NATIONAL CENTER FOR EDUCATION STATISTICS

May 2001

The 1998 High School

Transcript Study

User's Guide

and Technical Report

U.S. Department of Education

Office of Educational Research and Improvement NCES 2001-477
NATIONAL CENTER FOR EDUCATION STATISTICS

The 1998 High School

Transcript Study

User's Guide

and Technical Report

Westat

Stephen Roey

Nancy Caldwell

Keith Rust

Eyal Blumstein

Tom Krenzke

Stan Legum

Judy Kuhn

Mark Waksberg

Intelligent Automation, Inc.

Jacqueline Haynes

National Center for Education Statistics

Janis Brown, Project Officer
NATIONAL CENTER FOR EDUCATION STATISTICS

U.S. Department of Education

Rod Paige

Secretary

National Center for Education Statistics

Gary W. Phillips

Acting 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 high quality data to the U.S. Department of Education, the Congress, the states, other

education policymakers, practitioners, data users, and the general public.

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

Office of Educational Research and Improvement

U.S. Department of Education

1990 K Street, NW

Washington, DC 20006-5651

May 2001

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

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

Suggested Citation

U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. The 1998 High School

Transcript Study Tabulations: Comparative Data on Credits Earned and Demographics for 1998,

1994, 1990, 1987, and 1982 High School Graduates, NCES 2001-498, by Stephen Roey, Nancy

Caldwell, Keith Rust, Eyal Blumstein, Tom Krenzke, Stan Legum, Judy Kuhn, Mark Waksberg,

and Jacqueline Haynes. Project Officer, Janis Brown. Washington, DC: 2001.

For ordering information on this report, write:

U.S. Department of Education

ED Pubs

P.O. Box 1398

Jessup, MD 20794-1398

or call toll free 1-877-4ED-Pubs.

Content Contact:

Janis Brown

(202) 502-7419
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The authors appreciate the indepth review of this report by the following

adjudication panel members: Patricia Dabbs, Steven Gorman, Andrew Kolstad, and Shi-Chang

Wu from the National Center for Education Statistics and Vonda Kiplinger from ESSI.

The authors of this report are indebted to all the schools who participated in the

study and thus provided the information that made this report possible. At Westat, in addition to

the authors, Carol Hannaford and Robert Perkins contributed to the production of this report.
iii

THE 1998 HIGH SCHOOL TRANSCRIPT STUDY USER’S GUIDE

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Chapter Page

1 INTRODUCTION TO THE HIGH SCHOOL TRANSCRIPT STUDY ......... 1-1

2 BACKGROUND: SAMPLE DESIGN ............................................................ 2-1

2.1 1998 NAEP Sample Design ................................................................ 2-1

2.2 Selection of NAEP Primary Sampling Units ...................................... 2-2

2.3 Selection of NAEP Schools................................................................. 2-3

2.4 Assignment of Sessions to Schools for NAEP.................................... 2-6

2.5 Sampling Students............................................................................... 2-8

2.6 Students not Included in the Assessment ............................................ 2-12

3 SELECTION OF PRIMARY SAMPLING UNITS, SCHOOLS, AND

STUDENTS FOR THE 1998 HIGH SCHOOL TRANSCRIPT STUDY ....... 3-1

3.1 PSU Sample......................................................................................... 3-1

3.2 School Sample..................................................................................... 3-2

3.3 Student Sample.................................................................................... 3-3

4 DATA COLLECTION PROCEDURES.......................................................... 4-1

4.1 Training NAEP Field Supervisors as Data Collectors ........................ 4-1

4.2 Contacts with States, Districts, and Schools ....................................... 4-2

4.3 Obtaining Course Catalogs, Sample Transcripts, and Other

School-Level Information ................................................................... 4-8

4.3.1 Catalogs............................................................................... 4-11

4.3.2 Sample Transcripts.............................................................. 4-12

4.3.3 School Information Form (SIF)........................................... 4-12

4.3.4 School Questionnaire........................................................... 4-12

4.4 Identifying the Sample Students and Obtaining Transcripts............... 4-13

4.4.1 Schools with NAEP Materials............................................. 4-13

4.4.2 Schools without NAEP Materials........................................ 4-20

4.5 SD/LEP Questionnaire ........................................................................ 4-21

4.6 Sending Data to Westat ....................................................................... 4-23

4.7 Receipt and Review of Data from Data Collectors............................. 4-24
iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued)

Chapter Page

5 DATA PROCESSING PROCEDURES........................................................... 5-1

5.1 Establishing Student ID Control Lists................................................. 5-2

5.1.1 Student Sampling Information System................................ 5-2

5.1.2 School Information Form .................................................... 5-2

5.1.3 Transcript Request Form ..................................................... 5-4

5.2 CADE System for Entering Transcript Data ....................................... 5-4

5.2.1 Verification of Transcript Data............................................ 5-5

5.3 CACE System for Coding and Editing Course Catalogs .................... 5-6

5.3.1 General Procedures for Coding Course Catalogs................ 5-7

5.3.2 Entering Course Titles......................................................... 5-7

5.3.3 Classification of Secondary School Courses....................... 5-10

5.4 Matching Transcript Titles to Catalog Titles ...................................... 5-13

5.5 Standardizing Credits and Grades....................................................... 5-15

5.6 Quality Control Checks....................................................................... 5-18

5.6.1 Quality Control for Transcript Data Entry........................... 5-19

5.6.2 Quality Control for Catalog Data Entry............................... 5-20

5.6.3 Quality Control for Catalog Coding .................................... 5-20

5.7 Scanning and Preparing the SD/LEP Questionnaires.......................... 5-23

5.8 Scanning and Preparing the School Questionnaires............................ 5-25

5.9 Personnel Selection, Training, and Supervision.................................. 5-26

5.9.1 Training Data Entry Staff .................................................... 5-26

5.9.2 Training Catalog Coders...................................................... 5-26

6 WEIGHTING AND ESTIMATION OF SAMPLING VARIANCE............... 6-1

6.1 The HSTS Sample Weights: An Introduction..................................... 6-2

6.2 The HSTS-NAEP Linked Weights: An Introduction.......................... 6-3

6.3 Computation of the Base Weights....................................................... 6-4

6.3.1 Computation of Base Weights: HSTS Weights................... 6-5

6.3.2 Conditional Student Base Weights for the HSTS................ 6-7

6.3.3 Computation of Base Weights: NAEP-HSTS

Linked Weights.................................................................... 6-7
v

TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued)

Chapter Page

6.4 Weighting Adjustments for School Nonresponse ............................... 6-10

6.4.1 Approach to School Nonresponse Weighting

Adjustments......................................................................... 6-12

6.4.2 Selection of School Nonresponse Cells............................... 6-13

6.4.3 The School Nonresponse Cells: Results of the

CHAID Analysis.................................................................. 6-14

6.4.4 HSTS School Nonresponse Adjustments ............................ 6-16

6.4.5 School Nonresponse Adjustment for the NAEP-HSTS

Linked Weights.................................................................... 6-17

6.5 Student Weight Adjustments............................................................... 6-19

6.5.1 Student Nonresponse Adjustment: HSTS Weights ............. 6-20

6.5.2 CHAID Analysis to Choose Student Nonresponse Cells .... 6-21

6.5.3 Computation of Student Nonresponse Adjustments:

HSTS Weights..................................................................... 6-22

6.5.4 Student Nonresponse Adjustments: Linked Weights.......... 6-23

6.5.5 Trimming the Nonresponse Adjusted Student Weights ...... 6-26

6.5.6 Trimming the Linked Base Weights.................................... 6-29

6.5.7 Reporting Population Factors: Linked Weights................... 6-30

6.5.8 Poststratified Student Weights: HSTS Weights................... 6-31

6.5.9 Poststratified Student Weights: Linked Weights................. 6-33

6.5.10 Final Sampling Weights ...................................................... 6-35

6.6 Variance Estimation ............................................................................ 6-38

6.6.1 Computation of Replicate Base Weights............................. 6-40

6.6.2 Degrees of Freedom of the Variance Estimate .................... 6-44

7 1998 HIGH SCHOOL TRANSCRIPT STUDY DATA FILES....................... 7-1

7.1 Master CSSC File................................................................................ 7-3

7.2 Course Offerings File .......................................................................... 7-3

7.3 School File........................................................................................... 7-4

7.4 Student File ......................................................................................... 7-4

7.5 Linked Weights File ............................................................................ 7-6

7.6 SD/LEP Questionnaire File ................................................................. 7-6

7.7 Test and Honors File ........................................................................... 7-7

7.8 Transcript File ..................................................................................... 7-7

7.9 NAEP Data Files................................................................................. 7-8

8 REFERENCES................................................................................................. 8-1
vi

TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued)

List of Appendices

Appendix Page

A 1998 Grade 12 School Questionnaire............................................................... A-1

B School Information Form, 1998 High School Transcript Study ..................... B-1

C 1998 SD/LEP Questionnaire ............................................................................ C-1

D 1998 High School Transcript Study Codebook for Linked Weights File ........ D-1

E 1998 High School Transcript Study Codebook for SD/LEP

Questionnaire .................................................................................................. E-1

F 1998 High School Transcript Study Codebook for Test and Honors File........ F-1

G 1998 High School Transcript Study Codebook for Transcript File.................. G-1

H 1998 High School Transcript Study Codebook for School File....................... H-1

I 1998 High School Transcript Study Codebook for Student File...................... I-1

J 1998 High School Transcript Study Codebook for Course Offerings File ...... J-1

K 1998 High School Transcript Study Codebook for NAEP Writing Data......... K-1

L 1998 High School Transcript Study Codebook for NAEP Civics Data ........... L-1

M 1998 High School Transcript Study Codebook for NAEP Reading Data........ M-1

N 1998 High School Transcript Study NAEP 50-minute Writing Data

Codebook ......................................................................................................... N-1

O High School Transcript Study Codebook for Master CSSC File ..................... O-1
vii

TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued)

List of Tables

Table Page

1–1 High school transcript studies .......................................................................... 1-1

1–2 Sample sizes for the high school transcript studies.......................................... 1-13

2-1 NAEP geographic regions used for stratification............................................. 2-2

2-2 Noncertainty PSU strata ................................................................................... 2-4

2-3 Allocation of sessions....................................................................................... 2-7

2-4 Allocation of sessions to schools...................................................................... 2-7

3-1 Response rates of eligible schools by linking category, unweighted ............... 3-6

3-2 Percent of sampled students who were graduates and for whom

completed transcripts were received ................................................................ 3-6

3-3 Response rates of graduates, unweighted......................................................... 3-7

3-4 Response rates for NAEP, transcript study, and linked schools, weighted ...... 3-8

5-1 Numeric grade conversion................................................................................ 5-15

6-1 Counts of NAEP and HSTS sampled schools.................................................. 6-6

6-2 Total students in HSTS study in HSTS cooperating schools........................... 6-7

6-3 Session allocation weights................................................................................ 6-9

6-4 Writing sample allocation factors..................................................................... 6-9

6-5 Assessed and excluded students with usable transcripts and graduated

in linked schools............................................................................................... 6-10

6-6 Response rates for public and nonpublic schools, unweighted ........................ 6-15

6-7 School nonresponse adjustment factors for the HSTS weights........................ 6-16

6-8 Session nonresponse adjustment factors for the linked weights....................... 6-19

6-9 Counts and percents of graduating seniors known and imputed ...................... 6-21
viii

TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued)

List of Tables (continued)

Table Page

6-10 Student nonresponse adjustment cells and factors for HSTS weights.............. 6-23

6-11 Distribution of student nonresponse adjustments by assessment ..................... 6-25

6-12 Reporting populations ...................................................................................... 6-30

6-13 Reporting factors for assessed and excluded students, reading

assessment ........................................................................................................ 6-30

6-14 Student poststratification cells and control totals............................................. 6-32

6-15 HSTS poststratification factors ........................................................................ 6-32

6-16 Poststratification factors for the linked weights............................................... 6-34

6-17 Distributions of the final HSTS and linked weights......................................... 6-36

6-18 Analysis capabilities for WesVar, SUDAAN, and Stata ................................. 6-41

7-1 Naming conventions......................................................................................... 7-10

7-2 Comparison of records and nonzero weights in the Linked Weights File........ 7-10

List of Figures

Figure

5-1 Student information processing and ID reconciliation..................................... 5-3

5-2 Data entry and coding process.......................................................................... 5-11

5-3 Quality control processes for catalog coding ................................................... 5-21
ix

TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued)

List of Exhibits

Exhibit Page

3-1 NAEP administration schedule ........................................................................ 3-4

4-1 Superintendent’s letter from Project Officer.................................................... 4-3

4-2 Summary of school transcript activities........................................................... 4-4

4-3 Informational letter to principals from Project Officer .................................... 4-5

4-4 Disclosure notice .............................................................................................. 4-7

4-5 Course catalog checklist................................................................................... 4-9

4-6 Transcript format checklist............................................................................... 4-10

4-7 Transcript request form – Version 1................................................................. 4-14

4-8 Documentation of missing transcripts.............................................................. 4-17

4-9 Shipping transmittal form................................................................................. 4-19

4-10 Transcript request form – Version 2................................................................. 4-22

5-1 Abbreviations for data entry............................................................................. 5-6

5-2 Values for flags ................................................................................................ 5-12

5-3 Carnegie Unit Report........................................................................................ 5-16

5-4 Standardization of grades................................................................................. 5-17
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

User's Guide and Technical Report x

FOREWORD

The 1998 High School Transcript Study (HSTS) was conducted by Westat for the U.S.

Department of Education’s National Center for Education Statistics. This study provides the Department

of Education and other educational policymakers with information regarding current course offerings and

students’ course-taking patterns in the Nation’s secondary schools. Since similar studies were conducted

of course-taking patterns of 1982, 1987, 1990, and 1994 graduates, one research objective was to study

changes in these patterns. Another research objective was to compare course-taking patterns to study

results on the 1998 National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP). NAEP is a federally funded,

ongoing, periodic assessment of educational achievement in the various subject areas and disciplines

taught in the nation’s schools. Since 1969, NAEP has gathered nationwide information about the levels of

educational achievement of elementary and secondary school students.

The 1998 High School Transcript Study is documented in two reports:

n The 1998 High School Transcript Study User’s Guide and Technical Report – The

User’s Guide documents the procedures used to collect and summarize the data. It

also provides information needed to use all publicly released data files produced by

the study. In previous years, the information contained in this technical report was

divided into two documents: The Data File User’s Manual and the Technical Manual.

n The 1998 High School Transcript Study Tabulations – The Tabulations Report

provides copious tables summarizing the course-taking patterns of 1998 high school

graduates and comparing them to those of their counterparts in 1982, 1987, 1990, and

1994. To accommodate the 1998 data, it was necessary to drop one year’s data from

some of the tables. Details on the changes in design and format from the 1994

Tabulations are described in the Tabulations Report. The report also provides tables

describing the relationship of the course-taking patterns of 1998 graduates to their

proficiencies in reading, writing, and civics as measured by the 1998 National

Assessment of Educational Progress.

It is expected that there will be a diverse audience interested in the methodology and the

results of this study. Some readers will be interested in an in-depth discussion of certain subjects, while

others may only wish to gain a basic understanding of the procedures and findings. For that reason, the

first chapter presents an introduction to the study, in a question and answer format. The reader who

wishes to learn more about a subject is referred to the area in this report or the Tabulations Report where a

more in-depth presentation is offered.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

xi User's Guide and Technical Report

The questions have been grouped into three categories, although there is some overlap in

some of the areas. The three major areas are: What is the High School Transcript Study? How is the High

School Transcript Study related to the National Assessment of Educational Progress? How can the data

from the High School Transcript Study be used?
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

 1-1 User's Guide and Technical Report

1. INTRODUCTION TO THE HIGH SCHOOL TRANSCRIPT STUDY 

 WHAT IS THE HIGH SCHOOL TRANSCRIPT STUDY?

The 1998 High School Transcript Study (HSTS) was conducted by Westat for the U.S. 

Department of Education’s National Center for Education Statistics (NCES). Thousands of transcripts of 

students who graduated from public and nonpublic high schools were collected from a nationally 

representative sample of schools. This study provides the Department of Education and other educational 

policymakers with information regarding current course offerings and course-taking patterns in the 

Nation’s secondary schools. In addition, it provides information on the relationship of student coursetaking patterns to achievement as measured by the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 

a federally-funded, ongoing, periodic assessment of educational achievement in the Nation’s schools. 

Since similar studies were conducted of the course-taking patterns of graduates through the 

years, changes in these patterns can be studied and compared. Five studies involving the collection of 

transcripts from high school graduates have been conducted since 1982. These studies consisted of: 

Table 1–1. High school transcript studies 

Study Year conducted 

Approximate number of 

transcripts collected 

High School and Beyond 1982 12,000 

High School Transcript Study 1987 25,000 

High School Transcript Study 1990 21,000 

High School Transcript Study 1994 25,000 

High School Transcript Study 1998 25,000 

 Is participation in HSTS voluntary? Are the data confidential? Are students 

names or other identifiers available?

The High School Transcript Study is not an exam and requires no preparatory work or time 

from the students. Students transcripts are collected for the sample of students selected by Westat field 

workers for the NAEP assessment. All NAEP and HSTS activities are voluntary, so students can refuse to 

participate in the assessment and/or have a copy of their transcript collected by NAEP staff. 

As in NAEP activities, Westat follows the guidance of schools regarding whether or not to 

inform parents or obtain signed or implied parental consent. Generally, schools do not require parental or 
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

User's Guide and Technical Report 1-2

student notification or consent for the HSTS because there is no burden placed on the student. However, 

if a school requires that students and/or parents be notified or that consent be obtained, Westat complies 

with that request. 

The data obtained from the transcript study are kept strictly confidential. Student names and 

any other identifiable information are deleted from the copies of the transcripts before these materials 

leave the schools. Furthermore, in schools that are linked to NAEP, each student receives a NAEP student 

ID that is also used in the HSTS. The list that links the student’s name with that NAEP ID remains in the 

school. Westat does not have access to that list and cannot re-create it if it is lost. 

The data files that Westat supplies (both the restricted and the public use files)1

 do not 

contain the students’ names or other unique identifiers. Data files do contain the students’ NAEP ID, 

which enables researchers to link the transcript data to the NAEP data, but Westat follows NCES’ strict 

procedures regarding the confidentiality of data files. 

For more information, please refer to Chapter 4. 

 What are HSTS’s procedures for collecting data? 

The field workers for the 1998 High School Transcript Study were drawn from the pool of 

NAEP field supervisors and were trained in the data collection procedures. 

Eligible schools participating in NAEP were informed about the 1998 HSTS when they 

received information about NAEP. Schools were provided with information about participation in the 

HSTS, including procedures that would be used to ensure confidentiality of the data, and the amount and 

nature of school staff time required for HSTS participation. 

Minimal staff time is involved in completing some forms, as well as some clerical effort. 

Whenever possible, Westat staff assists in these efforts. For eligible schools that agreed to cooperate, 

students sampled for NAEP were included in the HSTS sample. A brightly-colored Disclosure Notice was 

placed in their folder both to alert the school personnel that information contained in the student’s folder 

 

1

 There are two versions of the 1998 High School Transcript Study data files: the restricted use data files and the public use data files. For a 

description of those files, please refer to Chapter 7. 
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

 1-3 User's Guide and Technical Report

would be used for the HSTS and to serve as a visible marker for identifying the folders of selected 

students to facilitate finding their transcript later. 

Initial HSTS information requested from schools and collected by field workers at the time 

of the NAEP assessment included information which they were asked to provide on the School 

Information Form (SIF). Other requested information included copies of their school’s course catalogs for 

the four most recent school years, including 1997-98, and three sample transcripts. They were also asked 

to provide a complete transcript for each graduate in the HSTS sample as soon as graduation information 

was posted on the transcripts. Information provided on the SIF indicated the appropriate date for the field 

workers to obtain the transcripts. When completing the SIF, field worker also gathered general 

information about class periods, credits, graduation requirements, and other aspects of school policy. 

Sometimes this information was documented in the course catalog and at other times in a separate school 

policy document. 

Field workers filled out checklists for the materials they obtained. These checklists served 

two purposes: 

1. They guided field workers in obtaining materials with the maximum amount of 

information possible that would be useful in the HSTS. 

2. They provided Westat staff with a quick way to review the materials, so that they 

could request additional information if needed. 

This information was collected in visits to the school prior to and at the time of the 

assessment. When all the information had been collected, it was forwarded to Westat. For schools that did 

not participate in NAEP but were agreeable to taking part in the HSTS, contact was made near the end of 

the 1997–98 school year and the same information was collected once the students’ final data were posted 

on their transcripts. 

For more information, and a detailed description of the process of obtaining materials for the 

HSTS, please refer to Chapter 4. 

 What contextual background data does HSTS provide (a) from questionnaires; 

(b) from transcripts; and (c) from school-level information? 

The High School Transcript Study provides data that comes from the NAEP questionnaires, 

the high school transcripts, and the school level forms filled out by a school coordinator or counselor. 
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

User's Guide and Technical Report 1-4

 QUESTIONNAIRES 

 School Questionnaire: The School Questionnaire (see Appendix A) is a 54-item 

questionnaire that collects information about school, teacher, and home factors that 

might relate to student achievement. It was completed by a school official (usually the 

principal) as part of NAEP for the NAEP participating schools. 

 Students with Disabilities/Limited English Proficiency (SD/LEP) Questionnaire:

Prior to 1996, the questionnaire that collected information from school staff about 

students with disabilities and students with limited English proficiency was called the 

Individualized Education Plan/Limited English Proficiency (IEP/LEP) Questionnaire. 

It was re-titled as the SD/LEP Questionnaire in 1996. The SD/LEP Questionnaire was 

completed for students sampled for NAEP and identified by the school as having a 

disability and/or limited English proficiency. Schools were asked to have the person 

most knowledgeable about a student complete the questionnaire. In large schools, this 

person was typically a counselor, a special education teacher, or a teacher of English 

as a Second Language. In smaller schools, this person was typically a classroom 

teacher. 

For schools participating in the 1998 NAEP, the SD/LEP Questionnaires were 

collected as part of the NAEP procedures. Questions 1 and 2 were used to determine 

which section(s) of the questionnaire should be completed. Part A (questions 3 

through 19) was answered for a student with a disability. Part B of the questionnaire 

(questions 20 through 41) was completed for an LEP student. If a student was 

classified as both SD and LEP, the entire questionnaire was completed. A copy of the 

questionnaire is included as Appendix C. 

 TRANSCRIPTS 

The student transcripts provide data that is coded and entered into the data system by trained 

coders. This data include the following: 

 Date student enrolled in high school; 

 Date student graduated; 

 Rank in class; 

 Size of class; 

 Grade Point Average (GPA); 

 Days absent each year; 

 Other standardized test scores and honors (where available); 
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

 1-5 User's Guide and Technical Report

 List of courses taken in high school, including the grades received and the number of 

credits received for each course; and 

 Total number of credits received and, in many cases, total number of credits 

attempted. 

 SCHOOL-LEVEL INFORMATION 

 Transcript Request Form (TRF): When graduation information was posted on the 

transcripts, field workers returned to the schools to obtain the requested transcripts. 

For each NAEP school, the field worker was given a Transcript Request Form (See 

Chapter 4). In addition to the NAEP ID, it contained columns for entering graduation 

status (Exit Status) and the student’s gender, birth month and year, race/ethnicity, SD 

status, LEP status, Title 1 services receipt, and National School Lunch Program 

participation. Data available from NAEP files (NAEP ID and demographic variables) 

were preprinted on the form. After completing the form, any personal identifiers were 

removed from the Transcript Request Forms. Westat did not include the students’ 

names on the TRFs. 

 School Information Form (SIF): The SIF (see Appendix B) was completed by the 

field worker or a school staff member or sometimes by both. The completed SIF 

contained information about the school in general, about sources of information 

within the school (if needed to complete HSTS data collection), course description 

materials, significant changes in course offerings in the past four years, graduation 

requirements and grading practices at the school, and about the format of the school’s 

transcripts. The field workers were instructed to fill out the SIF completely, or to 

indicate clearly on the SIF where the requested information could be found in the 

other materials provided by the school. 

 School-Level Catalog or Course Lists: If a school provided catalogs of course 

offerings for the four years that the seniors attended the school (as requested), data 

entry personnel entered a list of all course titles appearing in the catalogs. A concerted 

effort was made to standardize the format of titles. About 75 percent of the schools 

provided more than one year’s catalog. Catalogs from all years received were used to 

determine whether there were significant changes over the four years. A curriculum 

specialist selected the portions of each catalog to be used so that they excluded 

sections on programs that students could take only by attending another school in the 

district, courses taken at night, and so on. The specialist included programs from 

previous years that were not listed in the current catalog but were offered during the 

period when students in the HSTS attended the school. These titles were entered in the 

order of their appearance in the catalogs. 

For more information, please refer to Chapters 4 and 5. 
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

User's Guide and Technical Report 1-6

 What is the Transcript Request Form (TRF) and why is it so important? How is 

the TRF obtained and what information does it contain?

When graduation information was posted on transcripts (the date that it would be available 

was provided by the school on the School Information Form), a field worker returned to the school to 

obtain the requested transcripts. For each NAEP school, the field worker was given a Transcript Request 

Form (TRF), Version 1 (see Exhibit 4-7). In addition to Student Name and NAEP ID, it contained 

columns for the students’ graduation status, gender, birth month and year, race/ethnicity, SD status, LEP 

status, Title 1 services receipt, and National School Lunch Program participation. Data available from 

NAEP files (NAEP ID and demographic variables) were preprinted on the form. The completed TRFs 

contained the following information: 

 Student Name – Since names were never removed from the school, this column was 

blank when the TRF’s were printed. The field worker first recorded the first name, 

middle initial, and last name of each assessed, absent, or excluded student listed on the 

NAEP Administration Schedule. The names were recorded only to ensure that the 

correct student folders were used. 

 NAEP ID – The 10-digit NAEP assessment booklet numbers, or SD/LEP 

questionnaire numbers for students excluded from the 1998 assessment were 

preprinted in ID order. This column on the TRF identified all students for whom 

transcripts were needed. 

 Exit Status – Using information provided by the school, field workers assigned one 

of the following codes to describe each student’s outcome at the school. The Exit 

Status codes are defined on page 1-16. 

 Birthdate, Gender, and Race/Ethnicity – Demographic information was generally 

preprinted for each sampled student. If not preprinted, it was recorded from the NAEP 

Administration Schedule. If the school informed a field worker that some of this 

information was incorrect, the field worker entered the correct information on the 

TRF. 

 SD and LEP Status – For each student, it was recorded whether or not the student 

was classified by the school as SD and/or LEP. 

 National School Lunch Program (NSLP) and Title 1 – Yes or No for participation 

in each of these programs. 

 Transcript Received – Field workers checked this column to document that the 

transcript for a given student had been received. 

Once the Transcript Request Form was completed, the field worker filled out a summary box 

at the top of the form and requested transcripts according to the procedures set forth by the school. The 
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

 1-7 User's Guide and Technical Report

Disclosure Notice placed in students’ folders at the time of the NAEP assessment helped to facilitate 

transcript collection in participating NAEP schools. 

Once the field worker filled in the names of the students, some schools were able to access 

an electronic data file and copy the transcripts. In other schools, the transcripts were manually pulled from 

their folders and photocopied at the school. 

Once the transcripts were provided, the field worker reviewed them to ensure that a 

transcript was received for each 12th grade student who was selected for the NAEP assessment, whether 

or not that student had graduated. (Non–graduates were removed from the files at a later stage.) The field 

worker then checked each transcript for eligibility, understandability (e.g., are all the codes on it defined 

on the transcript or explained in the SIF?), and completeness. The field worker labeled each transcript 

with preprinted labels containing the School ID and the NAEP ID for the student and completed a 

Documentation of Missing Transcripts form to explain any omissions. 

After the field worker collected and recorded all the information required on the sampled 

students and reviewed the transcripts for completeness and accuracy, he or she prepared the transcripts for 

transmittal to Westat. This procedure involved “masking” all personally identifiable information where it 

appeared on each transcript, using a broad felt tip marker or correction tape to line through or cover all 

identifiers. 

Personal identifiers were also removed from the Transcript Request Forms. Before sending 

the TRFs back to Westat, the field worker cut off the portion that included the students’ names, to comply 

with confidentiality provisions. The portion with the names was left in the school’s NAEP folder. 

For further information, please refer to Chapter 4. 

 What is a Course Catalog and how is it obtained? What is the difference between 

the different types of catalogs, and which one is used in the data processing step?

A Course Catalog is a list of all the courses the school offers and their descriptions. Such 

catalogs are generally published each year, and are used for accurately matching the CSSC codes used in 

the HSTS with the course title, obtained from the transcript. 
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

User's Guide and Technical Report 1-8

Field workers request these Course Catalogs when they first contact a school, then collect 

them when they visit the school for sampling. The Course Catalogs are carefully reviewed at the school. 

Field workers verify that the catalog contains all the courses that the 12th graders of that year have taken 

in that school, including vocational, remedial, honors, special education, off-campus courses, or courses 

taught in a language other than English. If any course listings were not in the catalog, every effort is made 

to obtain additional information from school personnel to document the existence of such courses and to 

describe them. After that review, the Course Catalogs are sent to Westat. 

In most cases, the current Course Catalog and the ones from the three preceding years are 

collected. This allows Westat to track any changes in course offerings or in the curriculum in the four 

years the graduates attended high school. It also allows the catalog coders to review any course title on 

the transcript and accurately match it to a description in the catalog, even if the curriculum or the course 

titles have changed during those four years. 

Based on Westat’s experience in coding course catalogs from this and previous High School 

Transcript Studies, five types of course catalogs have been identified: 

1. A school-level catalog providing course titles and descriptions; 

2. A district-level catalog, which indicates which courses were offered at the HSTS 

participating school; 

3. A course list by department that includes general descriptions of course offerings by 

department; 

4. A school-level course list without descriptions; or 

5. A district-level catalog without any indication of which courses were offered in 

specific schools. 

Westat uses the highest-level catalog available. 

For further details, please refer to Chapter 4. 

 Who codes the catalogs? What special requirements are needed from the coders? 

How are they trained? 

In order to code the school catalogs, Westat hired a staff of skilled personnel who had an 

extensive background in education, mainly teachers and counselors, and who were familiar with schools’ 
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

 1-9 User's Guide and Technical Report

curriculum and the education system. These staff members were trained to familiarize themselves with 

the CSSC coding scheme and the variety of ways that a course could be coded. For several days, they 

were given exercises and tasks to ensure that they could code a course title with the appropriate CSSC 

code. 

To ensure consistency and quality, catalog coding decisions were based on a basic set of 

coding principles and procedures. First, the catalog coder reviewed a school catalog “holistically” to 

ascertain ways that course levels, special education, and other special programs were designated. He or 

she looked for sequences of courses, descriptions of programs, requirements, credits awarded, or other 

information provided to obtain a general view of the curriculum. Then, using the CACE system 

(Computer Aided Coding and Editing), the coder looked at each course title, found it in the catalog, and 

read whatever description was available. The coder then selected the best CSSC code for the course. 

Wherever possible, the catalog coder selected codes based on a course description rather than on title. 

After selecting the CSSC code, the coder reviewed the flags for that course and edited them 

as needed. If the coder found courses in the CACE catalog listing that should not be there, they could be 

deleted. Similarly, if the coder found that a course was missing from the CACE listing of catalog titles, it 

was added to the list and coded. After the coder finished coding the regular education courses for a 

school, the special education expert coded all special education courses. 

For the specific steps of the coding procedure please refer to Chapter 5. 

 How are the data entered from the transcripts? 

Westat processed the data from the 1998 High School Transcript Study (HSTS) along three 

simultaneous paths as follows: 

1. The Student Sampling Information System; 

2. The Computer Assisted Data Entry System; and 

3. The Computer Assisted Coding and Editing System. 

With the exception of the transcripts and the course catalogs, some data entered in each 

system were collected by Westat field personnel and some data had already been assembled for NAEP 

into data files by the Educational Testing Service (ETS). Westat staff obtained the relevant NAEP data 
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

User's Guide and Technical Report 1-10

files from ETS and merged them with the HSTS data collected from non-NAEP-participating schools. As 

described below, appropriate checks were made to ensure that only one set of data was entered for a 

school or a student, and procedures were developed to resolve inconsistencies among the data sources. 

When entering and cleaning the data for the study, we performed the following tasks: 

 Establishing student ID control lists; 

 Entering transcript data; 

 Coding course catalogs; 

 Matching transcript titles to catalog titles; 

 Standardizing credits and grades; and 

 Performing quality control checks. 

These steps involved the entry and coding of the students’ transcripts and the schools’ course 

catalogs, as well as matching the courses on the coded catalogs to the courses on the transcripts. 

Each of these steps is described in detail in Sections 5-1 through 5-6 of Chapter 5. 

 HOW IS THE HIGH SCHOOL TRANSCRIPT STUDY RELATED TO THE 

NATIONAL ASSESSMENT OF EDUCATIONAL PROGRESS? 

 How is HSTS related to NAEP? 

The High School Transcript Study is conducted in conjunction with the National Assessment 

of Educational Progress (NAEP); both are federally-funded and completed by Westat for the U.S. 

Department of Education’s National Center for Education Statistics. The 1998 HSTS was designed to 

allow an analysis of the course-taking patterns of students who graduated from American public and 

nonpublic high schools in 1998. It was further designed so that data on students’ course-taking patterns 

can be linked to the 1998 NAEP assessment results. Since studies similar to the 1998 HSTS were 
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

 1-11 User's Guide and Technical Report

conducted on 1982, 1987, 1990, and 1994 graduates, changes in these patterns and relationships to NAEP 

performance in these years can also be studied.2

NAEP provides the HSTS with data of assessments in different subjects. For the 1998 

HSTS, NAEP proficiency estimates of reading, writing, and civics were provided. In 1994, history, 

geography and reading assessments were conducted, and proficiency estimates in those subjects were 

provided. 

For a comprehensive description of the HSTS and NAEP please refer to Chapter 2. 

 How are the samples of schools and students in NAEP related to the HSTS 

samples? 

In order to maintain as many links as possible with NAEP scores, where schools refusing to 

participate in NAEP were replaced by substitute schools, the substitute schools, not the refusals, were 

asked to participate in the HSTS. Of the 322 schools in the original sample, 264 original/substitute 

schools participated in the HSTS survey, of which 241 were originally sampled. Of the 264 participating 

schools, 232 schools cooperated with both HSTS and NAEP and the links for the students were 

maintained, 10 schools cooperated with HSTS and NAEP but the links for the students were not 

maintained, and 22 schools cooperated with HSTS but not with NAEP. 

A total of 28,764 students were selected for inclusion in the HSTS. Of these, 27,183 students 

were from schools that maintained their NAEP administration schedules and were identified by their 

NAEP booklet numbers. Another 500 students were from schools that participated in NAEP but had lost 

the link between student names and NAEP booklet numbers, and 1,081 were from schools that did not 

participate in NAEP. 

Because sampling was performed in most schools prior to graduation, not all sampled 

students were, in fact, graduates. Only graduates, however, were eligible for the transcript study. We were 

able to determine that of the 28,764 students in the sample, 25,248 actually graduated and that 3,328 did 

not. Of the remaining 188 students, we imputed 174 as graduates and 14 as not. Thus, from the 25,422 

graduates 24,218 transcripts were collected and processed. 

 

2

 The 1987, 1990 and 1994 transcript data were collected by Westat in coordination with the 1987, 1990, and 1994 NAEP (Thorne et al., 1989; 

Legum et al., 1993; Legum et al., 1997). The 1982 data were collected by the National Opinion Research Center as part of the High School and 

Beyond project (Jones et al., 1983a). 
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

User's Guide and Technical Report 1-12

For further information regarding this topic, please refer to Chapter 3. 

 HOW CAN THE DATA FROM THE HIGH SCHOOL TRANSCRIPT STUDY BE 

USED? 

 Can the 1998 HSTS results be compared to other transcript studies? 

Since studies were conducted of course-taking patterns of 1982, 1987, 1990, 1994 and 1998 

graduates, one research objective was to study changes in these patterns. Another research objective was 

to compare course-taking patterns to study results on the 1998 National Assessment of Educational 

Progress. 

The 1998 High School Transcript Study used a complex sample design with the goal of 

securing a sample from which estimates of population and sub-population characteristics could be 

obtained with reasonably high precision (in other words, low sampling variability). At the same time, it 

was necessary that the sample be economically and operationally feasible to obtain. The resulting design 

requires that the user of the HSTS data utilize sampling weights to ensure valid analysis of the transcript 

data. 

The samples for the five studies are roughly comparable. The weighting techniques used 

across studies are also comparable. However, there are some differences that warrant notice when using 

these tables. 

The 1982 sample was drawn as part of the first follow-up to the High School and Beyond 

longitudinal study. The 1987, 1990, 1994, and 1998 samples were drawn as part of the corresponding 

NAEP samples. One result of this difference is that the 1982 study, because of its longitudinal nature, had 

more opportunity to obtain demographic information. On the other hand, because students repeated years, 

transferred to different schools, or dropped out of school before their senior year, there was also a greater 

probability that final transcripts showing four years of high school could not be obtained for these 

students. 

The samples were drawn at different points in the students’ high school careers. The 1982 

students were sampled when they were sophomores and were followed when they transferred to new 

schools. The 1987 students were sampled when they were juniors, but no attempt was made to follow 
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

 1-13 User's Guide and Technical Report

them if they left school. The 1990, 1994, and 1998 students were sampled in their senior year. Thus the 

1987 study sample, unlike the others, has no students who transferred into their school during their senior 

year. 

All five samples used a multi-stage, stratified, and clustered design. There are differential 

rates of oversampling among the studies to reflect special interests. For instance, the 1987 study 

oversampled students with disabilities and the 1994 and 1998 NAEP assessments oversampled minority 

students. 

Westat performed all the variance estimations using the jackknife procedure. Because the 

number of replicates used in the 1990 study was greater than in the earlier studies, the variance estimates 

for 1990 are somewhat more precise than in the earlier studies. Similarly, because the number of 

replicates used in the 1994 and 1998 studies were greater than in the earlier studies, the variance estimates 

for 1994 and 1998 are even more precise. Note that the 1982 sample consisted of considerably fewer 

transcripts than in later years. The number of schools involved, however, was considerably greater. The 

estimates tend to have comparable sampling errors across years, despite the differences in the number of 

transcripts sampled. The sampling errors, in fact, are often smaller for 1982 estimates. In other words, the 

design effects for years other than 1982 were considerably greater than for 1982, more than offsetting the 

effects of the larger sample size of transcripts for those other years. 

The sample sizes differ in the five studies and are summarized in the table below. 

Table 1–2. Sample sizes for the high school transcript studies 

Sample size 1998 1994 1990 1987 1982 

Schools in the original sample 322 379 379 497 1,882 

Schools represented in the tables 264 340 330 429 947 

Students in the original sample 28,764 28,715 23,270 35,180 18,427 

Transcripts represented in the tables 24,218 24,120 21,158 25,054 12,275 

Average number of transcripts per school 96.3 73.8 64.1 58.2 12.9 

The data tables for the 1998 HSTS are presented in Appendix A of the Tabulations Report. 

Appendix B of the Tabulations Report contains a listing of the categories (stubs) used as row labels in the 

tables and the CSSC codes associated with each category. 
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

User's Guide and Technical Report 1-14

For more information about the 1998 tabulations, and the comparison between the different 

studies, please refer to Chapter 1 of the Tabulations Report. Please refer to Chapter 2 of this guide for a 

comprehensive description of the NAEP study. 

 What is a weight and how is it determined? 

The High School Transcript Study sampled almost 29,000 students from 264 schools. To 

make valid inferences about the entire population of graduated grade 12 students from the sample of 

student transcripts that was collected, it is necessary to use the sampling weights. The weights reflect the 

probability sampling scheme used to arrive at the sample of students for whom transcripts were requested. 

The HSTS weights were constructed without regard to the NAEP participation or nonparticipation status 

of schools and students. The weights also reflect the impact of sample nonresponse at the school and the 

student levels, making adjustments for these groups to decrease the potential bias that might arise through 

differential nonresponse across population subgroups. Finally, improvements to the precision of weighted 

estimates result from the application of poststratification factors to the sample weights. 

Student transcript data were weighted for the purpose of making estimates of course-taking 

by high school graduates nationwide. The final weight attached to an individual student record reflected 

two major aspects of the sample design and the population being surveyed. The first component, the base 

weight, was used to expand sample results to represent the total population and reflected the probability 

of selection in the sample. The second component, the adjustment of the base weight to account for 

nonresponse within the sample, is implemented to ensure that the resulting survey estimates of certain 

characteristics (race/ethnicity, size of community, and region) conformed to those estimates known 

reliably from external sources. 

Weights, developed using the procedures described in Chapter 3 of the Tabulations, are 

contained in the Student File and the Linked Weights File. Westat has provided the final student weight 

(FINSTUWT) in the Student File and the final usable linked weight (FINLNKWT) in the Linked Weights 

File so that data analyses can be weighted up to national totals. The final student weight should be used in 

analyses involving only transcript data. The weights in the Linked Weights File should be used in 

analyses involving both transcript data and data obtained from NAEP data files. 

For further information, please refer to Chapter 3 of the Tabulations Report. 
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

 1-15 User's Guide and Technical Report

 Why are there two general sets of weights (linked and non-linked weights) for 

HSTS? 

The linked weights must be used whenever the analysis involves NAEP data. There are files 

containing linked weights for reading, writing, and civics, the subjects in which students were assessed in 

1998 NAEP. The linked weights were created to analyze each NAEP subject separately. Conversely, the 

non-linked weights must be used when analyzing transcript data only (i.e., without regard to NAEP data). 

The student file, which lists all HSTS students, contains these non-linked weights. One difference 

between the processes for creating linked and non-linked weights is in the treatment of nonresponse. The 

linked weights are adjusted to account for nonrespondents, where nonrespondents are eligible students 

with incomplete transcripts or eligible students that were absent in NAEP. The non-linked weights are 

adjusted to account for nonrespondents, where nonrespondents are eligible students with incomplete 

transcripts. 

For more information about the linked weights, please refer to Chapter 3. 

 What is the PSU?

The HSTS used a subsample of primary sampling units (PSUs) and schools from the 1998 

NAEP assessment for grade 12 students. The HSTS used the NAEP target sample of students in these 

subsampled schools. Chapter 3 describes aspects of the selection of PSUs, schools, and students that are 

specific to the transcript study. The purposes of the 1998 High School Transcript Study (HSTS) were to 

gather data on a nationally representative sample of students who graduated from American public and 

nonpublic high schools in 1998 that could be linked to NAEP results. For the HSTS sample of students to 

be as representative as possible, it included a subsample of NAEP PSUs, and, subsequently, subsampled 

schools with 12th grades within the PSUs that were selected for NAEP, regardless of whether they 

participated in NAEP. A representative sample of students was included from each school. When 

possible, the students selected for the transcript study were the same as those selected for NAEP. When 

this selection was not possible, a systematic sample of students was drawn from the school. 

For further information, please refer to Chapters 2 and 3. 
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

User's Guide and Technical Report 1-16

 How is a student given a unique HSTS ID? 

The 1998 High School Transcript Study involved collecting, processing, and analyzing 

nearly 29,000 transcripts from 264 high schools nationwide. In order to accurately process each of these 

students’ transcripts, a unique student ID was necessary. 

The HSTS school sample was a sub-sample of NAEP. Each one of the schools participating 

in the HSTS had a unique 3-digit Primary Sampling Unit (PSU) ID and a 3-digit School ID.3

 Each school 

then had a unique 6-digit ID. 

In NAEP-linked schools, i.e. schools that retained their link to the NAEP assessment, each 

student received a unique 10-digit booklet ID. This ID was unique throughout the HSTS. A different 

procedure was required for schools that had not retained their materials which linked selected students to 

their specific IDs or had not participated in NAEP. In those schools, a new sample of students was 

selected and students were assigned IDs that ranged from 990–0000001 to 990–0000060. This scheme 

meant that the student IDs were unique within a school, but not within the entire study. 

In order to achieve unique student IDs within the entire study, the school’s 6-digit unique ID 

was concatenated to the 10-digit student ID. This assured that each student received a unique ID across 

the entire study. 

 What is an Exit Status and how is it used? Why are there more Exit Statuses in 

1998 than in previous years? 

The Exit Status is a code that describes the type of diploma the student received. Using 

information provided by the school, field workers assigned one of the following codes to describe each 

student’s outcome at the school: 

a. Graduated with a standard diploma; 

b. Graduated with an honors diploma; 

c. Received a diploma with special education adjustments; 

d. Received a certificate of attendance; 

 

3

 The School ID is a 3-digit ID to which a fourth control digit is added. In many of the reports, Westat included this fourth digit, but for the 

purpose of obtaining a unique student ID, this digit was dropped. 
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

 1-17 User's Guide and Technical Report

e. Still enrolled in this school; 

f. Dropped out; 

g. Other, such as transferred, GED, or unknown; 

h. Out of Scope; or 

i. Completed course requirements but did not pass required tests. 

In some cases, the Exit Status was determined directly from the transcripts and sometimes it 

was provided by other sources at the school. The Exit Status was recorded on the Transcript Request 

Form (TRF) and later used to verify that the student indeed graduated and that his/her transcript was 

eligible for the study. It also provided information about whether or not to include the transcript in the 

tabulation process. In a few cases, Westat discovered that a student had not actually graduated and 

changed the Exit Status accordingly. 

In 1998, two new Exit Statuses that did not exist previously (H and I) were added to the list. 

Exit Status H was added to address cases in which the student was excluded from the study, such as 

students who graduated during the study year (1998) but who had been attending high school for more 

than five years. Exit Status I was added to describe a case where a student fulfilled the school’s 

requirements for graduation, but did not pass a state exam that made him/her eligible for a graduation 

diploma. 

For more information about the Exit Status, please refer to Chapters 4 and 5. 

 What is the CSSC Code and how is it used? Are there any other coding systems 

that are being used in similar studies? 

To compare transcripts from different schools, it is necessary to code each of the courses 

entered from the transcripts using a common course coding system. The coding system employed for this 

purpose was a modification of the Classification of Secondary School Courses (CSSC). The CSSC, which 

contains approximately 2,200 course codes, is a modification of the Classification of Instructional 

Program (CIP) that is used for classifying college courses. Both systems (CIP and CSSC) use a threelevel, 6-digit system for classifying courses. The CSSC uses the same first two levels as the CIP, which 
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

User's Guide and Technical Report 1-18

are represented by the first four digits of each code.4 The third level of the CSSC (the fifth and sixth digits 

of the course code) is unique to the CSSC and represents specific high school courses. 

With over 2,200 codes in the CSSC, it is neither practical nor desirable to include estimates 

of each possible code in each of the tables. Although estimates are provided for each of the codes that 

appear in the transcripts in the final table in Appendix A of the Tabulations, it is often more useful to 

analyze the courses in larger groups such as English, Social Studies, Math, or Science. There is also 

interest in finer divisions of these groups such as Biology, Chemistry, and Physics. The subject area 

taxonomy that is presented in Appendix B of the Tabulations provides the structure for grouping the 

courses. 

The 1987 High School Transcript Study developed a taxonomy used for the 1987 High 

School Transcript Study Tabulations. This taxonomy, which is documented in the 1987 Tabulations, was 

developed with an emphasis on strictly limiting the content of “academic” categories to academic courses. 

It was applied to data from the 1982 High School and Beyond (HS&B) First Follow-up Study and the 

1987 HSTS data. Both of these data sets were coded using the CSSC. The 1990 High School Transcript 

Study used a slightly expanded version of the same taxonomy in its reports.5

The Secondary School Taxonomy (SST) was originally developed in the late 1980s.6

 In 

addition to the HS&B and 1987 HSTS files, variants of the SST were applied to files produced by the 

Educational Testing Service Study of Academic Prediction of Growth (1969) and the National 

Longitudinal Study-Youth Cohort (1975-1982), which were coded using unique classification schemes 

which were not fully compatible with the CSSC. The SST was developed under the auspices of the 

National Assessment of Vocational Education (NAVE) and was subject to extensive review by vocational 

and academic educators and researchers, NAVE staff, and contractor staff. Although there is broad 

agreement between the taxonomy developed for the 1987 HSTS and the SST, the SST has a less purely 

academic emphasis and a more richly defined group of vocational education categories. 

 

4

 Actually, the CSSC uses the first two levels of the CIP as it existed in 1982. The CIP has undergone some modification since then. In addition, 

three sets of codes at the top level have been added to the CSSC to provide a means of classifying courses specifically designed for students 

with disabilities. 

5

 The 1990 study added 18 new codes to the CSSC and to the taxonomy. The full taxonomy is documented in both The 1990 High School 

Transcript Study Tabulations and The 1990 High School Transcript Study Data File User’s Manual.

6

 A description of the development of the SST is provided in Gifford, Hoachlander, and Tuma (1994), The Secondary School Taxonomy Final 

Report. 
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

 1-19 User's Guide and Technical Report

Since most recent NCES publications which have analyzed transcript data have used the 

SST, it was adapted for use in the 1994 tabulations, and this adaptation has been carried over to the 1998 

report. The SST is, however, limited in that it contains only the CSSC codes found in the data sets which 

it was designed to analyze. For this reason, the SST was expanded in 1994 to include all currently defined 

CSSC codes.7

 The version of the Secondary School Taxonomy used in these tables also differs from the 

version used in studies before 1994 in two other respects: 

 Some additional categories have been added. These have not changed the definition of 

any of the existing categories. 

 Drama and Dance have been separated into two categories. This split is consistent 

with the reporting level in the previous High School Transcript Studies. Since these 

two values are always reported adjacent to each other, they can easily be added 

together to determine the corresponding combined category. 

Because the SST assigns courses differently to academic and vocational categories, analyses 

based on the SST report larger numbers of students following vocational curricula and fewer following 

academic curricula than the taxonomy used in the 1987 and 1990 transcript studies. For example, the 

1990 HSTS classified 75 percent of 1990 graduates8

 in academic programs and 6 percent in vocational 

programs (1990 HSTS Tabulations, Table 1), while the current study classifies 69.6 percent of 1990 

graduates in academic programs and 8.0 percent in vocational programs (Table 2). 

One other feature of the SST that should be kept in mind when interpreting these tables is 

that it classifies English as a Second Language (ESL) courses as Foreign Language rather than English 

courses. This classification has the effect of lowering the number of students who appear to satisfy the 

recommendation of completing four years of English. It also has the effect of increasing the apparent 

number of Foreign Language courses completed and lowering the correlations of number of years of 

Foreign Language completed with each set of the NAEP proficiency scores. These effects are particularly 

noticeable among Hispanic graduates. 

 

7

 In addition to the studies cited earlier in this section, the National Education Longitudinal Study (NELS) of 1988 Second Follow-Up: Transcript 

Component collected transcripts from high school graduates and coded them using the CSSC. The students in the transcript component of the 

NELS study graduated from high school in 1992. Researchers at National Opinion Research Center, which conducted the study for NCES, have 

informed us that they were able to use the CSSC codes in the 1990 version of the CSSC and did not need to add any additional codes. 

8

 Legum, Stanley; Caldwell, Nancy; Goksel, Huseyin; Haynes, Jacqueline; Hynson, Charles; Rust, Keith; Blecher, Nina. The 1990 High School 

Transcript Study Tabulations: Comparative Data on Credits Earned and Demographics for 1990, 1987, and 1982 High School Graduates. U.S. 

Department of Education, Office of Educational Research and Improvement, National Center for Education Statistics, NCES 93-423,

Washington, DC, April 1993. 
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

User's Guide and Technical Report 1-20

 How are codes added to the CSSC? Are they ever deleted?

The high school curriculum may change each year or every few years. New courses are 

added, old courses are taken out of the curriculum, and some courses are combined with others to produce 

new courses. The CSSC code list contains over 2200 codes and descriptions of courses offered by high 

schools nationwide. For every HSTS, the need arises to examine the list of CSSC codes and decide 

whether all the courses that were offered in that particular year have a matching CSSC code that can 

adequately describe it. In 1994, 12 new CSSC codes were added to the list. In 1998, the computer science 

curriculum changed dramatically. New courses such as Web Design, Java Programming, and C++ 

Programming were added, courses that did not exist previously. Also, many courses that were labeled as 

honor courses in the past were reclassified as AP courses. Many IB (International Baccalaureate) courses 

were added as well. In all, a total of 83 new or revised codes were added to the CSSC in 1998. 

Highly trained coders are hired to code the school catalogs Westat had received from the 

field workers. These coders browse through the catalogs and match the appropriate CSSC codes to the 

courses offered, according to the content and description of the course. If a course that is offered does not 

have a matching CSSC code in the existing list, the coders write that course description in a special 

suggestion list. After the catalogs have been reviewed, and all but these courses on the suggestion list 

have been coded, a Coding Specialist reviews the suggestion list and tries to match these courses to 

existing CSSC codes. If a course does not have a matching CSSC code, a new CSSC code is generated. 

Schools also make changes to their curriculum by dropping courses they had offered in the 

past. These courses are either dropped completely from the offering list, split into two courses, or are 

renamed and their course description changed. During the data cleanup stage that Westat performed, 

duplicate or unneeded CSSC codes were deleted. An example would be a Calculus AP honors course that 

was redefined and split into Calculus AP and Calculus honors. Both new CSSC codes better describe the 

offered courses, so that the original CSSC code was no longer needed. Westat made sure that for each 

CSSC code that was deleted, documentation was supplied and analyses across the HSTS studies could be 

carried out. 

For further information about the CSSC codes, please refer to Chapter 7. 
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

 1-21 User's Guide and Technical Report

 Were there any restrictions on what data appeared in the HSTS tabulations? 

For the 1998 HSTS, Westat attempted to collect high school transcripts from about 29,000 

students who graduated from high school in 1998. So that the tables represent students with complete 

transcripts, students whose transcripts did not include course-by-course data for at least three full years of 

high school were excluded. To be consistent with other published analyses, Westat adopted the following 

rules for including and excluding students in the analyses that produced the tables: 

1. Both public and nonpublic school students were included. 

2. Students with special education diplomas, certificates of attendance, and certificates 

of completion were excluded. Students who received certificates of completion 

completed the necessary school requirements for graduation, but failed to successfully 

complete a required state graduation exam. 

3. Students with disabilities (HCFLAG=2 in the HSTS studies) who received regular or 

honors diplomas (i.e., those who were not screened out by rule 2) were included. 

4. Students with zero English credits were excluded. 

5. Students with fewer than 16 Carnegie units were excluded. 

Some previous studies have excluded students with more than 32 Carnegie units on the 

grounds that they must have shorter class periods than normal schools and use of their data would inflate 

our estimates. In the current study, students with more than 32 Carnegie units were not excluded. 

In a few cases, Westat discovered that a student had not actually graduated and changed the 

exit status accordingly. It was also found that some students had earned substantially more credits than 

were required to graduate. Often these were students who had spent substantial amounts of time in both 

foreign and American high schools. While they were awarded credit for the foreign courses, they were 

still required to take an essentially American curriculum in order to obtain the American diploma. 

In still other cases it was found that, although a student had fewer credits than were required 

to graduate, the transcript had all the other attributes of a graduated senior such as four full years of 

courses, all required courses, a graduation date, grade point average, and class standing. In these cases, if 

a careful review of the transcript and the data files showed no data entry or coding errors, the transcript 

was kept in the database with the apparent inconsistency recorded on the transcript, but was not included 

in the tabulations. 
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

User's Guide and Technical Report 1-22

These restrictions reduced the number of 1998 graduates represented in the tables to 24,218 

These students attended 264 schools that had previously been sampled for the National Assessment of 

Educational Progress. 

For further information on this topic, please refer to Chapter 2 of the Tabulations Report. 

 How does one obtain copies of HSTS data files? 

There are two versions of the 1998 High School Transcript Study data files: the restricted 

use data files and the public use data files. All values in this report are based on the restricted use data 

files. To ensure the confidentiality of students, data in the School File, Course Offering File, and 

Transcript File that would identify the state in which a school is located have either been set to missing 

(as in the FIPS State Code in the School File) or set to generic values (e.g., a course title of “Mississippi 

History” was set to “State History” in the Course Offerings File). In addition, the number of teachers and 

enrollment values in the School File and some race/ethnicity values in the Student File have been set to 

missing. The data in the remaining files are identical in both the restricted use and public use versions. 

Because of confidentiality legislation, secondary users who wish to obtain a copy of the 

restricted-use data files must apply for an NCES restricted data license. If your organization does not 

already have a restricted data license, you need to obtain a copy of the “NCES Field Restricted Use Data 

Procedures Manual.” There is a four-page checklist in this document that details the steps involved in 

obtaining a license. You may request a copy from the following contact person or you may view and 

download the manual from the NCES web site at http://nces.ed.gov/statprog/rudman .” 

Cynthia Barton (202) 502-7307 

cynthia_barton@ed.gov

If your organization already has a restricted data license, you may only need to have it 

amended to add any additional datasets or to add additional names as authorized users of the data. Note that, 

in a college or university setting, only faculty can serve as the primary project officer. Graduate students 

may be listed as authorized users only. 
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

 1-23 User's Guide and Technical Report

To obtain a restricted data license (or to amend an existing license), a secondary user 

generally must send a letter addressed to the Data Security Office, formally requesting the data. The 

mailing address of the Data Security Office is: 

Data Security Office 

Department of Education/NCES 

1990 K Street NW 

Room 9061 

Washington, DC 20006 

Please include the following information in your request: 

 The name of the dataset(s) you wish to use; 

 The purpose for the loan of the data; 

 The length of time you will need the data; and 

 An affidavit of nondisclosure for each person who will have access to the data, 

promising to keep the data completely confidential. 

For other publications of previous High School Transcript Studies and NAEP, please contact 

Cynthia Barton at the number given above. 

Brief summaries of the transcript coding system, the demographic information that was 

collected on the students in the study, the student data weights, and the data files are provided below. 

There is more detail on each of these subjects in the following chapters of this report. 

The Coding System 

To compare transcripts from different schools, it is necessary to code each of the courses 

entered on the transcripts using a common course coding system. The coding system employed for this 

purpose was a modification of the Classification of Secondary School Courses (CSSC) (Ludwig et al., 

1982). The CSSC, which contains approximately 2,200 course codes, is a modification of the 

Classification of Instructional Programs (CIP) that is used for classifying college courses (Morgan et al., 

1991). Both systems use a three-level, six-digit system for classifying courses. The CSSC uses the same 
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

User's Guide and Technical Report 1-24

first two levels as the CIP, which are represented by the first four digits of each code.9 The third level of 

the CSSC (the fifth and sixth digits of the course code) is unique to the CSSC and represents specific high 

school courses. 

The CSSC also uses an additional 1-digit “disability” flag and a 1-digit “sequence” flag. The 

first flag indicates whether a course is open to all students or is restricted to disabled students. The 

sequence flag indicates whether a course is part of a sequence of courses and, if so, its place in that 

sequence. The disability flag was added to the CSSC during the 1987 transcript study. The sequence flag 

was added during the 1990 study. 

During the 1987, 1990, 1994, and 1998 studies, courses appearing on student transcripts 

were coded to indicate whether they were transfer courses, offered off campus, honors or above gradelevel courses, remedial or below grade-level courses, or designed for students with limited English 

proficiency (LEP) and/or taught in a language other than English. In 1998, courses offered as Advanced 

Placement or International Baccalaureate courses were coded separately from other honors-level courses, 

using both new CSSC codes and new flag values. A total of 83 new or revised CSSC codes were added in 

1998. In addition to codes for Advanced Placement and International Baccalaureate courses, most new 

codes reflect changes in course offerings in the technology area. 

Course catalogs and related materials and information from the participating schools were 

used to determine the codes assigned to each course. Grades and credits were also received and entered 

for each course and standardized into a consistent system. 

 Student Information 

Information gathered for all students included gender, grade level, birth year, birth month, 

graduation status, race/ethnicity, whether or not the student had a disability (SD) or was limited English 

proficient, received Title 1 services, or participated in the National School Lunch Program. Also obtained 

were the date of entry to the school, the graduation date, type of diploma, number of days absent in each 

of four years (9th grade, 10th grade, 11th grade, and 12th grade), grade point average, and class rank. In 

 

9

 Actually, the CSSC uses the first two levels of the CIP as it existed in 1982. The CIP has undergone some modification since then. In addition, 

three sets of codes at the top level have been added to the CSSC to provide a means of classifying courses specifically designed for students 

with disabilities. 
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

 1-25 User's Guide and Technical Report

addition, all awards and scores on certain standardized tests taken by each student as reflected on the 

transcript were listed. 

In some cases, more than the basic information was obtained. The following additional 

information, as reported by school personnel, was collected for students with a disability: grade-level 

equivalent performance in English and mathematics, proportion of time the student was placed in 

mainstream and special education classes, type and severity of disability, and type of accommodation(s) 

provided to the student. 

The following additional information, as reported by school personnel, was collected for 

students with limited English proficiency: English and mathematics grade levels, percentage of the day 

spent in special language programs, native language, type of specialized instruction, the type of 

accommodation(s) provided to the student in testing, and the student’s ability to speak, understand, read, 

and write English. 

 Student Data Weights 

Student transcript data were weighted for the purpose of making estimates of course-taking 

patterns by students in the class of 1998 nationwide. Several sets of weights were created: 

 Weights for all eligible sampled students with completed, missing, or unusable 

transcripts in the transcript study, where “eligible” means that the student graduated in 

1998, and “unusable” transcripts are those with less than 75 percent of the credits 

required by the school to graduate. Weights are set to zero for missing and unusable 

transcripts. 

 Four sets of “linked” weights for NAEP-assessed and excluded students who 

graduated and for which a usable transcript was obtained. Since students in NAEP 

were assigned an assessment of a particular subject, separate weights were developed 

for the students in each subject-specific assessment: 

- NAEP 25-minute writing assessment; 

- NAEP 50-minute writing assessment; 

- NAEP reading assessment; 

- NAEP civics assessment; and 
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

User's Guide and Technical Report 1-26

- The NAEP study Assessment of Civics Trend was not analyzed and was not 

included in the 1998 HSTS. 

In each set of weights, the final weight attached to an individual student record reflected two 

major aspects of the sample design and the population surveyed. The first component, the student base 

weight, is the reciprocal of the probability of selection into the sample, which takes into account the 

product of the probability of selecting the primary sampling unit (geographic area), the probability of 

selecting the school within the primary sampling unit, and the probability of selecting the student within 

the school. The second component resulted from the adjustment of the student base weight to account for 

nonresponse within the sample and to ensure that the resulting survey estimates of certain characteristics 

(race/ethnicity and region) conformed to those known reliably from external sources. 

In order to make valid inferences about the entire population of graduated 12th grade 

students from the sample of student transcripts collected, it is necessary to use the sampling weights. The 

weights reflect the probability sampling scheme used to arrive at the sample of students for whom 

transcripts were requested. The HSTS weights were constructed without regard to the NAEP 

participation/nonparticipation status of schools and students. The weights also reflect the impact of 

sample nonresponse at the school and the student level, and make weight adjustments to decrease the 

potential bias that might arise through differential nonresponse across population subgroups. Finally, 

improvements to the precision of weighted estimates result from the application of poststratification 

factors to the sample weights. 

 Data Files 

The study has produced a set of eight data files that are available on public use data sets 

(with some additional information available on a restricted use basis): 

 The Master CSSC File – The Classification of Secondary School Courses (CSSC), 

including all modifications made to the original (1982) CSSC during the 1987, 1990, 

1994 and 1998 transcript studies. This file has separate variables for the CSSC code, 

the disability flag, the sequence flag, and the course title. 

 The Course Offerings File – Provides a comprehensive listing of the courses offered 

in the schools included in the study. A CSSC code is associated with each course title. 

 The School File – Provides detailed information on the schools from which the 

students were sampled. 
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

 1-27 User's Guide and Technical Report

 The Student File – Provides demographic information on all students in the study, as 

well as sampling weights and summaries of their course-taking histories. 

 The Four Subject-Level Linked Weights Files – Provides weights for use when 

performing analyses relating transcript data to NAEP assessment results. 

 The Test and Honors File – Provides a list of honors and standardized test results that 

were included on the transcripts. 

 The Transcript File – Provides a complete list of all courses appearing on the 

transcripts of students in the study. 

 The SD/LEP File – Provides detailed information on students with disabilities and/or 

limited English proficiency. 

Four additional NAEP assessment files contain proficiency estimates (also described as 

plausible values, as discussed in Chapter 7) for each student who completed NAEP. These are: 

 The 1998 NAEP 25-Minute Writing Assessment Data File; 

 The 1998 NAEP 50-Minute Writing Assessment Data File;10 

 The 1998 NAEP Reading Assessment Data File; and 

 The 1998 NAEP Civics Assessment Data File. 

These files contain NAEP scores for the total number of 1998 graduates who participated in 

both the specific NAEP assessment and the transcript study. However, students who did not meet the 

graduation requirements were later excluded from the transcript study. Their data is present only in the 

NAEP assessment files and not in the transcript data files. 

This report provides a brief description of the sampling of schools and students (Chapters 2 

and 3), the data collection procedures (Chapter 4), data processing procedures (Chapter 5), and the 

weighting procedures (Chapter 6). Chapter 7 describes the codebooks and data files that are included in 

this report, which can be found in Appendices D through N. Appendices A-C contain the questionnaires 

used in this study. 

 

10 The 50-minute writing assessment file does not contain proficiency assessments. Instead, a categorical determination was assigned for the 

assessment. 
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

2-1 User's Guide and Technical Report

2. BACKGROUND: SAMPLE DESIGN

The 1998 High School Transcript Study (HSTS) was designed to allow an analysis of the

coursetaking patterns of students who graduated from American public and nonpublic high schools in

1998. It was further designed so that data on students’ coursetaking patterns can be linked to the 1998

National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) assessment results. Since studies similar to the

1998 HSTS were conducted on 1982, 1987, 1990, and 1994 graduates, changes in these patterns and

relationships to NAEP performance in these years can also be studied.1

The HSTS used a subsample of primary sampling units (PSUs) and schools from the 1998

NAEP assessment for grade 12 students. The HSTS used the NAEP target sample of students in these

subsampled schools. This chapter describes aspects of the 1998 NAEP sample design that affect the

transcript study. Chapter 3 describes aspects of the selection of PSUs, schools, and students that are

specific to the transcript study.

2.1 1998 NAEP Sample Design

The 1998 National Assessment of Educational Progress used a multistage probability sample

design. Counties or groups of counties were the first-stage sampling units, and elementary and secondary

schools were the second-stage units. The third stage of sampling consisted of the assignment of sessions

by type to sampled schools and the assignment of sample types to sampled schools. The session type

refers to the subject(s) being assessed, while the sample type refers to the specific criteria for inclusion

that were applied to the session (see Section 2.4 for a discussion of the inclusion criteria). The fourth

stage involved selection of students within schools and their assignment to session types.

A total of 94 Primary Sampling Units (PSUs) were included in the sample, and a sample of

733 schools actually participated in the assessment for grade 4, 761 schools for grade 8, and 608 schools

for grade 12. Various blocks or packages of exercises were administered to students in these schools.

 

1 The 1987, 1990 and 1994 transcript data were collected by Westat in coordination with the 1987, 1990, and 1994 NAEP (Thorne et al., 1989;

Legum et al., 1993; Legum et al., 1997). The 1982 data were collected by the National Opinion Research Center as part of the High School and

Beyond project (Jones et al., 1983a).
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

User's Guide and Technical Report 2-2

2.2 Selection of NAEP Primary Sampling Units

In the first stage of sampling, the United States (the 50 states and the District of Columbia)

was divided into geographic primary sampling units. Each PSU met a minimum size requirement (a 1990

census population of at least 60,000 in the Northeast and South and 45,000 in the Midwest or West

regions) and comprised a metropolitan statistical area (MSA), a single county, or (more often in the case

of nonMSA PSUs) a group of contiguous counties. In the case of New England MSAs, which are not

formed from whole counties, the corresponding New England County Metropolitan Areas, which are

defined in terms of whole counties, were designated as the PSUs. Each PSU was contained entirely within

one of the four geographic regions defined in Table 2-1. Each region contains about one-fourth of the

U.S. population. These regions were used to stratify the sample of PSUs, ensuring that each region was

adequately represented in the various assessment samples.

In a few cases, a metropolitan statistical area crossed region boundaries. Such MSAs were

split into two or more PSUs as necessary. For example, the Cincinnati OH-KY-IN MSA was split into the

Cincinnati OH-IN PSU in the Central region and the Cincinnati KY PSU in the Southeast region.

Table 2-1. NAEP geographic regions used for stratification

Northeast South Midwest West

Connecticut

Delaware

District of Columbia

Maine

Maryland

Massachusetts

New Hampshire

New Jersey

New York

Pennsylvania

Rhode Island

Vermont

Virginia*

Alabama

Arkansas

Florida

Georgia

Kentucky

Louisiana

Mississippi

North Carolina

South Carolina

Tennessee

Virginia*

West Virginia

Illinois

Indiana

Iowa

Kansas

Michigan

Minnesota

Missouri

Nebraska

North Dakota

Ohio

South Dakota

Wisconsin

Alaska

Arizona

California

Colorado

Hawaii

Idaho

Montana

Nevada

New Mexico

Oklahoma

Oregon

Texas

Utah

Washington

Wyoming

* That part of Virginia that is part of the Washington, DC-MD-VA metropolitan area is included in the Northeast region; the remainder of the

state is included in the Southeast.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

2-3 User's Guide and Technical Report

The 22 largest PSUs in the United States were included with certainty (that is, with

probability = 1). The remaining smaller PSUs were not guaranteed to be selected for the sample (that is,

they were included with probability < 1). These were grouped into a number of noncertainty strata and

one PSU was selected from each stratum. Within each major stratum or subuniverse, further stratification

was achieved by ordering the noncertainty PSUs according to several additional socioeconomic

characteristics, yielding 72 strata.

The strata were defined so that the aggregate of the measures of size of the PSUs in a

stratum was approximately equal for each stratum. The size measure used was the population from the

1990 Census. The characteristics used to define strata were the percentage minority population,

percentage change in total population since 1980, per capita income, percent of persons age 25 or over

with college degrees, percent of persons age 25 or over who completed high school, and the civilian

unemployment rate. Up to four of these characteristics were used in one subuniverse. For each

subuniverse, the characteristics used were chosen by modeling PSU-level mean reading proficiency

scores for 1988, 1990, and 1992. Then one PSU was selected with probability proportional to size from

each of the 72 noncertainty strata. That is, within each stratum, a PSU’s probability of being selected was

proportional to its population.

The final sample of 94 PSUs was drawn from a population of about 1,000 PSUs. Primarily

because of the use of MSAs as PSUs (they varied greatly in size), PSUs varied considerably as to their

probability of selection. In each region, noncertainty PSUs were classified as metropolitan (MSA) or

nonmetropolitan (nonMSA). The 36 selected noncertainty MSA PSUs had probabilities ranging from

0.03 to 0.56, while the 36 nonMSA PSUs had probabilities ranging from 0.03 to 0.10. Parts of 44 states

were included in the main sample PSUs. Ninety-four PSUs were selected for the main NAEP sample (22

certainty and 72 noncertainty). A subset of 58 of these same PSUs was randomly selected for the HSTS

sample. The major strata, or subuniverses of noncertainty PSUs, are shown in Table 2-2.

2.3 Selection of NAEP Schools

For NAEP, after the PSUs were selected, the next step was to select the schools within the

PSUs. For the second stage of sampling, a frame list of 12th grade schools was formed within each PSU.

There were 4,513 public and 4,853 nonpublic schools on the final second-stage sampling frame.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

User's Guide and Technical Report 2-4

Table 2-2. Noncertainty PSU strata

Region

Number of strata for

MSA PSUs

Number of strata for

nonMSA PSUs Total

Northeast 6 4 10

South 12 12 24

Midwest 8 12 20

West 10 8 18

Total 36 36 72

The public schools (including Bureau of Indian Affairs [BIA] schools and Department of

Defense Education Activity [DoDEA] schools) and nonpublic schools (including Catholic schools) in

each PSU were listed. The lists of schools were obtained from two sources. A list of public, BIA, and

DoDEA schools, which is maintained by Quality Education Data, Inc. (QED),2 and included information

obtained from the 1994-95 NCES Common Core of Data (CCD), was obtained in early March 1997.

Regular public schools are schools with students who are classified as being in a specific grade (as

opposed to schools having only “ungraded” classrooms). These include statewide magnet schools and

charter schools.

Lists of Catholic and other nonpublic schools were obtained from the Private School Survey

(PSS) conducted by the National Center for Education Statistics. The PSS list of schools is an ongoing

registry of private schools. The registry is updated prior to the survey through two sources. The first

source, called the list frame, is a conglomeration of a number of lists from several associations, states, and

so on. Although the list frame attempts to provide complete coverage of the private school universe, it

needs to be supplemented with a second source. The second source uses an area frame to identify and

represent schools not on the list frame. The area samples are conducted first by randomly selecting

primary sampling units (PSUs); these are single counties or groups of counties from the area frame, which

consists of all counties in the nation. Within each selected PSU, a complete list of schools is gathered

from a variety of means, and schools not on the list frame are identified and added to the list frame of

nonpublic schools. The probabilities of selection for schools on the PSS list ranged from 0.06 to 1.00

 

2 Quality Education Data, Inc. (Denver, CO) (QED) is a privately maintained database of public and private schools in the United States that

provides an annual listing of all schools and school districts in the United States, released in November of each year. This listing corresponds to

the previous school year. It includes information about each school's name, mailing address, location address, district name, FIPS state number,

Office of Education district number, number of students, number of teachers, grades served, and other sociodemographic data.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

2-5 User's Guide and Technical Report

(most were equal to 1.00). A weight component was computed so that these selected PSS nonpublic

schools represented themselves and also represented the non-PSS nonpublic schools for non-PSS PSUs.

For each school in the frame, estimates were made of the number of eligible students. The

QED and PSS files give total enrollment and the grade range for each school, thus providing the average

enrollment per grade. Schools were selected across all PSUs, systematically from a sorted list with

probabilities proportional to assigned measure of size, which was a function of the average enrollment per

grade. The sorting variables included NAEP region, private/public classification, type of location,

high/low minority group, PSU stratum, and grade enrollment. To increase cost efficiency in sampling,

samples were designed to include more nonpublic and high-minority public schools, and more relatively

large schools.

Each public school that was considered high minority (i.e., with over 15 percent black and/or

Hispanic enrollment) was given double the probability of selection of a public school which was not

considered high minority and which was of a similar size, in the same PSU. Such high-minority schools

were oversampled to enlarge the sample of black and Hispanic students, thereby enhancing the reliability

of estimates for these groups. Given a specified sample size, this procedure reduces slightly the reliability

of estimates for all students as a whole and for those not black or Hispanic.

In NAEP, each private school was given triple the probability of selection of a low-minority

public school of similar size from the same PSU. These greater probabilities of selection were used to

ensure adequate samples of private school students in order to allow the derivation of reliable NAEP

estimates for such students. In HSTS, however, the oversampling of private schools was reversed by

taking a private school subsample from the NAEP sampled schools at only one-third the sampling rate of

the corresponding public school sample (see Chapter 3).

The QED files do not contain schools that opened between 1996 and the assessment dates.

Therefore, special procedures were implemented to be sure that the NAEP assessment represented

students in new public schools. Small school districts—those that contained only one eligible school—

were handled differently from large school districts, which contained more than one eligible school. In

small school districts, the schools selected were thought to contain all students in the district that were

eligible for the assessment. Districts containing these schools were asked if other schools with 12th grade

existed and, if so, they were automatically included in the assessment.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

User's Guide and Technical Report 2-6

For large school districts a district-level frame was constructed from the schools on the QED

file. Then districts were sampled systematically with probabilities proportional to a measure of size. In

most cases, the measure of size was total district enrollment, but in very small districts a minimum

measure of size was used. Each sampled district was asked to update the list of eligible schools derived

from information on the QED files. Frames of eligible new schools were then constructed for 12th grade,

and samples of new schools were selected systematically with probability proportional to eligible

enrollment using the same sampling rates as for the old schools. As a result of this process, three new

public schools were selected.

Potential substitute schools were selected for all sampled schools in the 1998 NAEP where a

close match could be identified. An attempt was made to preselect (before field processes began) a

maximum of two substitute schools for each sampled public school (one in-district and one out-ofdistrict) and each sampled Catholic school, and one for each sampled nonCatholic nonpublic school. A

nonparticipating school was replaced by a substitute when the participating school was considered a final

refusal. To minimize bias, a substitute school resembled the original selection as much as possible.

Substitutes were assigned by matching approximately on the following attributes:

n Affiliation (public or private);

n Estimated number of eligible students; and

n Minority composition.

A substitute was always selected from the same PSU as the refusing school. When school

nonparticipation was due to district refusal, none of the schools in the refusing district were considered

substitute candidates. However, when substituting for school-level (rather than district-level) refusals,

preference was given to substitute candidates in the same district. Of the 608 participating grade 12

sampled schools, 48 were substitutes.

2.4 Assignment of Sessions to Schools for NAEP

Three subjects were assessed in different types of assessment sessions. The assessment

subjects were writing, civics (writing and civics were combined into one session, as the directions and

timing of the sections were the same), reading (the reading assessments, at grades 8 and 12, included
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

2-7 User's Guide and Technical Report

some booklets that consisted of two 25-minute blocks of questions and others that consisted of one

50-minute block, but were combined in one session type), and civics trend. The last time that civics was

assessed was in 1988, and since that time the civics frameworks and items for NAEP have changed. In

order to measure trends with the past, yet also measure students’ knowledge in relation to the new

frameworks, two different civics assessments were conducted in 1998. Civics trend used the identical

items and procedures from the 1988 assessment, while the new frameworks were evaluated with new

civics items (that were field-tested in 1997).

Each 12th grade was allocated a number of sessions, based on the estimated number of

grade-eligible students, as shown in Table 2-3.

Table 2-3. Allocation of sessions

Estimated number of grade eligibles Number of sessions allocated

1 – 30 1

31 – 60 2

61 – 90 3

91 – 120 4

121 or more 5

The sessions were allocated to 12th grade sampled schools by placing schools in the order

used for sampling and allocating the appropriate number of sessions from the following repeated

sequence (W denotes writing/civics, R denotes reading and C denotes civics trend): R, W, W, R, W, W,

R, W, W, R, W, W, C, W, W, R, W, W, R, W, W, W, R, W, W, W, R, W, W, R, W, W, R, W, W, C, W,

W, R, W, W, R, W, W, W, R, W, W, W. The sequence contains 34 W’s, 13 R’s, and 2 C’s. It was

designed to ensure the maximum feasible spread of assessment types among schools, while ensuring that

close to 69 percent of the selected students were assigned to writing/civics, 27 percent to reading, and

4 percent to civics trend, as summarized in Table 2-4.

Table 2-4. Allocation of sessions to schools

Session name Number of sessions

Percent of selected students

assigned to session

Writing/civics (W) 34 69

Reading (R) 13 27

Civics Trend (C) 2 4
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

User's Guide and Technical Report 2-8

Schools with 31 or more eligible students were always assigned at least one writing/civics

session. Schools with 91 or more eligibles were almost always assigned a minimum of one reading

session. Many schools were awarded multiple sessions of the same type or multiple sessions of different

types. This did not necessarily mean that the school had to physically conduct multiple sessions of a given

assessment type, but the assignment of session types determined the proportions of selected students

within the school that were assigned to each type.

In order to determine the effect of using different criteria for excluding students from the

assessment, two different sample types (S2 and S3) were assigned to the session types assigned to

schools. In sample type 2 schools, the 1996 exclusion criteria were used. In sample type 3 schools, the

1996 exclusion criteria were used and accommodations were offered to students with disabilities (SD) and

students with limited English proficiency (LEP). For schools assigned a reading session, sample type was

assigned to schools separately so that 50 percent of the schools assigned reading were assigned sample

type 2 and 50 percent were assigned sample type 3. The schools were placed in the order of sampling,

then sample types were assigned to schools with a reading session by alternating sample types 2 and 3.

Sample type was assigned so that a variety of schools with respect to region, school type, urbanization,

and size were in each sample type. For writing/civics sessions, only sample type S3 was assigned. For

civics trend sessions, only sample type S2 was assigned.

2.5 Sampling Students

In the fourth stage of sampling, the sample of students within sampled schools was

systematically drawn from school-prepared lists of eligible students. Student Listing Forms (SLF) were

prepared for each participating school; all enrolled students of the 12th grade were to be entered on the

SLFs. Student samples also included oversampling of black and Hispanic students in schools with low

minority enrollment, and oversampling SD/LEP students in public schools assigned to reading, and were

specified through the use of Session Assignment Forms (SAF).

Up-to-date information on grade enrollment was obtained for sampled schools through two

field processes. Scheduling assessment dates with schools and being on site at the school at the time of

sampling and the assessment allowed field staff to obtain updated information on the number of grade

eligibles.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

2-9 User's Guide and Technical Report

The district supervisor generally carried out the sampling of students a week before the

assessment. Student Listing Forms were prepared in each participating school. All enrolled 12th grade

students were to be entered on the SLF in any order convenient to the school, or the school could produce

a computer-generated list. Before carrying out the sampling, the district supervisor reviewed the form and

made comparisons with other enrollment information to ensure that the list included all eligible students.

Once the list was determined to be complete, a sequential line number was assigned to each student.

The sample of students to be selected in each school was derived in the following manner. A

maximum sample size of 150 students was set for each school. In schools that, according to information

on the frame, had fewer than 150 eligible students, each eligible student enrolled at the school was

selected in the sample for one of the sessions assigned to the school. In the larger schools, a sample of

students was drawn and students were assigned to sessions as appropriate.

The assignment of students to sessions was completed in the following way. After the

students were numbered on the Student Listing Form, the field worker referred to the school’s designated

SAF. There, the line numbers for each of the school’s assigned sessions were listed. For instance, a Civics

Trend session might include the students listed on lines 4, 9, 14, 19, 24, 30, and so on, with a different

sequence of line numbers for the students designated for a Reading session.

The field workers for the 1998 High School Transcript Study were drawn from the pool of

NAEP field supervisors. To avoid confusion, the data collection personnel for the HSTS are referred to

simply as field workers. If the field worker found that the line numbers, when applied to the numbered list

of eligible students assembled in the field for each school, generated a sample in excess of 170 students,

he or she called a field supervisor. New line numbers based on the actual number of eligible students were

generated on a personal computer and relayed to the field worker. A similar revision to the line numbers

was made in a school with a sampling interval in excess of 1.0 and eligible enrollment less than

80 percent of that initially estimated. In this case, the sample size was increased to the appropriate level.

This procedure provided a suitable compromise between control over the sampling rate within each

school and operational autonomy and flexibility for field workers.

In all cases where new line numbers were generated, sampling intervals were sent to

Westat’s central office and stored for use in sample weighting. Field workers were not required to derive

or record within-school sampling rates.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

User's Guide and Technical Report 2-10

Students were assigned to the sessions systematically, in proportion to the number of

sessions of each type allocated to the school. To control the student sampling operations as closely as

possible, Westat generated a Session Assignment Form for each school where sampling was to be carried

out. This computer-generated form specified:

n The types of sessions that were to be administered at the school;

n The line numbers (from the SLF) specifying the students to be drawn into the sample;

n The minimum and maximum number of students listed on the SLF that could be

accepted without requiring revision to the within-school sampling rates;

n Whether accommodations were to be offered to SD/LEP students;

n Instructions and line numbers for oversampling black and Hispanic students in public

schools with low minority enrollment and SD/LEP students in schools assigned

reading; and

n Special instructions as appropriate for the 1998 SD/LEP Questionnaire.

It became necessary, because of updated grade enrollment numbers, to revise the session

allocation structure for some smaller-than-expected schools with more than one session type initially

assigned. Smaller-than-expected schools were defined as having a potential of fewer than 12 students

assigned to a particular session type. For example, if two writing/civics and one reading session were

assigned, and the number of grade eligibles was updated to 30 students, then only 10 would be assessed in

reading.

In this case, and in general, for smaller-than-expected schools where the number of gradeeligibles per session type assigned (without regard to the number of sessions assigned for each type) was

12 or more (15 in the example), all session types were kept and students were split evenly across the

session types. Thus, in the example given here, 15 students would be assigned to reading and 15 to

writing, rather than the initial sample allocation number of 10 and 20, respectively. If the number of

grade-eligibles per session type assigned was fewer than 12, just one session type was kept at random,

and a weight adjustment factor was computed as the ratio of the number of sessions assigned to the

number of sessions assigned for the session type that was kept. This weight adjustment accounts for the

dropping of one or more session types.

In public schools with low minority enrollment, an oversample of black and Hispanic

students was selected. After the initial sample was selected, the nonselected black and Hispanic students
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

2-11 User's Guide and Technical Report

were identified and listed. These students were sampled to a total that was expected to be the same

number of black and Hispanic students already selected. In practice, however, if the number of

nonselected students was less than the number of selected students, then all nonselected black and

Hispanic students were also to be assessed. Otherwise, these students were sampled so that their overall

within-school probability of selection was twice the rate of other students.

Line numbers were generated to split the additional sample of black and Hispanic students

into sessions using the session allocation rates applied to the initial sampling procedure. Thus, if the

school was assigned two sessions of writing/civics and one of civics trend, two-thirds of these extra black

and Hispanic students were assigned to writing/civics, and one-third to civics trend.

The procedures for assessing students with disabilities and limited English proficient

students (SD/LEP) varied by sample type. Those in sample type 3 were offered accommodations not

available to other students or to SD/LEP students in sample type 2. Oversampling procedures were

applied to SD/LEP students as a measure to ensure an adequate sample size from both sample types 2 and

3 for reading. In this way, comparisons of the effect of offering accommodations to students have

enhanced power to detect effects.

The general intent of oversampling within each school assigned at least one reading session

was to select SD/LEP students at twice the rate at which non-SD/LEP students were sampled (or to

include all SD/LEP students if there were not sufficient numbers to permit sampling at twice the rate).

There was no oversampling of schools as part of this procedure. In each school oversampled for SD/LEP

students, the initial desired sample of students was drawn for each session assigned, from the full list of

eligible students. As previously stated, black and Hispanic students were oversampled in public schools in

low-minority areas. Among students not selected for either of the two prior sampling operations for this

school, the SD/LEP students were identified. A sample from among these was drawn, using a sampling

rate that would achieve the double sampling rate required overall. Again, the weighting procedures

ensured that the results were not biased as a result of the relative under-representation of SD/LEP students

from smaller schools and relative under-representation of black and Hispanic students from smaller lowminority schools.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

User's Guide and Technical Report 2-12

2.6 Students not Included in the Assessment

Once the sample of students was selected, school staff were asked to identify any students

with a disability and any students classified as limited English proficient. The SD/LEP Questionnaire was

then distributed to the school staff member most knowledgeable about the student, as described in Section

4.5. The questionnaire collected information about the student’s disability/language proficiency and any

special services provided by the school.

School staff were also asked to determine whether any of the students identified as SD or

LEP could not participate meaningfully in the assessment. These students were not invited to the

assessment and were coded as “excluded” to distinguish them from absent students. Transcripts for these

students are, however, included in the transcript study.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

3-1 User's Guide and Technical Report

3. SELECTION OF PRIMARY SAMPLING UNITS, SCHOOLS, AND

STUDENTS FOR THE 1998 HIGH SCHOOL TRANSCRIPT STUDY

The purposes of the 1998 High School Transcript Study (HSTS) were to gather data on a

nationally representative sample of students who graduated from American public and nonpublic high

schools in 1998 and to gather data that could be linked to NAEP results. For the HSTS sample of students

to be as representative as possible, it included a subsample of NAEP PSUs, and subsequently subsampled

schools with 12th grades within the PSUs that were selected for NAEP, regardless of whether they

participated in NAEP. A representative sample of students was included from each school. When

possible, the students selected for the transcript study were the same as those selected for NAEP. When

this was not possible, a systematic sample of students was drawn from the school. The PSU sample, the

school sample, and the student sample are described in detail in the following sections.

3.1 PSU Sample

As discussed in Chapter 2, the 1998 NAEP sample included the selection of PSUs as the first

stage of sampling. To obtain a substantially smaller number of schools (322 12th grade schools were

selected from the 852 originally sampled in NAEP) in order to reduce field costs, a subsample of the

NAEP PSUs was selected for the HSTS. All 22 certainty PSUs and half of the 72 noncertainty PSUs were

selected. For selecting the 36 noncertainty PSUs, the 72 NAEP sampled PSUs were combined into

pseudostrata based on region, urbanicity, and socioeconomic characteristics. Then the PSUs were selected

based on the following probabilities of selection:

 A probability of selection equal to one was assigned to the certainty PSUs and

 A probability of selection equal to one-half was assigned to the noncertainty PSUs.

One PSU was selected randomly within each noncertainty pseudostratum. A total of 58

PSUs were selected for the HSTS.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

User's Guide and Technical Report 3-2

3.2 School Sample

The 1998 HSTS sample comprised only schools selected for the NAEP main sample that had

12th-grade classes and were within the 58 PSUs selected for the HSTS. There were 606 eligible schools

that satisfied this criterion, of which 366 were public and 240 were nonpublic. In the next step of

selection, a subsample of 322 schools was selected, consisting of 269 public schools and 53 nonpublic

schools. To create the subsample of schools for the HSTS, the following probabilities of selection were

assigned to offset the increased probability of selection for nonpublic schools (three times that of public

schools with low numbers of minority students) that occurred in the NAEP sample:

 A probability of 1/2 was assigned to public schools in certainty PSUs;

 A probability of 1/6 was assigned to nonpublic schools in certainty PSUs;

 A probability of 1 was assigned to public schools in noncertainty PSUs; and

 A probability of 1/3 was assigned to nonpublic schools in noncertainty PSUs.

Prior to sampling, the schools were sorted in the sort order of the original sample procedure

relating to schools in NAEP (refer to Section 2.3 for the sorting variables). An oversample of nonpublic

schools was considered important for the NAEP sample but was not considered desirable for the HSTS

sample. Because nonpublic schools tend to be smaller than public schools, the collection cost per

transcript is higher.

In order to maintain as many links as possible with NAEP scores, where schools refusing to

participate in NAEP were replaced by substitute schools, the substitute schools, not the refusals, were

asked to participate in the HSTS. Of the 322 schools in the original sample, 264 original/substitutes

participated in the HSTS survey, of which 241 were originally sampled. Of the 264 participating schools,

232 schools cooperated with both HSTS and NAEP and the links for the students were maintained, 10

schools cooperated with HSTS and NAEP but the links for the students were not maintained, and 22

schools cooperated with HSTS but not with NAEP.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

3-3 User's Guide and Technical Report

3.3 Student Sample

For schools participating in both NAEP and HSTS, the same students were included in the

two samples where possible. For privacy reasons, the only means of identifying the students participating

in NAEP was a list left in the school office. Since the NAEP assessments were administered from January

through April 1998, the schools were asked to retain the NAEP administration schedules until the HSTS

data collection in the summer and fall of 1998.1

 The administration schedules are forms produced

specifically for each school. They include the assessment booklet ID’s that are assigned to each school,

which are listed sequentially on the administration schedules. Once the student sample is drawn, the

selected student’s name is recorded on the administration schedule for the type of session for which he or

she was selected. As this is done, the booklet ID on that line becomes the student’s NAEP ID number.

This is the only place where selected students’ names are recorded. Other demographic information is

also recorded on the administration schedule, which is shown in Exhibit 3-1.

For schools that participated in NAEP but were missing their administration schedules, and

for schools that agreed to provide transcripts but did not participate in the NAEP assessment, the field

workers sampled the students using the following rules:

 If 60 or fewer students were in the senior class, all students were selected for the

study.

 If more than 60 students were in the senior class, the field worker drew a systematic

random sample of 50 students.

To draw a sample, the field worker obtained a complete list of students in the senior class,

numbered each student sequentially, and then entered the number of students in the class and the number

of transcripts needed (50) onto a sampling form. After determining the number of students in the senior

class, the field worker calculated a sampling interval. A random start was drawn from a supplied list of

random numbers, and a systematic sample was drawn based on the random start and the sampling

interval. The field worker then wrote the names of the sampled students on a Transcript Request Form

(TRF) and gave it to the school staff to draw the transcripts. The TRF also provided a place to record the

 

1 NAEP asked schools to retain the administration schedules until the end of the calendar year in case it became necessary to use them to resolve

ID-related questions. For reasons of confidentiality, the schools that were not in the transcript study were requested to destroy these materials

by June 30, 1998.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

User's Guide and Technical Report 3-4 Exhibit 3-1. NAEP administration schedule
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

3-5 User's Guide and Technical Report

students’ graduation status, gender, race/ethnicity, birth month, birth year, disability status, LEP status,

receipt of Title I services, and National School Lunch Program participation. To maintain confidentiality,

the field worker removed the students’ names before returning a copy of the TRF to Westat along with the

transcripts.

When field workers went to the schools to collect the transcript data, they had been supplied

with sets of labels for each student NAEP ID at the school. They had also received a Transcript Request

Form produced for each school, with each ID listed on a line of the form, along with the demographic

information that had been collected on the student at the time of the assessment. As they collected the

transcripts, they attached the ID labels to them to identify the student to whom they belonged. At the same

time, they made sure that any other identifying information was erased or obscured, so that the student

could not be identified. For schools that had not participated in NAEP, a set of labels was created with

newly assigned ID numbers for the students selected in that school. In those schools, the TRF was

produced with the new ID numbers, but with space to record all of the demographic information that was

collected.

A total of 28,764 students were selected for inclusion in the HSTS. Of these, 27,183 students

were from schools that maintained their NAEP administration schedules and were identified by their

NAEP booklet numbers. Another 500 students were from schools that participated in NAEP but had lost

the link between student names and NAEP booklet numbers, and 1,081 were from schools that did not

participate in NAEP.

Table 3-1 displays the number of eligible schools in the sample and the number and percent

of schools from which we collected transcripts, by linking category. Where it is indicated that transcripts

were collected, it means they were usable transcripts of graduating students.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

User's Guide and Technical Report 3-6

Table 3-1. Response rates of eligible schools by linking category, unweighted

School participation status

Number of

schools in

sample

Number of schools

where transcript

data were collected

Percent of schools

where transcript

data were collected

Original school participated in NAEP—IDs

linked to NAEP IDs

221 211 95.5

Original school participated in NAEP—IDs

not linked to NAEP IDs

8 8 100.0

Original school did not participate in NAEP 72 22 30.6

Eligible original sampled schools 301 241 80.0

Substitute school participated in NAEP—

IDs linked to NAEP IDs

21 21 100.0

Substitute school participated in NAEP—

IDs not linked to NAEP IDs

2 2 100.0

Total substitute schools 23 23 100.0

Total original and substitute schools 324 264 81.5

Table 3-2 displays the number of sampled students in the participating (original and

substitute) schools and the number and percent of completed transcripts of graduates that were processed.

Table 3-2. Percent of sampled students who were graduates and for whom completed transcripts were

received

School participation status

Number of

students in

sample

Number and percent of sampled students

who were graduates and for whom

completed transcripts were received*

School participated in NAEP—

IDs linked to NAEP IDs

27,183 22,804 86.4

School participated in NAEP—

IDs not linked to NAEP IDs

500 461 93.0

School did not participate in NAEP 1,081 953 88.9

Total 28,764 24,218 86.6

* This number reflects the number of usable transcripts collected.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

3-7 User's Guide and Technical Report

Because sampling was performed in most schools prior to graduation, not all sampled

students were, in fact, graduates. Only graduates, however, were eligible for the transcript study. We were

able to determine that of the 28,764 students in the sample, 25,248 actually graduated and that 3,328 did

not. Of the remaining 188 students, we imputed 174 as graduates and 14 as not. Thus, from the 25,422

graduates Westat collected and processed 24,218 transcripts. That is, Westat was able to obtain 98.0

percent of the transcripts of eligible students. Table 3-3 displays the response rates for graduates in the

eligible participating schools.

Table 3-3. Response rates of graduates, unweighted

School participation status

Known

graduates

Imputed

graduates

Known

and

imputed

graduates

Number of

transcripts

of known

graduates

collected

Percent of

transcripts

of known

graduates

collected

Percent of

transcripts of

known and

imputed

graduates

collected

School participated in NAEP—

IDs linked to NAEP IDs

23,803 97 23,900 22,804 98.6 98.2

School participated in NAEP—

IDs not linked to NAEP IDs

477 0 477 461 97.5 97.5

School did not participate in

NAEP

968 77 1,045 953 99.3 92.0

Total 25,248 174 25,422 24,218 98.6 98.0
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

User's Guide and Technical Report 3-8

Table 3-4 displays the weighted response rates for NAEP, the transcript study, and the linked

schools.

Table 3-4. Response rates for NAEP, transcript study, and linked schools, weighted

Weighted school

response rate

before

substitution (in

percent)

Weighted school

response rate

after substitution

(in percent)

Weighted student

response rate

(in percent)

Overall

response rate

(in percent)

Overall NAEP

25-Minute Writing

50-Minute Writing

Civics

Reading

75.2

69.7

69.7

69.7

69.7

81.6

78.0

78.0

78.0

78.2

79.6

79.7

80.4

79.4

80.1

65.0

62.1

62.7

61.9

62.6

Transcript Study 76.6 85.3 98.3 83.8

Linked Schools

25-Minute Writing

50-Minute Writing

Civics

Reading

65.7

65.7

65.7

65.6

73.5

73.5

73.5

73.2

81.6

82.4

80.7

82.5*

60.0

60.6

59.3

60.4

* The student response rate reflects all students within S2 and S3 schools. Therefore, some students that are in the response rate calculation are

not in the reading reporting population, as defined in Section 6.5.7. Section 6.5.7 discusses how a portion of students in S3 schools assigned

reading is used to comprise the reporting population for the NAEP reading assessment.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

4-1 User's Guide and Technical Report

4. DATA COLLECTION PROCEDURES

4.1 Training NAEP Field Supervisors as Data Collectors

The field workers for the 1998 High School Transcript Study were drawn from the pool of

NAEP field supervisors. They were trained in the data collection procedures for HSTS in December 1997.

This training was conducted by the HSTS Curriculum Specialist/Coding Supervisor and took place over

one full day. The training consisted of three sessions. The purpose of the first session was to establish the

background knowledge needed to help field workers to make informed decisions when collecting

information in the schools, and to explain why attention to detail and accuracy would be crucial in

ensuring the quality of HSTS data. The second training session was held to familiarize field workers with

the HSTS materials and forms and with the variety of materials they could expect to find in the schools.

The third session provided an opportunity for field workers to work with sample catalogs and transcripts,

and to fill out practice forms, as they would do using the actual materials for the HSTS.

The first training session consisted of a presentation describing the purposes of the HSTS,

the procedures Westat uses in handling and processing HSTS data, and the best sources of data to obtain

from schools to provide Westat with the needed data. Specific examples were used throughout the

presentation.

During the second session, field supervisors were shown examples of various types of high

school records and materials, including school- and district-level catalogs, course lists, transcripts, and all

the forms used and completed for the HSTS. The information on each of these materials was crossreferenced to the data needed for the HSTS at the school and student levels. Transparencies of screen

prints of the transcript data entry and course coding systems were shown to demonstrate how the

information from the specific materials would be entered.

The third training session consisted of completing sets of exercises, designed to provide the

field workers with hands-on experience in examining school materials and filling out the forms they

would use. The practice materials consisted of copies of actual catalogs, course lists, and transcripts

obtained in the 1994 HSTS (with all identifying information deleted).
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

User's Guide and Technical Report 4-2

The first set of exercises was completed by the group as a whole, using transparencies of the

materials and an overhead projector. The second set was completed in pairs or small groups, and the third

set was completed individually and collected for review by supervisory staff. Errors or misconceptions

were corrected and discussed with the field workers prior to their leaving the training session. Sample

catalogs included a course list, extracts from a large catalog, and a smaller catalog. The sample materials

were selected to give field workers a sense of the variety of materials they might expect to find in schools

with respect to the amount of information available, the physical layout of the materials, and the ease or

difficulty of accessing the information in the materials. Transcripts were examined in this exercise to

show a number of ways that special education, for example, might be indicated, as well as indicators for

transfer courses, remedial courses, honors courses, off-campus location courses, or courses for students

with limited English proficiency.

4.2 Contacts with States, Districts, and Schools

In September 1997, superintendents and principals were notified about the transcript study

through the Summary of School Tasks which was included in a mailout to all schools selected for NAEP.

This summary included information on several aspects of the main NAEP study, as well as the

notification of the transcript study. In December 1997, district superintendents of participating 12th-grade

schools sampled for the main NAEP and selected for the HSTS were mailed additional information

concerning the HSTS. Items in the package included the following:

 An informational letter to school superintendents from the Project Officer of NCES

(Exhibit 4-1);

 A list of schools in the district selected for the 1998 HSTS; and

 A summary of school transcript activities (Exhibit 4-2).

For contacts with school-level personnel, field workers were provided with the following

materials:

 An informational letter to principals from the Project Officer of NCES (Exhibit 4-3).

 The summary of school transcript activities.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

4-3 User's Guide and Technical Report

Exhibit 4-1. Superintendent’s letter from Project Officer
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

User's Guide and Technical Report 4-4

Exhibit 4-2. Summary of school transcript activities

1998 HIGH SCHOOL TRANSCRIPT STUDY

SUMMARY OF SCHOOL ACTIVITIES

This sheet summarizes the High School Transcript Study activities that will be undertaken in 1998.

Hopefully, it will provide answers to some of the questions you may have. NAEP supervisors will

provide you with a more detailed description of these tasks during telephone and in-person visits to the

school.

KEY ASPECTS OF THE HIGH SCHOOL TRANSCRIPT STUDY

 NO STUDENT TIME IS INVOLVED. NAEP staff will work with your school and do as much of

the work as possible to minimize the burden.

 Students’ names and other individually identifying information will be removed from copies of the

transcripts before they leave the school.

 Your school will be reimbursed at your usual rate for providing transcripts.

ACTIVITIES INVOLVING SCHOOLS

Phase 1: January – March 1998

1. The 1998 High School Transcript Study sample will be identified by the NAEP supervisor.

2. Course lists or catalogs will also be requested. Course catalogs will be requested for the following

years: 1997-98, 1996-97, 1995-96, and 1994-95.

3. A sample of three transcripts will be requested. One should include regular courses, one special

education courses, and one honors courses.

4. The NAEP supervisor will need to review transcripts and course catalogs and collect additional

information before leaving your school so that questions about either may be clarified.

Phase 2: Summer – Fall 1998

1. In the Summer or Fall of 1998, NAEP staff will return to your school to collect the requested

transcripts of students who graduated.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

4-5 User's Guide and Technical Report

Exhibit 4-3. Informational letter to principals from Project Officer
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

User's Guide and Technical Report 4-6

Field workers provided these materials to the school principals and school coordinators

during their initial visit to schools to conduct NAEP sampling. They discussed the HSTS with the school

coordinator prior to the sampling visit when they called to confirm the sampling date.

Eligible schools participating in NAEP were informed about the 1998 HSTS when they

received information about NAEP. Schools were provided with information about participating in the

HSTS, including procedures that would be used to ensure confidentiality of the data, and the amount and

nature of school staff time required for participating in HSTS. For eligible schools that agreed to

cooperate, students sampled for NAEP were included in the HSTS sample, and a brightly-colored

Disclosure Notice was placed in their folder by a NAEP field worker or school staff member. This notice,

shown in Exhibit 4-4, served two functions:

 It alerted the school personnel that information contained in the student’s folder would

be used for the HSTS.

 Because of its color, it also served as a visible marker for identifying the folders of

students in the HSTS sample to facilitate finding their transcript later.

Once participation in the study was authorized by the district, individual schools were

contacted. The contact letter for NAEP, for all schools in which 12th graders were assessed, provided

information about the 1998 HSTS. Initial HSTS information requested from schools and collected by

NAEP field workers at the time of the NAEP assessment included information which they were asked to

provide on the School Information Form (SIF), as well as their school’s course catalogs for the four most

recent school years, including 1997-98, and three sample transcripts. They were also asked to provide a

complete transcript for each graduate in the HSTS sample as soon as graduation information was posted

on the transcripts. Information provided on the SIF indicated the appropriate date for the field workers to

obtain the transcripts. Schools that were eligible for the 1998 HSTS but that had chosen not to participate

in the 1998 NAEP assessment were contacted near the end of the school year.

In originally nonparticipating NAEP schools, notification to the schools included

information that the intent was to select a sample of up to 50 students and to provide the same

confidentiality safeguards with these samples as with all NAEP students. That is, student names would be

removed from any papers that left the school. Field workers also emphasized that a school’s participation

in the High School Transcript Study would not involve any student time.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

4-7 User's Guide and Technical Report

Exhibit 4-4. Disclosure notice (original printed in fluorescent green)

DISCLOSURE NOTICE

1998 HIGH SCHOOL TRANSCRIPT STUDY

Date: Spring Quarter 1998

Fall Quarter 1998

A copy of this student’s transcript ___ will be ___ has been provided to WESTAT, agent for the U.S. Department of Edu

for Education Statistics (NCES). The granting of Education Department authority for collection of the transcript data has 

the provisions of the Family Education Rights and Privacy Act (FERPa) (20 U.S.C. 122g), as implemented by 34 CFR 9

This disclosure statement fulfills the requirements of provision 34 CFR 99.32 of FERPA.The High School Transcript Study (HSTS), sponsored by NCES, is being conducted to collect information on current cou

taking in the nation’s secondary schools. This student has been selected to participate in HSTS, and data from these recordothers into statistical summaries and tables. No individually identifiable information will be released in any form.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

User's Guide and Technical Report 4-8

For both NAEP participating and nonparticipating schools, the initial contact by the field

worker included a discussion of the following:

 Procedures for obtaining transcripts for the selected students and the method for

reimbursing the school for the expense and

 The availability of a course catalog or description.

An appointment was then set to visit the school to prepare the transcript requests and obtain

the course catalogs.

4.3 Obtaining Course Catalogs, Sample Transcripts, and Other School-Level Information

Field workers requested sample materials for the HSTS when they first contacted a school

and collected these materials when they visited the school for sampling. There were 242 schools that

participated in NAEP and also participated in the HSTS (although 10 of these schools did not maintain

the NAEP-HSTS links). There were also 22 schools from the original school sample that participated in

the HSTS, but did not participate in NAEP. The sample materials included, preferably, a course catalog (a

list of courses) offered for each of four consecutive years, from 1994-95 through 1997-98; a completed

School Information Form, as shown in Appendix B; and three transcripts of students who graduated in

1998, representing a “regular” student, one with honors courses, and one with special education courses.

Since these materials were unique to each school, acquiring them before the collection of the actual

transcripts enabled Westat staff to examine them and call a field worker or the school (i.e., before school

personnel left for the summer) with any questions that arose during the school year. The catalogs and

transcripts collected were also examined by the field worker who filled out a Course Catalog Checklist

(Exhibit 4-5) and a Transcript Format Checklist (Exhibit 4-6) for each item collected and sent to Westat.

The field worker also gathered general information about class periods, credits, graduation

requirements, and other aspects of school policy. Sometimes this information was documented in the

course catalog and at other times in a separate school policy document.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

4-9 User's Guide and Technical Report

Exhibit 4-5. Course catalog checklist

NAEP School ID: 

School Name: 

Supervisor: 

COURSE CATALOG CHECKLIST

Record each catalog title and check off all items which are identified in the course description materials you

have collected.

School Level Materials

School

Year

Catalog

Title

Course

Title

Course

Number

Course

Credits

Course

Description

Course

Level1

Special

Codes2

Special

Programs3

1994-95

1995-96

1996-97

1997-98

District Level Materials

School

Year

Catalog

Title

Course

Title

Course

Number

Course

Credits

Course

Description

Course

Level1

Special

Codes2

Where

Offered4

1994-95

1995-96

1997-98

1997-98

1 Identified as Regular, Honors, A.P, Remedial, Special Education, ESL?

2 Does the catalog describe what codes mean?

3 Are Special Programs (Sp. Ed, IB, Vocational, etc.) included in this catalog?

4 Does the district catalog identify courses offered at the sampled HSTS school?
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

User's Guide and Technical Report 4-10

Exhibit 4-6. Transcript format checklist

NAEP School ID: 

Supervisor: 

TRANSCRIPT FORMAT CHECKLIST

Marked

Not

Marked

Not on

Transcript

1. Student’s birthdate

2. Student’s race/ethnicity

3. Student’s gender

4. Student’s LEP/LEP status

5. Student’s graduation date

6. Years attending this school

7. Type of diploma awarded

8. When a course was taken (year and semester)

9. For a single course:

a. course name

b. number of credits awarded

c. length of course (one year, semester, or other)

d. grade received

e. level of course (honors, remedial, SpEd, regular)

f. transfer credit from another high school

g. taught in another language (or ESL course

h. vocational courses

i. location, if not taught at this school site

10. Total number of credits received

11. “Weighting” of course credits/grades (for honors or

remedial levels)

12. Are abbreviations or codes used on the transcripts? If so,

indicate on the back of this form what they are and what

they mean for those that are not obvious.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

4-11 User's Guide and Technical Report

4.3.1 Catalogs

Course catalogs were carefully reviewed at the school. Field workers verified that the

catalogs contained all of the courses that 1998 12th graders could have taken in high school, including

vocational, remedial, honors, special education, or off-campus courses, or courses taught in a language

other than English. If these course listings were not in the catalog, every effort was made to obtain

additional information from school personnel to document the existence of such courses and to describe

them.

Our prior experience in coding course catalogs for previous HSTS studies led us to identify

the following levels of priority for the type of catalog to request:

1. A school-level catalog providing course titles and descriptions;

2. A district-level catalog, if it indicated which courses were offered at the HSTS

participating school;

3. A course list by department that included general descriptions of course offerings by

department;

4. A school-level course list without descriptions; or

5. A district-level catalog without any indication of which courses were offered in

specific schools.

Field workers filled out a Course Catalog Checklist for the catalogs they obtained. This

checklist served two purposes:

 It guided field workers in obtaining materials with the maximum amount of

information possible that would be useful in the HSTS.

 It provided Westat staff with a quick way to review catalogs, so that they could

request additional information if needed.

Catalogs (or whatever material was available) were forwarded to Westat.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

User's Guide and Technical Report 4-12

4.3.2 Sample Transcripts

Since transcript format varies greatly among school districts throughout the country, it was

sometimes difficult to find the needed information on a transcript. This presented an obstacle to uniform

treatment of information on transcripts. Another difficulty was encountered in determining the meaning of

“coded” information found on some transcripts, particularly codes indicating the level of courses – that is,

whether a course was honors or remedial level, or whether it was a special education course or part of

another special program.

To solve this problem, Westat obtained sample transcripts of previous graduates, marked up

to indicate where on the transcript the needed information was to be found, and how information

regarding course level was coded. Westat requested three sample transcripts from each school: one

containing honors level courses, one containing special education courses, and one “regular” transcript.

Attached to each marked-up transcript was a Transcript Format Checklist, indicating the information to be

marked and whether or not that piece of information was included on the school’s transcripts.

4.3.3 School Information Form (SIF)

The SIF was forwarded to Westat along with the other preliminary materials as described

above. The SIF (see Appendix B) was completed by the field worker or a school staff member or

sometimes by both. The name and position of the school’s HSTS coordinator who helped fill out the SIF

appeared on the first page. The completed SIF contained information about the school in general, about

sources of information within the school (if needed to complete HSTS data collection), about the course

description materials, about graduation requirements and grading practices at the school, and about the

format of the school’s transcripts. The field workers were instructed to fill out the SIF completely, or to

indicate clearly on the SIF where the requested information could be found in the other materials provided

by the school.

4.3.4 School Questionnaire

The School Questionnaire (formerly called the School Characteristics and Policies

Questionnaire) (Appendix A) is a 54-item questionnaire that collected information about school, teacher,
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

4-13 User's Guide and Technical Report

and home factors that might relate to student achievement. It was completed by a school official (usually

the principal) as part of NAEP for the NAEP participating schools.

4.4 Identifying the Sample Students and Obtaining Transcripts

The 1998 HSTS used the NAEP sample for selecting schools and students in NAEPparticipating schools. For schools that participated in NAEP, the student sample was recorded on the

NAEP Administration Schedules. For schools that did not participate in NAEP, the field worker drew a

sample of students at the school. Our procedures for identifying students in schools with NAEP materials

and in schools without NAEP materials are described in detail in separate sections below.

4.4.1 Schools with NAEP Materials

Schools that participated in NAEP identified students participating in the HSTS at the same

time that the NAEP sample was selected. For all HSTS participants, a Disclosure Notice was placed in the

student’s cumulative record folder where it would be highly visible and thus make it easier to identify and

collect needed transcripts after students had graduated.

Transcripts were requested for all students who were assessed, for sampled students who

were absent during assessment, and for the SD/LEP students who were sampled but excluded by the

school from participating in the 1998 NAEP assessment.

When graduation information was posted on transcripts (the date was provided by the school

on the School Information Form), a field worker returned to the school to obtain the requested transcripts.

For each NAEP school, the field worker was given a Transcript Request Form (TRF), Version 1

(Exhibit 4-7). In addition to Student Name and NAEP ID, it contained columns for entering graduation

status, gender, birth month and year, race/ethnicity, SD status, LEP status, if receiving Title 1 services,

and National School Lunch Program participation. Data available from NAEP files (NAEP ID and

demographic variables) were preprinted on the form. The completed TRFs contained the following

information:

 Student Name – The field worker recorded the first name, middle initial, and last

name of each assessed, absent, or excluded student listed on the NAEP Administration

Schedule. These entries were made to correspond to the preprinted NAEP ID.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

User's Guide and Technical Report 4-14 Exhibit 4-7. Transcript request form – Version 1
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

4-15 User's Guide and Technical Report

 NAEP ID – The 10-digit NAEP assessment booklet numbers and SD/LEP

questionnaire numbers for excluded students from the 1998 assessment were

preprinted in ID order. This column on the TRF identified all students for whom

transcripts were needed.

 Exit Status – Using information provided by the school, field workers assigned one

of the following codes to describe each student’s outcome at the school:

a. Graduated with a standard diploma;

b. Graduated with an honors diploma;

c. Received a diploma with special education adjustments;

d. Received a certificate of attendance;

e. Still enrolled in this school;

f. Dropped out;

g. Other, such as transferred, GED, or unknown;

h. Out of scope; or

i. Completed course requirements but did not pass required tests.

Sometimes the exit status was determined directly from the transcripts and sometimes

it was provided by other sources at the school.

 Birthdate, Sex, and Race/Ethnicity – Demographic information was generally

preprinted for each sampled student. If not preprinted, it was recorded from the NAEP

Administration Schedule. If the school informed a field worker that some of this

information was incorrect, the field worker entered the correct information on the

TRF.

 SD and LEP Status – For each student, it was recorded whether or not the student

was classified by the school as SD and/or LEP.

 National School Lunch Program (NSLP) and Title 1 – Yes or No for participation

in each of these programs.

 Transcript Received – Field workers checked this column to document that the

transcript for a given student had been received.

Once the Transcript Request Form was completed by carefully transferring student

information from the Administration Schedules, the field worker filled out a summary box at the top of

the form and requested transcripts according to the procedures set forth by the school. The Disclosure
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

User's Guide and Technical Report 4-16

Notice placed in students’ folders at the time of the NAEP assessment helped to facilitate transcript

collection in participating NAEP schools.

The following directions for completing the Transcript Request Form were given to the field

worker.

1. Enter your name at the “Supervisor” line in the top box of the TRF.

2. Verify that the school has all of the pages of the Administration Schedules, comparing

the school copies to your own (which were provided without names). Student names

should be legible on the complete school copy.

3. Eliminate any non-12th graders by drawing a single line through their names.

4. Begin with the NAEP ID of the first student on the Administration Schedule. Find the

corresponding NAEP ID on the Transcript Request Form. (These are printed in ID

order.)

5. The birthdate, gender, race/ethnicity, SD/LEP, Title 1 status, and National School

Lunch Program participation should all be preprinted on the TRF and should match

the information recorded for that student on the Administration Schedule. If not,

correct the information on the TRF after you have verified that you have matched

entries correctly.

6. Record the student’s full name from the Administration Schedule on the line of the

Transcript Request Form with the same NAEP ID. Make a small check on the

Administration Schedule as you go to indicate you have completed the transcription

for a given student (this should be the last use of the Administration Schedule). In

some schools, it may be necessary to record some form of school ID (e.g., Social

Security Number) in addition to or in lieu of the student’s name for the school to

access the files. Make sure you’re aware of this before you start completing the TRFs.

7. Continue this process for all 12th grade students on the Administration Schedules with

one exception: any students who have been crossed off as “withdrawn” should be

skipped in the process.

8. When you have gone through all of the Administration Schedules in this fashion, you

should have a name entry corresponding to each NAEP ID preprinted on the TRF.

9. Code the “exit status” for each student at this time if it is available. Alternatively, this

information may be recorded when the transcripts are collected. Confer with your

school coordinator to determine the best way to get this information; it may not be on

the transcript or it may be coded information.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

4-17 User's Guide and Technical Report

Exhibit 4-8. Documentation of missing transcripts

NAEP School ID: 

Supervisor: 

Documentation of Missing Transcripts

Date: 

School Name: 

Number of Transcripts Requested: 

Number of Transcripts Received: 

# of Regular Transcript: 

# of Honors Transcripts: 

# of Special Edu. Transcripts: 

Reason(s) for Missing Transcripts: 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

User's Guide and Technical Report 4-18

10. Record the number of transcripts requested in the box at the top of the first page of the

TRF. Record the number received at the time you obtain the transcripts. For each

transcript received, place a checkmark in the “Transcript Received” column. Be sure

to complete a “Documentation of Missing Transcripts” form (Exhibit 4-8) if you

cannot obtain a transcript.

Once the field worker filled in the names of the students, some schools were able to access

an electronic data file and copy the transcripts. In other schools, the transcripts were pulled from their

folders and photocopied at the school.

Once the request was filled, the field worker reviewed the transcripts to ensure that a

transcript was received for each 12th grade student who was selected for the NAEP assessment, whether

or not that student had graduated. The field worker then checked each transcript for eligibility,

understandability (e.g., are all the codes on it defined on the transcript or explained in the SIF?), and

completeness and labeled each transcript with preprinted labels containing the School ID and the NAEP

ID for the student. The field worker completed a Documentation of Missing Transcripts form to explain

the reasons the school gave for any missing transcripts.

After the field worker collected and recorded all the information required on the sampled

students and reviewed the transcripts for completeness and accuracy, he or she prepared the transcripts for

transmittal to Westat. This procedure involved “masking” all personally identifiable information where it

appeared on each transcript, using a broad felt tip marker or correction tape to line through or cover all

identifiers.

Personal identifiers were also removed from the Transcript Request Forms. Before sending

the TRFs to Westat, the field worker cut off the portion that included the students’ names, in order to

comply with confidentiality provisions. The portion with the names was left in the school’s NAEP folder.

Schools were reimbursed at their standard rates for providing the transcripts. The field

worker then completed a Shipping Transmittal Form (Exhibit 4-9) and returned it with the TRF, the

transcripts, the Documentation of Missing Transcripts, and the SIF to Westat.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

4-19 User's Guide and Technical Report

Exhibit 4-9. Shipping transmittal form

908842

1998 HSTS – SHIPPING TRANSMITTAL FORM

(INSTRUCTIONS: Fill out for each school and shipment)

School ID #: _____________________________ School Name: __________________________

Supervisor: ______________________________ School Shipment #: 1 2

Date Shipped: ____________________________ Source of Sample: NAEP List

New Sample

1. TRANSCRIPTS:

1) Total Number Requested _________________________

2) Number in This Shipment _________________________

3) Number Unavailable _________________________

4) Number to be sent/Estimated shipping date ________________________

IF SCHOOL DID NOT PARTICIPATE IN NAEP, COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING:

2. SD/LEP STUDENT QUESTIONNAIRES:

1) Total number requested _________________________

2) Number in this shipment _________________________

3) Number unavailable _________________________

4) Number to be sent _________________________

3. COURSE CATALOG: (check one)

In this shipment

To be shipped

Unavailable

4. COURSE CATEGORY: (Check one for each year):

1997-98

In This Shipment

To be Shipped

Unavailable

1996-97

In This Shipment

To be Shipped

Unavailable

1995-96

In This Shipment

To be Shipped

Unavailable

1994-95

In This Shipment

To be Shipped

Unavailable

5. SCHOOL INFORMATION FORM (Check one):

 In this shipment

 To be shipped

6. COURSE CATALOG CHECKLIST:

 In this shipment

7. TRANSCRIPT FORMAT CHECKLIST:

 In this shipment
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

User's Guide and Technical Report 4-20

 4.4.2 Schools without NAEP Materials

In schools that did not participate in NAEP, the field worker first selected a sample of

students, then requested transcripts for those students and followed the procedures described in the

previous section for reviewing and shipping transcripts. The School Information Form was also

completed, and course catalogs for the past four academic years were collected. The information in the

catalogs was documented by completing the Course Catalog Checklist. At this point, the procedure was

different. Rather than obtaining and annotating three example transcripts, as was done at the time of the

NAEP visit to the school, the field worker used the Transcript Format Checklist to annotate three actual

transcripts from among those that were collected.

In the schools that participated in HSTS but not in NAEP, the process of generating a sample

of students began when the school produced a listing of all students who graduated from the 12th grade

during the spring or summer of 1998. This list was requested during the preliminary call placed to the

school when it was determined that the school would participate in HSTS. The following information was

collected for each student selected for participation in HSTS:

 Exit status,

 Gender,

 Birthdate (month/year),

 Race/ethnicity,

 If student had a disability (SD),

 If student had limited English proficiency (LEP),

 If student was receiving Title 1 services, and

 If student was a participant in the National School Lunch Program.

These data were collected either with the list of 1998 graduates or after sampling, depending on which

procedure was easier for the school. SD/LEP Questionnaires were not collected for students in schools

that had not participated in NAEP.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

4-21 User's Guide and Technical Report

Selecting the Sample

As described in Section 3.3, there were two basic sampling rules for the 1998 HSTS. These

rules applied to all schools that required a new sample of students.

1. If there were 60 or fewer graduates listed, all graduates were included in the sample.

2. If there were more than 60 graduates listed, a sample of 50 students was drawn using a

systematic random sampling.

Because the students in the HSTS-only schools did not have NAEP identification numbers, a

set of IDs was preassigned for up to 60 students in each school. The Transcript Request Form—Version 2

(Exhibit 4-10) was preprinted with these IDs and had space for filling in each student’s name and basic

demographic characteristics.

The field worker, with the assistance of the school, completed the TRF and submitted it to

the school staff. The transcripts were then provided to the field worker who reviewed and shipped them to

Westat in the same manner as transcripts from schools participating in NAEP.

4.5 SD/LEP Questionnaire

Prior to 1996, the questionnaire that collected information from school staff about students

with disabilities and students with limited English proficiency was called the IEP/LEP Questionnaire. It

was retitled as the SD/LEP Questionnaire in 1996. The SD/LEP Questionnaire was completed for

students sampled for NAEP and identified by the school as having a disability and/or for students with

limited English proficiency. Westat asked the schools to have the person most knowledgeable about a

student complete the questionnaire. In large schools, this person was typically a counselor, a special

education teacher, or a teacher of English as a Second Language. In smaller schools, this person was

typically a classroom teacher.

For schools participating in the 1998 NAEP, the SD/LEP Questionnaires were collected as

part of the NAEP procedures. Questions one and two were used to determine which section(s) of the

questionnaire should be completed. Part A (questions 3 through 19) was answered for a student with a
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

User's Guide and Technical Report 4-22

Exhibit 4-10. Transcript request form – Version 2
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

4-23 User's Guide and Technical Report

disability. Part B of the questionnaire (questions 20 through 41) was completed for an LEP student. If a

student was classified as both SD and LEP, the entire questionnaire was completed. A copy of the

questionnaire is included as Appendix C.

4.6 Sending Data to Westat

As with NAEP, safeguards were built into the procedures for the transcript study to ensure

that applicable privacy requirements were met. These safeguards included the removal of all personal

identifiers from the transcripts provided by the schools. When the transcripts left the school, students

could be identified only by ID numbers. In schools where the NAEP information was available, the ID

number was the same as the student’s NAEP booklet number. In schools where a sample of students was

drawn specifically for the HSTS, new IDs were generated.

After transcripts were collected and all information on sampled students recorded, field

workers prepared the transcripts for transmittal to Westat. They first compared the data on the transcripts

to the TRF to verify that they had obtained and correctly labeled the transcripts. At the same time, they

noted on the TRF which transcripts were received and which were not. They then cut off the left hand

column of the TRF, which contained the names of the students. The list of names remained in the schools

(and was ultimately destroyed) and the remainder of the TRF was placed in the package to send to

Westat.

The field workers masked all personally identifying information where it appeared on each

transcript, using a broad felt tip marker to line through all identifiers. The types of personal identifiers and

their location on the transcripts were different for each school and, sometimes, for the different categories

of students within a single school. Field workers were careful to examine every transcript and line

through the following information each time it appeared: student’s name, parent’s name, names of

guardians or other relatives, addresses (including street, city, state, ZIP), phone numbers, and Social

Security numbers or other student ID numbers.

A Shipping Transmittal Form accompanied all shipments to Westat and summarized the

types and number of materials being sent. This form also gave information on whether the transcripts

were from the NAEP list or a new sample and, if the school did not participate in NAEP, whether course

catalogs and an SIF were included in the shipment.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

User's Guide and Technical Report 4-24

4.7 Receipt and Review of Data from Data Collectors

When transcript study materials arrived at Westat, a receipt clerk carefully reviewed all

items for accuracy and completeness. Transcripts were matched to the Transcript Request Form. Field

workers were contacted immediately if further clarification was needed. Schools were reimbursed for the

cost of producing the transcripts within two weeks of having their materials received at Westat.

An automated management system was developed and maintained at Westat. A disposition

code structure was developed to indicate the status of each school’s participation. As field workers

reported the results of their contacts with district superintendents and individual schools, a receipt clerk

keyed a disposition code for each school. Disposition reports were generated from the receipt system once

a week so that home office staff could review the progress of securing cooperation from the sampled

schools.

Once verified, information on the number of transcripts and course catalogs requested and

received was entered in the receipt system by a data entry clerk. Weekly status reports were generated to

monitor the progress of obtaining the transcripts. Transcripts and other school materials were maintained

in individual school folders and stored until used by data preparation staff. Each school folder included

the school’s catalog or catalogs, Transcript Request Forms, student transcripts, Catalog and Transcript

Format Checklists, a School Information Form, and a Shipping Transmittal Form.

Catalogs, sample transcripts, and SIF’s were reviewed at Westat to ensure their

completeness. Phone calls were made to the field workers or to schools, as needed, to resolve any

questions regarding the content or accuracy of the materials.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

5-1 User's Guide and Technical Report

5. DATA PROCESSING PROCEDURES

Westat processed the data from the 1998 High School Transcript Study (HSTS) along three

simultaneous paths as follows:

 The Student Sampling Information System;

 The Computer Assisted Data Entry System; and

 The Computer Assisted Coding and Editing System.

With the exception of the transcripts and the course catalogs, some data entered in each

system were collected by Westat field personnel and some data had already been assembled for NAEP

into data files by the Educational Testing Service (ETS). Westat staff obtained the relevant NAEP data

files from ETS and merged them with the HSTS data collected from nonNAEP-participating schools. As

described below, appropriate checks were made to ensure that only one set of data was entered for a

school or a student, and procedures were developed to resolve inconsistencies among the data sources.

The three data processing paths are described in Sections 5-1 through 5-3.

When entering and cleaning the data for the study, the following tasks were performed:

 Establishing Student ID Control Lists;

 Entering Transcript Data;

 Coding Course Catalogs;

 Matching Transcript Titles to Catalog Titles;

 Standardizing Credits and Grades; and

 Performing Quality Control Checks.

These steps involved the entry and coding of the students’ transcripts and the schools’ course

catalogs, as well as matching the courses on the coded catalogs to the courses on the transcripts. Each of

these steps is described in detail in the sections below.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

User's Guide and Technical Report 5-2

5.1 Establishing Student ID Control Lists

Student ID control lists were developed from lists obtained from the NAEP administration

records for schools that participated in NAEP. The control list for a school is the master list of IDs against

which all other operations are checked. Only IDs matching those on the control lists are processed, as

other IDs are either out of scope or miskeyings. In addition, each data processing step must account for all

the IDs on the control list or for a well-defined subset of those IDs. Only NAEP students who were

identified during the NAEP administration as 12th graders were retained on the control lists generated

from NAEP. Students identified as 10th or 11th graders, or those with an unknown grade, were removed

from the lists.

For schools that did not participate in NAEP, or that had lost the linkage between the

students’ names and their IDs, control lists were compiled from completed Transcript Request FormsVersion 2. A data file was created for each school listing the valid student IDs for that specific HSTS

school.

5.1.1 Student Sampling Information System

The Transcript Request Form and the sampling section of the School Information Form

provided the student sampling information for each school participating in the study. Figure 5-1 illustrates

the process for entering the student sampling information. The figure also illustrates how intermediate

files were used to ensure that all information was valid and that only valid student ID numbers were used.

5.1.2 School Information Form

In HSTS schools that also participated in NAEP, the student sampling rates were identical to

those used in NAEP because the sample was identical. For the 32 schools in which Westat staff drew

samples in the field, the number of students listed (i.e., the number of eligible seniors) and the number of

students sampled were recorded in the sampling section of the School Information Form. This

information was keyed into a file that was checked against the number of unique student IDs on the

Transcript Request Form and then used in the weighting process.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

5-3 User's Guide and Technical Report

From SD/LEP

data entry

Disability Flag

and Status

SD/LEP File

Student File

Exit Status

Reconciliation

Student Information File

(clean)

From transcript

data entry

List showing

School NAEP

Linkage Status

ID Reconciliation

Master TRF File

Merge and Check for

Duplicate IDs

TRF File with

non-NAEP IDs

Student

Information File

(includes exit

status)

Student ID control

files for each

school

TRF File with

NAEP IDs

Data Entry and

Verification

TRF

(reviewed)

Initial Supervisory Review

School

Information Form

(SIF)

Transcript

Request Form

(TRF)

Figure 5-1. Student information processing and ID reconciliation
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

User's Guide and Technical Report 5-4

5.1.3 Transcript Request Form

The preprinted information on the Transcript Request Form was drawn from the NAEP

student file. For schools that kept their NAEP materials, data entry was uncomplicated. Westat staff first

created a file containing the preprinted information from the TRF with one record per student. Each

student’s graduation status as indicated on the TRF was entered at the end of each record. If necessary,

Westat staff corrected the demographic data preprinted on the TRF and then key verified these entries.

Finally, Westat staff key entered and verified all the TRFs from the schools for which new samples were

drawn in the 1998 study.

Westat merged the NAEP and non-NAEP TRF files and checked for valid IDs and

duplicates. Information in the TRF file and receipt control was used to create a list of valid school

identifiers with a flag indicating each school’s linkage status to NAEP. The linkage flag had four possible

values:

0 = School did not participate in HSTS;

1 = Both school ID and student IDs linked to NAEP;

2 = School participated in HSTS only; and

3 = School participated in NAEP but, because a new sample was drawn, the student IDs

do not match the NAEP booklet numbers.

The TRF file was also used to create a list of all valid student IDs within each school. These

lists were key control mechanisms that were used throughout all phases of the study to ensure that only

valid IDs could be attached to each data record. For example, during entry of the transcript data, one of

the data entry clerk’s first steps was to key in the school ID and a student ID. As these IDs were keyed,

the Computer Assisted Data Entry (CADE) system checked the IDs against the control lists and refused to

accept any IDs not listed.

5.2 CADE System for Entering Transcript Data

The CADE system included three basic screens for data entry. The first screen was used to

enter student-level information (date of birth, date of graduation, type of diploma, etc.). The second

screen was used to enter data on any honors received and scores on standardized tests. The third screen
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

5-5 User's Guide and Technical Report

was used to enter course data from the transcripts, including course title, grade, credits received, year

taken, and a number of “flags,” or special features. The data for all students in a school were collected in

a set of three database files, one file corresponding to each of the three screens.

The CADE system displayed labeled blank fields which the data entry clerk filled in as

directed. The system checked each entry to verify that it was within an allowed range and warned the

clerk when a problem occurred. Clerks entered data exactly as it appeared on the transcript, using the

Transcript Format Checklist as a guide to look for specific needed information on transcripts from a given

school. The checklist included student’s birthdate, race/ethnicity and gender, SD/LEP status, graduation

date, type of diploma awarded, details about an individual course, total number of credits received and

whether abbreviations or codes were used on the transcript. The data entry staff were instructed to use

abbreviations for course titles (see Exhibit 5-1) and to change any Roman numerals to Arabic numerals.

When all the transcripts for a school were completed, the status of the school file changed from

“incomplete” to “ready for verification.”

5.2.1 Verification of Transcript Data

All transcript data were 100 percent verified in the CADE system by a staff member other

than the one who initially entered the data. The verification portion of the CADE system is essentially a

“re-do and match” process where data are re-entered (blind to the first entry), and the computer stops

when a nonmatch between the original data and the current data is encountered. Verifiers can then either

accept the original entry or override it with the verified entry.

All fields were rekeyed except the course name field, test name field, and honors name field.

These three fields were displayed and reviewed by verifiers but were not key verified. As the three

“name” fields were not used for any automated analyses and required the greatest number of key strokes

to enter, it was felt that the most cost-effective use of resources was to perform a visual verification rather

than a rekeying. In addition, allowing the verifier to see the name of the course, test, or honors being

entered greatly simplified the task of ensuring that the verifier entered data in the same sequence as the

original keyer.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

User's Guide and Technical Report 5-6

Exhibit 5-1. Abbreviations for data entry

Advanced ......................................... Adv

Advanced Placement........................ AP

American.......................................... Amer

Beginning......................................... Beg

Biology............................................. Bio

College Prep(aratory)....................... CP

Cooperative...................................... Coop

Education ......................................... Ed

English ............................................. Engl

General............................................. Gen

Government...................................... Govt

History ............................................. Hist

Honors.............................................. Hon

Industrial Arts................................... IA

Intermediate...................................... Intermed

International Baccalaureate.............. IB

Introduction...................................... Intro

Mathematics ..................................... Math

Physical Education ........................... PE

Science ............................................. Sci

Special Education............................. SpEd

Trigonometry.................................... Trig

United States .................................... US

Vocational ........................................Voc

5.3 CACE System for Coding and Editing Course Catalogs

The Computer Aided Coding and Editing (CACE) System is a Paradox-database system

specifically created for coding high school catalogs. It consists of two major components: (1) a

component for selecting and entering the most appropriate Classification of Secondary School Courses

(CSSC) code and “flags” for each course in a catalog and (2) a component for matching each entry on a

transcript with an entry in the corresponding school’s list of course offerings. The system also provided

for data selection and entry, maintained file consistency, and produced output files suitable for further

analysis and manipulation. CACE’s user interface was designed to reduce the likelihood of coding errors

by encouraging selection from a list rather than key entry of data items.

The CACE System presents each title in a school’s catalog to the catalog coder one at a time.

The catalog coder then examines a “suggestion list” of potential codes for that course. The list is

synchronized with an on-line version of the CSSC so that the coder can simultaneously compare the

description for the course in the CSSC with the course description in the school catalog. The coder can

select the appropriate CSSC code either in the suggestion list or in the corresponding section of the

CSSC. If no catalog was provided, a catalog was created for the school, based on a list of courses

commonly offered by high schools. The list was augmented by adding courses that reasonably would be

expected to be offered, even if they did not occur on a transcript. For example, if transcripts included the

first and third years of a foreign language, it would be expected that the school also offered the second

year of that language, even if that course did not appear on any transcript in the HSTS sample.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

5-7 User's Guide and Technical Report

An alternative procedure allows the catalog coder to type the CSSC code directly into the

appropriate data field on the screen. The CACE system checks all entries against the master CSSC list

before allowing the record to be stored in the database. If the items in the suggestion list are not good

matches to the course description, the catalog coder can always browse through the full on-line CSSC or

refer to the hard copy of the CSSC. If the coder cannot determine an appropriate code for a course, he or

she may select a special code from the suggestion list that will mark the course for further consideration

by the coding supervisor.

5.3.1 General Procedures for Coding Course Catalogs

To assure consistency and quality, catalog coding decisions were based on a basic set of

coding principles and procedures. First, the catalog coder reviewed a school catalog “holistically” to

ascertain ways that course levels, special education, and other special programs were designated. He or

she looked for sequences of courses, descriptions of programs, requirements, credits awarded, or other

information provided, to obtain a general view of the curriculum. Then, using CACE, the coder looked at

each course title, found it in the catalog, and read whatever description was available. The coder then

selected the best CSSC code for the course. Wherever possible, the catalog coder selected codes based on

a course description rather than on title.

After selecting the CSSC code, the coder reviewed the flags for that course and edited them

as needed. If the coder found courses in the CACE catalog listing that should not be there, they could be

deleted. Similarly, if the coder found that a course was missing from the CACE listing of catalog titles, it

was added to the list and coded. After the coder finished coding the regular education courses for a

school, the special education expert coded all special education courses.

The specific steps of the coding procedure are described below.

5.3.2 Entering Course Titles

A curriculum specialist examined all catalog listings, regardless of how the catalog was

created. Every attempt was made to eliminate duplicates and to ensure that course titles included
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

User's Guide and Technical Report 5-8

appropriate annotations for grade (“English 10”), level (“Biology, AP”), or special programs

(“Automechanics Coop Ed”). Errors were corrected by data entry personnel and the corrected list was

again reviewed by the curriculum specialist.

Two variables indicating the source of information for a given school’s catalog are provided

with the School File. One variable indicates whether or not the course list that we used was derived from

transcripts. The other indicates the type of catalog which the school provided (school-level catalogs or

course lists, district catalogs, or schools without catalogs). The type of catalog or course list that the

school provided is indicated by the CATTYPE variable on the School File. For ease of use, these

variables also appear in the Course Offerings File.

5.3.2.1 School-level Catalogs or Course Lists

If a school provided a catalog of course offerings (as requested), data entry personnel entered

a list of all course titles appearing in the catalog. A concerted effort was made to standardize the format of

titles. All Roman numerals were converted to Arabic numerals. Abbreviation were standardized for all

frequently appearing courses (or words in courses) such as “ADV” for “advanced,” or “BEG” for

“beginning,” or “INTRO” for “introduction.” These abbreviations are the same as those used by the

transcript data entry clerks (see Exhibit 5-1).

About 75 percent of the schools provided more than one year’s catalog. Catalogs from all

years received were used to determine whether there were significant changes over the years provided.

The School Information Form indicated if there were any significant changes in course offerings over the

four years in which graduating students attended the school. A curriculum specialist selected the portions

of each catalog to be used so that they excluded sections on programs that students could take only by

attending another school in the district, courses taken at night, and so on. The specialist included

programs from previous years that were not listed in the current catalog but were offered during the

period when students in the HSTS attended the school. These titles were entered in the order of their

appearance in the catalogs.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

5-9 User's Guide and Technical Report

5.3.2.2 District-level Catalogs

Both school-level and district-level catalogs were found at many schools. Twenty schools

provided catalogs of courses offered by their entire school district, while the individual school’s specific

course offerings were a subset of those included in the district catalog. Often these district catalogs

included programs that were known not to be offered at the home school (such as an International

Baccalaureate program, a vocational program, or a performing arts program). To account for courses

actually offered at such schools, a list was created in the same manner as for schools not providing any

catalog (i.e., creating it from titles appearing on transcripts), but the resulting list was supplemented with

courses from the district catalog that were likely to be offered in the HSTS school (such as Advanced

Placement English 12, Accounting, or Basic Biology) even if they did not appear on a transcript. Thus,

the Course Offering File represents the best approximation of the complete list of courses offered by their

schools to the 1998 graduates in the sample.

5.3.2.3 Schools without Catalogs

Approximately 6 percent of the schools (17 of 264) did not provide any list of courses

offered at the school. For these schools, which were most often very small, a course list was generated

during the process of transcript data entry. When a course was entered that did not already appear on a

course offering list, it was added to the list using a function key programmed specifically for this purpose.

The resulting list of courses taken by students at the school was then treated as the school’s catalog.

There are significant limitations to creating catalogs for a school in this manner: (1) the list

represents only courses taken by students in the sample and may not include all courses actually offered at

that school; (2) many courses are repeated, since the same course may have been entered into the

transcript file in two different formats (e.g., “CONSTRUCTION 1” and “CONSTRUCTION TRADES 1,

“or “GLBL STDY 9” and “GLOBAL STUDIES 9”), and (3) no course description is available to clarify

the meaning of a title. These catalogs required considerable review and editing before course coding

could proceed. Schools with catalogs generated using the procedure described above have the variable

CATSRCE set to 0 in the School File. Other schools have the CATSRCE variable set to 1.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

User's Guide and Technical Report 5-10

5.3.3 Classification of Secondary School Courses

Westat used the Classification of Secondary School Courses (CSSC), including

modifications that were made during the 1987, 1990, and 1994 HSTS, as a standard for classifying and

coding the courses offered by all the schools in the 1998 HSTS and all the courses appearing on

transcripts of students included in the HSTS. The CSSC is a 6-digit, hierarchical numbering system for all

regular and special education courses offered in American secondary schools. Each CSSC entry includes

a 6-digit code, a course title and alternate titles, as well as a course description.

Westat updated the CSSC significantly in 1989 to reflect changes in the breadth and types of

courses taken by students in the 1987 HSTS. The CSSC was supplemented for the 1990 HSTS, and again

in 1994, but only modestly. Appendix B of the Tabulations Report lists 83 courses that were revised or

added to the CSSC for the 1998 HSTS. No previously existing CSSC courses were deleted. Many of these

new codes were added in 1998 to differentiate Advanced Placement (AP) and International Baccalaureate

(IB) courses from other honors-level courses. Two new values of the remedial/honors flag were also

added for these courses.

Figure 5-2 is a schematic of the data entry and coding systems illustrating the process used.

5.3.3.1 Flags

Westat coded additional information for each course as a series of single-digit “flags.” These

flags were used to indicate special features of a course such as its relationship to other courses in a

sequence of courses, the language of instruction for the course, the level of the course (honors, regular, or

remedial), whether it was a combination course (a multi-subject course requiring multiple codes such as

an art appreciation/music appreciation course), the location at which the course was taught, and any

enrollment restrictions (regular or disabled students). A full list of flags and their values is shown in

Exhibit 5-2.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

5-11 User's Guide and Technical Report

Match Transcript Titles 

 to Catalog Titles

Code Catalog Title 

with CSSC Code and 

Flags

Create Title List 

(from 

Transcripts)

Course Info.

Test and Honors 

Info.

Create 

CACE File

Generate 

Suggestion 

List

Review 

and Edit

Key and Verify 

Titles 

(from Catalogs)

Catalogs

Data 

Verification

Student Info

Enter Data 

Using CADE

Transcript

Figure 5-2. Data entry and coding process
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

User's Guide and Technical Report 5-12

Exhibit 5-2. Values for flags

Sequence Flag Off Campus Flag

0 Non sequential course (DEFAULT) 0 DEFAULT No

1 First course in sequence 1 Yes, taught at area Vo-Tech

2 Advanced course in sequence 2 Yes, taught at Special Ed Center

Language Flag 3 Yes, other

0 DEFAULT taught in English 4 Yes, at multiple locations

1 Taught in language other than English Transfer Flag

Remedial/Honors Flag 0 DEFAULT - Not a transfer course

1 Honors course 1 Transfer course

2 DEFAULT Regular course Special Education Flag

3 Remedial course 0 Self-contained special education

4 International Baccalaureate 1 Non special education (DEFAULT)

5 Advanced Placement 2 Resource-level special education

Combination Course Flag*

1 DEFAULT, Not a combination course

2 Yes, the course was assigned 2 CSSC codes

3 Yes, the course was assigned 3 CSSC codes

4 Yes, the course was assigned 4 CSSC codes

*NOTE: When multiple CSSC codes are assigned to a course, the course credits are divided evenly among each of the codes.

Codes for flags were automatically set to default values when a course was selected or

entered and could then be changed to nondefault values by the coder. The CACE system included a

“browse” screen where the catalog coder could rapidly review the work but could not edit it. This screen

displayed the data using one line per course title, a format that was particularly useful for locating

uncoded entries and reviewing similar titles for consistency in coding flags.

5.3.3.1.1 Coding Transfer Courses

An important variation on the course coding procedure was for transfer courses – that is,

courses on a student’s transcript that were taken when the student attended another school but the credits

for these courses were transferred to the HSTS school and accepted there. These courses were

automatically added to the catalog list appearing in CACE with the “transfer flag” indicating their transfer
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

5-13 User's Guide and Technical Report

status. In coding these transfer courses, the catalog coder could use only the course title to assign CSSC

codes. No descriptive information was available unless the course was taken in the same school district

and a district catalog was available for review.

To address this issue, the CACE system built a list of transfer course titles and previously

assigned CSSC codes and used these to assign CSSC codes automatically to transfer courses that matched

items in the list. When a new transfer course was coded, it was added to the list. Since the number of

transfer titles for a school could be quite large – sometimes up to 80 percent of the titles for the entire

school in an area with a highly transient population – this automated procedure saved a great deal of time

and ensured that identical titles always received identical codes.

Coders performed manual title matching only for nontransfer courses. Transfer titles were

automatically matched by CACE since the catalog entries are copies of transcript titles. For transfer

courses, a copy of the title of each transfer course was placed in the catalog course listing file so that it

could be coded with an appropriate CSSC code. Since these titles in the catalog are identical to those

appearing in the transcript course list, they could be matched to one another automatically.

5.3.3.1.2 Coding Special Education Courses

Special education courses were coded by a specialist holding an advanced degree in special

education. All special education coding was reviewed by the coding supervisor, who had extensive

expertise in special education. Special education courses were coded using the same procedures and

CACE features as those used for other courses.

5.4 Matching Transcript Titles to Catalog Titles

Once the transcript data entry was complete, the next step in the coding process was to

match transcript titles to catalog titles. Catalog coders completed a table that associated each course title

appearing on a transcript with the title of a course in the school’s catalog and its corresponding CSSC

code and flags. The process was somewhat more difficult than might be expected because of the lack of

uniformity in how courses are entered on transcripts, even within the same school. The task was also

somewhat complex because both flags and course titles must be matched, e.g., “Algebra 1” with an
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

User's Guide and Technical Report 5-14

honors flag had to be appropriately matched with an honors level course in the catalog. For all schools,

special education titles on transcripts were matched to appropriate catalog titles in special education by

the supervisor.

The CACE system includes a facility for matching titles of courses appearing on one or more

transcripts in a school to a course appearing in the course catalog. When a catalog coder entered the title

matching facility, the system divided the screen into two windows. The upper window contained a

scrollable list of transcript courses in alphabetical order and their associated transfer flag, language flag,

and remedial/honors flag. The lower window contained a scrollable list of course titles from the high

school’s catalog and their associated flags. The catalog coder selected a course title in the upper window

and then scrolled through the list in the lower window to find the matching catalog title. The coder

specified the matching catalog course by highlighting it and pressing the Enter key. The catalog title then

appeared next to the corresponding transcript title in the upper window. This process continued until each

transcript title was associated with a catalog title. To minimize the effort required for title matching, each

transcript title was presented for matching only once. Thus, even though “English 9” appeared on all the

transcripts from a school, the coder needed to match it only once.

A CSSC code was assigned to each course listed on a transcript by matching each unique

course title on a transcript to a specific CSSC-coded course in the school’s catalog. The CSSC code

thereby was associated with the transcript title. The associations were based on a match of the title, level

(i.e., average, honors, remedial), and flags (transfer, language of instruction, disability) for each transcript

entry. The matching process also served as an additional check on the accuracy of both transcript and

catalog title data entry. For example, if an entry appeared in the transcript but not in the catalog, the

catalog coder reviewed the transcript to determine whether the course should actually have been marked

with the transfer flag. The coder reviewed the catalog to determine whether the course was erroneously

omitted from the list of catalog titles. Sometimes this process revealed entire programs that students took

that were not described or even mentioned in the school catalog. This discrepancy may have occurred

because the only catalog provided was out of date and different courses were offered in 1994-1998 than

were represented in the older catalog.

One of the major difficulties encountered in evaluating transcript course titles occurred when

course titles were abbreviated. The original meaning of these abbreviations was difficult to determine.

Some could be deciphered by knowing the program offered at a school (e.g., “EFE” is “Economics and

Free Enterprise”), but others remained indecipherable despite all of our efforts (e.g., “ARCS”). Some
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

5-15 User's Guide and Technical Report

titles could reasonably be assigned to a broad domain, if not to a specific course. For example, “ABC

Math” can be matched to the “Math-Other” course title and CSSC code. An ambiguous title was matched

to an “other” course and code within a specific discipline whenever possible. Otherwise, the course was

assigned a code of “600000” for “uncodable.” This code was assigned to 918 of the over 1,000,000

courses entered. It represents less than 0.1 percent of the transcript entries.

5.5 Standardizing Credits and Grades

Since credit and grade information reported on transcripts varied considerably among

schools, districts and states, it was necessary to standardize this information so that valid student- and

school-level comparisons could be made. Standardized credit information was based on the Carnegie

Unit, which was defined as the number of credits a student received for a course taken every day, one

period per day, for a full school year. For each school, the catalog coder filled out a Carnegie Unit Report

(Exhibit 5-3). The factor for converting credits reported on the transcript to the standard Carnegie Unit

was verified by the curriculum specialist and then key entered for each school by data entry personnel.

Grade information on transcripts varied even more widely than credit information. Grades

were reported as letters, numbers, or other symbols on a variety of scales. Coders provided standardized

information for each school using the Standardization of Grades shown in Exhibit 5-4. Information was

then key entered for each school by data entry personnel. Numeric grades were converted to standardized

grades as shown in Table 5-1, unless the school documents specified other letter grade equivalents for

numeric grades.

Table 5-1. Numeric grade conversion

Numeric grade Standard grade

90-100 02 = A

80-89 05 = B

70-79 08 = C

60-69 11 = D

<60 13 = F
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

User's Guide and Technical Report 5-16

Exhibit 5-3. Carnegie Unit Report

NAEP School ID: Date: 

School Name: 

____________ = 1 Carnegie Unit

# of Credits

• Explicitly stated in school documents

___ Yes ___ No

Indicate where: 

• Inferred from transcript data (Check one)

Indicates # of credits received for a full year course taken every day, 1 period.

___ Yes ___ No

Indicates # of credits received for a semester-long course taken every day, 1 period

___ Yes ___ No

• Data Source (Check all that apply)

___ Catalogs ___ SIF ___ Other

___ Transcripts ___ Called school (attach report)

• Any changes over the past four (4) years?

1997 - 98 # of credits = 

1996 - 97 # of credits = 

1995 - 96 # of credits = 

1994 - 95 # of credits = 
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

5-17 User's Guide and Technical Report

Exhibit 5-4. Standardization of grades

Standardization of Grades

School ID # __________________________________ Initials _________________________

Standard List All Schools Equivalent

01 = A+

02 = A

03 = A04 = B+

05 = B

06 = B -

07 = C+

08 = C

09 = C10 = D+

11 = D

12 = D13 = F

14 = PASS OR SATISFACTORY

15 = UNSATISFACTORY

16 = WITHDREW

17 = INCOMPLETE

18 = NON GRADED

19 = BLANK

OTHERS (Specify)

NOTE: ATTACH SAMPLE TRANSCRIPT GRADES FOR TRANSFER AND LIST ID NUMBERS, IF

APPLICABLE.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

User's Guide and Technical Report 5-18

5.6 Quality Control Checks

As noted already, CACE has a component for selecting and entering CSSC codes and flags

for courses listed in a catalog. It also matches each entry on a transcript with an entry in the school’s list

of course offerings. Yet another component of the CACE system automatically converted the credits on

each transcript to Carnegie Units, then compared the number of credits entered to the number of credits

required for graduation in that school, school district, or state (depending upon which was the most

reliable source of information). This automated check verified that the total credits entered for a student

were less than 150 percent of the total number of credits required for graduation and not fewer than the

total credits required. This range was necessary because many students take more than the minimum

requirements for graduation, while only a small number of students graduate with fewer than the required

credits. When the total credits that a student had earned was less than the number needed to graduate, or

greater than 150 percent of the number required to graduate, the transcript and the data files were

examined to see if a mistake had occurred. Any mistakes were corrected and the total credits were

recalculated and compared to the graduation requirement.

In a few cases, Westat discovered that a student had not actually graduated and changed the

exit status accordingly. It was also found that some students had earned substantially more credits than

were required to graduate. Often these were students who had spent substantial amounts of time in both

foreign and American high schools. While they were awarded credit for the foreign courses, they were

still required to take an essentially American curriculum in order to obtain the American diploma.

In still other cases it was found that, although a student had fewer credits than were required

to graduate, the transcript had all the other attributes of a graduated senior such as four full years of

courses, all required courses, a graduation date, grade point average, and class standing. In these cases, if

a careful review of the transcript and the data files showed no data entry or coding errors, the transcript

was kept in the database with the apparent inconsistency as recorded on the transcript.

In a number of cases, the transcript listed transfer courses that needed to be given special

treatment. In some cases it was clear that the appropriate Carnegie Units conversion factor for the credits

reported on the transcript was different from that of the school issuing the transcript. When this occurred,

the conversion factor was adjusted appropriately for these courses on a student-by-student basis. In other

cases, entries were found on transcripts indicating that a student had been awarded some number of
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

5-19 User's Guide and Technical Report

credits for transferred courses, but there was no list of the specific courses. When this happened, a dummy

course titled “Undifferentiated Transfer Courses” was created and treated as uncodable.

If a list of transfer courses appeared on a transcript with an associated number of credits

indicated, a catalog coder apportioned the credits among the courses using whatever information was

available. For example, some transcripts had sections that indicated by a series of check marks which of a

set of requirements had been met. If the courses explicitly detailed on the transcript did not account for all

of the check marks, then the transferred credits must account for the remainder.

Inclusion of the Undifferentiated Transfer Courses on the file had the effect of accounting

for all the credits that appeared on the transcripts. It also provided the ability to screen essentially

incomplete transcripts out of the analyses. The intent of the transcript study is to summarize the

coursetaking patterns of graduates of American high schools over the three or four years that they attend a

typical high school. For analytic purposes, therefore, transcripts that did not list separate credits for the

equivalent of at least three full years of high school courses were treated as incomplete. This was done by

creating a flag (GRREQFLG) that was placed on the student file, which indicated whether the

differentiated course credits on a transcript equaled at least 75 percent of the minimum credits required to

graduate. If they did not, the transcript remained in the file, but the student was given a weight of zero and

was treated as missing for purposes of projecting national totals (see Chapter 6 of this report for a

description of the nonresponse adjustment procedures). In other words, the transcripts for such students

were fully coded and provided on the file, but with the recommendation that they not be used to estimate

national coursetaking patterns.

Each stage of the process described above included measures to assure both the quality and

consistency of the data. Quality control procedures ranged from those for specific data items to those for a

broad overview of the data. These are described in more detail in the following sections.

5.6.1 Quality Control for Transcript Data Entry

Measures to maintain the quality of data entry on transcripts included (1) 100 percent

verification of data entry, (2) review of all transcripts where the number of credits reported for a given

year (or the total number of credits) was not indicative of the school’s normal course load or graduation

requirements, and (3) reconciliation of IDs of transcripts entered with the list of valid IDs for the HSTS.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

User's Guide and Technical Report 5-20

Verification included all data entry fields except course titles, test names, and award titles. Verification

was performed by a CADE verifier who had not entered that data initially. The number of credits entered

for a transcript was automatically compared to a file containing the number of credits required for

graduation, and gave the verifier a warning message if the number of credits entered was too large or

small to be feasible. By reconciling the IDs on the transcripts that were entered with the IDs of students

on the HSTS-eligible list, it was ascertained that every eligible transcript was entered and that no

ineligible transcripts were entered.

5.6.2 Quality Control for Catalog Data Entry

The full listing of each catalog’s course titles was reviewed by a curriculum specialist who

visually compared the listing with the catalog itself. When errors were encountered, corrections were

keyed and the corrections were reviewed again. For those schools without catalogs, the listing that was

generated automatically was reviewed and edited when courses were coded.

5.6.3 Quality Control for Catalog Coding

The procedures for assuring the quality of assigning CSSC codes to courses offered in HSTS

schools included (1) careful training and supervision of coders, (2) formal reporting and resolution of

coding difficulties, (3) reliability checking throughout the process through independent coding of a

sample of courses, or by complete review of codes for non-transfer courses by the curriculum specialist,

(4) extensive quality reviews, and (5) automated quality assurance reports. Each of these procedures is

described separately below. Figure 5-3 is a schematic diagram of our quality control procedures for

catalog coding.

5.6.3.1 Difficulty Reporting

Problems in coding catalogs were reported directly to the curriculum specialist for review

and final resolution. In conference, the difficulties were resolved at that time, and notes were made to

document the decisions reached. Occasional telephone conferences with school personnel were also

conducted to answer important questions.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

5-21 User's Guide and Technical Report

Personnel Training 

and Supervision

Review/Resolution

of Coding Problems

Reliability Coding

(10% of Courses)

Edit Coding and

Catalogs as Needed

Quality Reviews

Final Association Table,

Course Offering File,

Transcript File

Automated Quality

Assurance

Edit Catalogs,

Coding, and Transcripts, 

as Needed

Edit Catalogs,

Coding, and Transcripts,

as Needed

Figure 5-3. Quality control processes for catalog coding
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

User's Guide and Technical Report 5-22

5.6.3.2 Coding Reliability

An important measure of the quality of catalog coding is reliability, or agreement between

coders on an appropriate CSSC code for a course. To measure coding reliability, one of the experienced

coders coded a random sample of 10 percent of the nontransfer courses in each school catalog.

For schools with fewer than 100 nontransfer titles in their catalogs, 10 courses were coded

by the experienced coder. For schools with more than 250 titles, 25 courses were coded. This sample

coding was then compared with the codes assigned to the same course by the catalog coder. An agreement

is either an exact match of codes or a match to a code that the curriculum specialist determines is equally

appropriate for the course. If 90 percent or more of the coding agreed, no further action was taken. If

agreement was less than 90 percent, the catalog coding was completely reviewed and any necessary

changes were made. The disagreements were also discussed with the catalog coder who had done the

original coding, and all coding procedures and principles were reviewed, as necessary. In addition, for 90

percent of the schools, the curriculum specialist reviewed all coding of nontransfer courses and made

changes as needed. Multiple levels of review ensured both accuracy and consistency in coding. Since

nearly all catalogs were completely reviewed by the coding supervisor and corrected, coding with

extremely high accuracy was ensured.

5.6.3.3 Quality Review

Additional procedures to measure and maintain quality included a two-step review process.

The first step consisted of generating a report for each school listing the courses that were uncoded, coded

as “uncodable,” or coded “other.” Another report listed transcript titles that were unmatched or matched

to an “uncodable” course. The curriculum specialist reviewed all these and recoded and rematched to the

fullest extent possible all courses for which she could provide more explicit coding. The second step or

“final review” was the last step in verifying the accuracy and completeness of all coding. The curriculum

specialist performed this review by examining each CACE file a final time, paying close attention to title

matching, as well as to catalog coding. When this review identified problems, the file was returned to a

catalog coder to fix the problems and the quality review procedures were repeated.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

5-23 User's Guide and Technical Report

5.6.3.4 Automated Checks

An additional quality check took place when the CACE files for a school were converted to

delivery format. Reports listing frequencies of occurrences that might indicate errors were sent to the

curriculum specialist for careful review. Each file was assigned a status of (1) complete, (2) errors in

transcript entry, (3) errors in catalog coding and associations, or (4) computer errors (such as duplicate

course sequence numbers). A file with status of 2, 3, or 4 was returned to CADE and CACE for

correction, a new report was generated, and the report was again reviewed. This process was repeated

until the file had a status of 1, indicating that it was complete and correct.

Some of the automated checks performed on the files produced by the transcript data entry

and coding process included the following:

 All files were checked for duplicate IDs.

 It was verified that all NAEP IDs in the control list also appeared on the TRF list.

 It was verified that all IDs on the TRF list for a school were in the student data file.

 A crosstabulation of graduation year by exit status was created and reviewed for

outliers.

 A crosstabulation of highest year (e.g., 11th grade, 12th grade) appearing in the

transcript by exit status was created and reviewed for outliers.

 A crosstabulation of total Carnegie Units earned by exit status was created and

checked for outliers.

 All students with 12th grade transfer courses (other than summer school) were listed

and their transcripts checked for accuracy of data entry.

 Valid combinations of course flags were checked. For instance, no course could be

both honors and remedial or special education.

5.7 Scanning and Preparing the SD/LEP Questionnaires

The SD/LEP forms collected during NAEP were scanned by National Computer Systems

(NCS) and the files provided to ETS. ETS provided Westat with data for all 12th grade students for whom

the SD/LEP Questionnaires had been completed during NAEP. Of all completed questionnaires, only the
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

User's Guide and Technical Report 5-24

ones with corresponding records in the HSTS Student File were selected for the final HSTS SD/LEP file.

A total of 1,237 students are represented in the final SD/LEP file.

The responses to the questionnaire were entered on optical scan forms by school personnel

(see Section 4.5) and scanned by NCS. The data in the scanned data file were direct representations of the

questionnaire responses. There were, however, four items on the scanned data file that needed some

recoding. The same recoding algorithm was used for the following three items:

Item 8. What percentage of time is this student mainstreamed (i.e., with his/her

nondisabled peers) in academic subjects (e.g., mathematics, reading/language

arts, science)?

Item 9. What percentage of time in the total school day is this student served by a special

education program (both in a class with his/her nondisabled peers and outside

such a class)?

Item 29. During this school year, what percentage of this student’s academic instruction is

provided in his/her native language?

The choices on the questionnaire were 0 percent, 1-24 percent, 25-49 percent, and so on

through 75-99 percent and 100 percent. For each item, the scanned data file contained one variable (coded

“Yes” or “Missing”) for each possible percentage choice. Because of this, it was possible to have more

than one percentage entered in response to Questions 8, 9, and 29. The following actions were taken in

order to create a file with a single field containing the actual percentage indicated on the questionnaire.

 If the respondent checked a single response for the item, the value of that response

was used;

 If the respondent checked two adjacent responses, they were averaged;

 If the respondent checked more than two responses or two nonadjacent responses, the

response code for “multiple response” was used; and

 If no response was checked, the code for “missing” was used.

One other item from the scanned data file was also recoded:

Item 3. Which of the following best describes this student’s disability?
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

5-25 User's Guide and Technical Report

Once again, the scanned file is structured in such a way that each possible selection is a

separate variable. This allowed multiple selections to occur. The solution was to recode the responses so

that, if two or more responses were chosen, the code for “multidisabled” was used.

Several variables were added to the final SD/LEP file. The student disability status was

determined by the first question on the questionnaire and by the pattern of answers to the content

questions. The disability flag (HCFLAG) was set to “1” if no disabling condition was indicated in our

records; otherwise it was set to “2.” Specifically, the disability flag was set to “2” if the following

conditions were met:

 The TRF had the SD field flagged as 1 (“Yes”);

 The student’s exit status as entered in the CADE system was 3 or 4 (special education

diploma or certificate of attendance);

 Question 1 “Does this student have a disability (physical and/or mental)?” in the

SD/LEP questionnaire had a response of B (Yes”).

The student’s Exit Status, race/ethnicity, grade level, gender, birth month and year, Title I

and NSLP flags were obtained from the Student File. If that information did not exist on the Student File,

the corresponding data from the SD/LEP questionnaire were incorporated if available. Frequencies and

crosstabulations were run to check the data for valid entries and outliers before, during, and after

processing.

5.8 Scanning and Preparing the School Questionnaires

The School Questionnaire was used in the 1998 NAEP and was available for 242 of the

264 HSTS schools (the remainder had not participated in NAEP). The data were entered on optical scan

forms by school personnel and scanned by NCS.

When coding the School Questionnaires, the coding system used with the previous School

Files was used whenever possible. As with the SD/LEP Questionnaire, processing consisted of

reformatting the scanned responses to provide one variable per question. When necessary, the value was

set to either “multiple response” or “no response” as appropriate. A copy of the 1998 School

Questionnaire is included as Appendix A.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

User's Guide and Technical Report 5-26

5.9 Personnel Selection, Training, and Supervision

Trained, experienced educators were used for the coding task to ensure that coding was

performed in a meaningful rather than rote manner. These coders had sufficient experience to understand,

for example, the subtle differences in levels of English courses (regardless of specific terms used to

describe them) so that they would be coded appropriately as at, above, or below grade level, and to

recognize what the term “grade level” really means. After selecting individuals with appropriate

experience and background, a thorough training was conducted in the concepts and procedures to be used

in performing the coding task. The training included multiple measures of trainees’ understanding and

accurate use of the information presented. Two of the coders had served in a similar capacity for the 1994

HSTS.

A curriculum specialist, holding a doctorate in Curriculum and Instruction, and experience

from participation in the 1990 and 1994 HSTS, supervised the entire coding operation. She was

constantly available to coders to answer questions, verify information, discuss issues, and provide general

guidance as questions and problems were encountered. All issues that were of a general nature (i.e.,

pertaining to coding many or all catalogs) were brought to the attention of the entire group of coders.

Answers to difficult coding decisions were posted on a wall visible to all coders. The curriculum

specialist periodically reviewed each coder’s work to ensure a continued high level of performance.

5.9.1 Training Data Entry Staff

Actual transcripts were used to illustrate different formats and different types of information

as demonstration materials. Trainees also used these transcripts as practice exercises to gain familiarity

and skill in using the CADE system. In addition, two experienced HSTS data coders prepared a summary

sheet for each school which directed the data entry clerk’s attention to any special features or difficulties

associated with a set of transcripts.

5.9.2 Training Catalog Coders

Catalog coders who were selected had either current or prior experience teaching in

American schools and/or had a college degree in education. An expert in special education was selected
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

5-27 User's Guide and Technical Report

to code the special education courses for all schools. Two of the catalog coders had coded catalogs during

the 1990 and 1994 HSTS and were highly experienced. They assisted in part of the training and

performed some specialized functions throughout the process of coding catalogs and entering transcript

data.

Coder training was conducted over a 4-day period by the curriculum specialist, who was also

the coding supervisor. Coders were trained both in the analytic aspects of selecting the best CSSC code

for each course and in operating the CACE system. Training materials included practice exercises based

on actual catalogs and transcripts from HSTS schools. The first day of training consisted of classroomtype presentations and a demonstration of the CACE system. The second day started with directed handson practice using CACE with training materials and gradually moved toward more independent use of the

system. On the third day, coders began working in pairs, using CACE to code their first actual catalog.

Each coder’s understanding of the coding task and CACE operation was evaluated each half-day on

practice tests and exercises. The final day was devoted to the beginning of actual coding, but all work was

carefully reviewed before it was considered complete.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

6-1 User's Guide and Technical Report

6. WEIGHTING AND ESTIMATION OF SAMPLING VARIANCE

The 1998 High School Transcript Study used a complex sample design with the goal of

securing a sample from which estimates of population and subpopulation characteristics could be

obtained with reasonably high precision (in other words, low sampling variability). At the same time, it

was necessary that the sample be economically and operationally feasible to obtain. The resulting design

requires that the user of the HSTS data utilize sampling weights to ensure valid analysis of the transcript

data.

Sampling weights are factors assigned to each transcript that are used in any aggregations of

transcript characteristics. Heuristically, these weights can be seen as being the number of students in the

population that the sampled transcript “represents.” A transcript with a sampling weight of 100 represents

1 sampled student and 99 other nonsampled (or sampled but nonresponding) students in the population. A

transcript with a sampling weight of 1 represents only the sampled student.

The sampling weights are designed primarily to represent differential sampling and response

rates. For example, if a student comes from a subcategory with a sampling rate of 1/10 and a response rate

of 1/2, then the student’s transcript might receive a sampling weight of 20. That transcript can be seen as

representing the student and 19 other nonsampled and nonresponding students.

From the viewpoint of assigning sampling weights, the most important aspect of the 1998

HSTS sample design was the utilization of differential sampling rates. For example, schools with high

percentages of minority students were sampled at a doubled sampling rate, and very small schools were

sampled at a lower rate to reduce the costs incurred in fielding the schools (see Chapter 2 for further

details regarding the sample design). Section 6.1 discusses the procedure for assigning sampling weights.

One consequence of the HSTS sample design is its effect on the estimation of sampling

variability. Because of the clustering effects of the multistage design (students within schools, schools

within primary sampling units) and because of the effects of certain adjustments to the sampling weights

(poststratification and weighting adjustments), observations made on different students cannot be

assumed to be independent of one another. As a result, ordinary formulas used to estimate the variance of

sample statistics, based on the assumption of independence, will tend to underestimate the true sample

variability. Three techniques that are widely utilized for variance estimation under those circumstances
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

User's Guide and Technical Report 6-2

are linearization, balanced repeated replication (BRR), and the jackknife. The jackknife procedure

provides reliable variance estimators while being easy for the user to utilize. Any aggregations are

computed utilizing the original sampling weights and each set of jackknife replicate weights. A simple

formula combines these estimates into a suitable variance estimator.

Two types of weights, HSTS sample weights and linked weights, are needed for these data.

HSTS sample weights are designed for any aggregations, including all of the transcripts in the study,

whether or not they correspond to assessed NAEP students. The weight of each transcript represents

students not included in the HSTS Study. Linked weights are designed for any aggregations that only

include transcripts from students who were in a particular NAEP assessment (or who were excluded from

NAEP). In this case, the linked weight assigned to the transcript is designed to represent not only students

not included in the HSTS study, but also students included in the HSTS study who were not given the

same assessment.

6.1 The HSTS Sample Weights: An Introduction

In order to make valid inferences about the entire population of graduated grade 12 students

from the sample of student transcripts collected, it is necessary to use the sampling weights. The weights

reflect the probability sampling scheme used to arrive at the sample of students for whom transcripts were

requested. The HSTS weights were constructed without regard to the NAEP participation or

nonparticipation status of schools and students. The weights also reflect the impact of sample

nonresponse at the school and the student level, and make adjustments for these groups to decrease the

potential bias that might arise through differential nonresponse across population subgroups. Finally,

improvements to the precision of weighted estimates result from the application of poststratification

factors to the sample weights.

Since the derivation of sampling weights and the estimation of sampling variability are

strongly related to the sample design, the reader will need to review the main features of the sampling

design discussed in Chapters 2 and 3 of this report.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

6-3 User's Guide and Technical Report

The final HSTS and linked student weights were constructed in the following steps:

1. The student base weights (or design unbiased weight) were constructed as the

reciprocal of the overall probability of selection. This procedure is discussed in

Sections 6.3.1 and 6.3.3.

2. School nonresponse factors were computed, adjusting for schools that did not

participate in the HSTS study. For the linked weights, adjustment factors were

assigned for each session type (writing/civics, reading, and civics trend). The school

nonresponse factors for the linked weights were also slightly different than the

corresponding HSTS student weight school nonresponse factors, to account for

schools that refused to participate in NAEP. This procedure is discussed in Section

6.4.

3. Student nonresponse factors were computed, adjusting the weights of “responding”

students to account for “nonresponding” students. Definitions of responding and

nonresponding students differed for the HSTS weights and the linked weights. The

definitions and procedures are described in Section 6.5.

4. Student trimming factors were generated to reduce the mean squared error of the

resulting estimates. Another purpose of trimming is to protect against a small number

of large weights from dominating the resulting estimates of small domains of interest.

This step is discussed in Section 6.5.

5. The last step was poststratification, the process of adjusting weights proportionally so

that they aggregate within certain subpopulations to independent estimates of these

subpopulation totals. These independent estimates were obtained from the Current

Population Survey (CPS) estimates for various student subgroups. As the CPS

estimate has smaller sampling error associated with it, this adjustment should improve

the quality of the weights. This step is also discussed in Section 6.5.

6.2 The HSTS-NAEP Linked Weights: An Introduction

A primary purpose of the HSTS study is to provide a database for analyzing the relationship

between students’ proficiencies, as measured by their NAEP assessment outcomes, and students’ coursetaking in their high school careers. In order for a student to be part of this “linked” database, a completed

NAEP assessment was required for the student, as well as a completed (and usable) transcript from the

HSTS study. In addition, the scope was limited to students who graduated as determined by the HSTS.

There were many students for whom a completed transcript was received but no NAEP assessment exists

(because either the school or the student refused to participate in NAEP or the student was absent on

assessment day). These students can be part of the HSTS database but not the linked database that

requires both transcripts and assessment results for the same student.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

User's Guide and Technical Report 6-4

The linked database requires a different set of sampling weights than the HSTS database

alone, as the set of students that qualify for these databases is a subset of the larger HSTS set. In

particular, the school and student nonresponse adjustments will be larger for the linked weights than for

the HSTS weights. This is so because a student or school had to participate in both the NAEP and the

HSTS surveys to qualify as a “respondent” for the linked database. This reduced the number of school

and student responses, thereby increasing the nonresponse adjustment factors.

The sampling weights are computed so that the sample can “represent” in a statistical sense

the full population of students from which the sample is drawn. In particular, the sampling weights will

aggregate to the total number of students in the population. Linked weights were computed separately for

writing, 25-minute reading, 50-minute reading, civics, and civics trend assessment students. Each

assessment sample represents the full population, so each of the five sets of assessment-linked weights

aggregate separately to the population totals.

Excluded students were pooled with assessed and absent students in the weighting process.

For student nonresponse adjustment, weights corresponding to excluded students with completed and

usable transcripts were adjusted to account for excluded students with unusable or missing transcripts.

The general weighting process for the linked weights was similar to HSTS and was discussed in

Section 6.1.

6.3 Computation of the Base Weights

Sample estimates were computed from the students’ transcripts by aggregating observations

from each transcript using the sample weights. If there were 100 percent response to the HSTS survey,

and if no trimming and poststratification were carried out, then the sample weights would be equal to the

base weights, which are the reciprocals of the probabilities of selection of that student. The sample

aggregates generated using these base weights would be unbiased estimators of the corresponding

quantities in the U.S. population (cite, for example, Cochran (1977), Section 9A.7). As indicated

previously, NAEP uses differential sampling rates, deliberately oversampling certain subpopulations to

obtain larger samples of respondents from those subgroups, thereby enhancing the precision of estimates

of characteristics of these oversampled subgroups.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

6-5 User's Guide and Technical Report

As a result of oversampling schools, these subpopulations, corresponding to students from

public schools with high concentrations of black and/or Hispanic students, and students from nonpublic

schools, are overrepresented. As a result of oversampling students, subpopulations of black and/or

Hispanic students from public schools with low concentrations of these groups and SD/LEP students in

schools assigned reading sessions, are also overrepresented in the sample. Appropriate estimation of

population characteristics must take disproportionate representation into account. This is accomplished by

assigning a weight to each respondent, where the weights approximately account for the sample design

and reflect the appropriate proportional representation of the various types of individuals in the

population.

6.3.1 Computation of Base Weights: HSTS Weights

The student base weight for the 1998 HSTS sample was computed for each student sampled

into one of the following:

1. A NAEP assessment (including selected students who were later excluded as being

nonassessable) in an HSTS sample school, where student IDs could be matched

between NAEP and HSTS files.

2. A new sample due to being in a HSTS school that did not cooperate in NAEP.

3. A new sample due to being in an HSTS- and NAEP-cooperating school, where the

student ID could not be linked between the two studies.

The HSTS student base weight assigned to a student is the reciprocal of the overall

probability that the student was selected. Thus, the base weight for a student may be expressed as the

product

WB = PSUWGT_M × QSCHWT12 × SCH_WT12 × TRPSUWT × TRSCHWT × CSBW

where,

PSUWGT_M = The inverse of the probability that the PSU was selected for NAEP. Of the 94 PSUs

selected, 22 were certainty PSUs and have a PSU weight of 1.0. For the remaining 72

PSUs, the probability of selection was calculated to account for the initial selection of

one PSU per stratum;

= 1, if the private school is from the PSS list frame;
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

User's Guide and Technical Report 6-6

QSCHWT12 = The inverse of the probability that a Catholic, Religious affiliated, or other nonpublic

school was selected for the PSS from the PSS area frame (refer to Section 2.3);

SCH_WT12 = The inverse of the conditional probability, given the NAEP PSU, that the school was

selected for NAEP;

TRPSUWT = The inverse of the conditional probability that the PSU was selected for HSTS, given

that the PSU was selected for NAEP;

TRSCHWT = The inverse of the conditional probability that the school was selected for HSTS,

given that the PSU was selected for HSTS and the school was selected for NAEP (and

given the school was selected for the PSS (for private schools)); and

CSBW = The inverse of the conditional probability, given the HSTS PSU and school, that the

student was selected.

Variations in 1998 HSTS in probabilities of selection, and consequently of weights, were

introduced by design, either to increase the effectiveness of the sample in achieving its goals of reporting

for various subpopulations, or to achieve increased efficiency per unit of cost.

The “frame” for the HSTS sample was the set of all eligible 1998 NAEP sample schools that

were sampled for the NAEP grade 12 study. Table 6-1 presents the following information for public and

nonpublic schools:

1. The number of schools in the 1998 Main NAEP grade 12 sample.

2. The number of eligible schools in the 1998 Main NAEP grade 12 sample.

3. The number of eligible NAEP schools that were sampled into the HSTS sample.

4. The percent of eligible NAEP schools in the HSTS sample.

Table 6-1. Counts of NAEP and HSTS sampled schools

School Type

Sampled NAEP

schools

Eligible NAEP

schools

Sampled HSTS

schools

Percent of eligible

NAEP schools

sampled

Public 535 527 269 51.0

Nonpublic 317 218 53 24.3

Total 852 745 322 43.2
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

6-7 User's Guide and Technical Report

6.3.2 Conditional Student Base Weights for the HSTS

As noted before, the quantity CSBW is the inverse of the conditional probability of selection

of the student into the HSTS. In schools that did not participate in the NAEP assessment, but did

participate in HSTS, a sample of students was drawn for the HSTS survey alone. There were 22 of these

schools, representing seven percent of the HSTS sample. There were also 10 schools that were

cooperative with the NAEP assessment, but did not retain the administrative information necessary to use

their assessed students in the HSTS study. Of the 10 schools that participated in NAEP but the student

links to NAEP were lost, eight were originally sampled and two were substitutes. For the 32 schools

where new samples of students were selected, if the school had fewer than 60 12th graders, then the

sampling rate was set to 1. Otherwise, an equal probability sample of 50 12th graders was chosen and the

conditional probability of selection was 50 divided by the total count of 12th graders in the school.

Table 6-2 presents the total number of students in the HSTS study from each class of school.

Table 6-2. Total students in HSTS study in HSTS cooperating schools

Response Category

Number of schools in

category

Number of sampled

students in HSTS study

HSTS and NAEP cooperating schools, with linkage 232 27,183

HSTS cooperating, but not NAEP 22 1,081

HSTS cooperating, no NAEP link 10 500

Total 264 28,764

Note: The number of schools includes original and substitute schools.

The schools in the first group are called “linked” schools: students in these schools received

positive sample HSTS and linked base weights. Students in the remaining schools received positive HSTS

base weights, but linked base weights of 0.

6.3.3 Computation of Base Weights: NAEP-HSTS Linked Weights

The student base weights appropriate for the NAEP-HSTS link are similar to those computed

for the HSTS weights. However, the probability that a school was assigned the particular NAEP session

(as discussed in Section 2.4), the probability that a school was assigned the particular NAEP sample type
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

User's Guide and Technical Report 6-8

(applies to reading, Section 2.4), and the probability that a student was assigned to the particular NAEP

assessment (i.e., subject) must also be included as subsampling was done to select final school and

student samples for each assessment.

Within schools, each student was assigned one of five assessments (to minimize the

workload required for each student). This assignment was random. After this assignment, the student was

evaluated as to eligibility and excluded from assessment if found to be ineligible (because of language

problems or disabilities).

The linked base weight assigned to a student is the reciprocal of the overall probability that

the student was selected for a particular assessment. Thus, the base weight for a student may be expressed

as the product

LWB = PSUWGT_M × QSCHWT12 × SCH_WT12 × TRPSUWT × TRSCHWT × SA_WT ×

SAADJ × STYWT × YRRND_FC × STUSA_WT

where,

PSUWGT_M, QSCHWT12, SCH_WT12, TRPSUWT, and TRSCHWT were explained in Section 6.3.1;

SA_WT = The inverse of the conditional probability, given the sample of NAEP schools in a

NAEP PSU, that the school was allocated the specified session type. This is a function

of the session type and the number of sessions allocated to the school. Session

allocation weights were calculated separately for each session type. The values for the

session allocation weights are summarized in Table 6-3;

SAADJ = The session allocation weights were adjusted for smaller-than-expected schools to

account for one or more session types that were dropped. The adjustment factor,

SAADJ, was computed as the number of sessions assigned divided by the number of

sessions assigned for the session type that was kept;

STYWT = The inverse of the conditional probability, given the sample of NAEP schools in a

PSU, that the specified sample type was assigned to the school. The sample type

weight is the reciprocal of the probability that the sample type was assigned to the

school. For reading, the weight is 2, and for other sessions the weight was set to 1;

YRRND_FC = The year-round school factor, which accounts for students not in session for schools

on a year-round system; and

STUSA_WT = The inverse of the conditional probability, given the HSTS school and HSTS PSU,

that the student was selected for the specified subject type.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

6-9 User's Guide and Technical Report

Table 6-3. Session allocation weights

Writing/Civics Reading Civics Trend

SA_WT

Number of

sessions

assigned SA_WT

Number of

sessions

assigned SA_WT

Number of

sessions

assigned

49/34 1 49/13 1 49/2 1

1 2 49/26 2 49/4 2

1 3 49/39 3 49/6 3

1 4 49/45 4 49/8 4

1 5 49/47 5 49/10 5

For assessed, absent, and excluded students, the conditional student weight, STUSA_WT, is

the reciprocal of the probability that the student was selected for the particular subject to which he/she

was assigned. This probability is the product of the within-school sampling rate, which includes the

sampling factors that account for the oversampling of black and Hispanic students in public schools with

lower numbers of minority students and the oversampling of SD/LEP students in nonpublic schools; the

proportion of the relevant eligible students assigned to the particular session type within the school as

prescribed by the SAF; and the proportion of students in a writing/civics session given a subject-specific

assessment booklet (see Table 6-4 for the subject factors).

Special attention was given the writing sample allocation factors for accommodated SD/LEP

students and nonaccommodated students. The SD/LEP students in 50-minute writing that were

accommodated were given 25-minute writing booklets. Therefore, the accommodated students had a

higher chance than the nonaccommodated students of being assigned the 25-minute writing booklet. A

special poststratification procedure was done for 50-minute writing, as described in Section 6.5.9.

Table 6-4. Writing sample allocation factors

Subject Factor

25-minute writing

Nonaccommodated 17/10

Accommodated 17/13

50-minute writing 17/3

Civics 17/4
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

User's Guide and Technical Report 6-10

Excluded students were weighted together with assessed and absent students within the

subject to which they were assigned. Table 6-5 gives the final counts of students assigned each type of

assessment. These counts are then separated out into two subcounts: (1) students who were excluded from

being assessed based on disability or limited English proficiency and (2) students who were certified as

eligible for assessment.

Table 6-5. Assessed and excluded students with usable transcripts and graduated in linked schools

NAEP Assessment Assessed students Excluded students Total students

25-minute writing 7,558 193 7,751

50-minute writing 2,232 64 2,296

Reading 4,826 96 4,922

Civics 3,032 63 3,095

Civics trend 758 27 785

All assessments 18,406 443 18,849

6.4 Weighting Adjustments for School Nonresponse

Nonresponse is present to some degree in every large-scale survey and generally has a

negative effect on the quality of estimators, if not adjusted for in the weights. First of all, nonresponse

reduces the effective sample size from n to nr

, where nr < n. This reduction of sample size increases the

sampling variance of any estimators. In addition, if there are significant differences between the

respondents and nonrespondents, then there will also be a bias of unknown size and direction. For

example, suppose that the overall response rate was 60 percent, but the response rate of black students

was only 20 percent, whereas the response rate of white students was 80 percent. Without any adjustment,

whites would be overrepresented in the data set by a factor of four. If there are systematic differences

between whites and blacks with regard to any of their HSTS characteristics, then this overrepresentation

would result in serious bias. In this example, a nonresponse adjustment would correct this bias by

multiplying the sampling weights for black students by a factor of five and the sample weights for white

students by a factor of 5/4.

Suppose Y is the population characteristic of interest, and is the summation of the

characteristic value for each student over all graduates in the U.S. population. One such characteristic, for
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

6-11 User's Guide and Technical Report

example, would be whether the student has taken Advanced Placement Calculus. If yijk is the

characteristic value (equal to 1 if the student has the characteristic, 0 otherwise) for the kth student in the

j

th school in the i

th PSU, with P the set of all schools in the U.S. population (in all PSUs), and Pij the

set of all graduates in the j

th school in the i

th PSU, then we can write Y as:

Y yijk

ij P k Pij

= ∈ ∈

∑∑ (Equation 6.4.1)

Suppose S is the HSTS sample of schools, with Sij the set of all sampled students in HSTS

school j in PSU i. Then under full response we can write the unbiased estimator of Y as:

ijk

ij S Sij k

F Bijk Y = ∑ ∑ W y ∈ ∈

ˆ (Equation 6.4.2)

where WBijk is the student base weight for sampled student k in HSTS school j in PSU i. (See Section 6.3

for the definition of WBijk .)

In the HSTS survey there was nonresponse at both the school and the student level. Let RS

be the set of cooperative HSTS schools, and RSij the set of sampled students for which we have

completed transcripts in school ij (the j

th school in the i

th PSU). Then our final estimator of Y can be

written as:

ijk

ij RS RSij k ijk Y = ∑ ∑ FINSTUWT y ∈ ∈

ˆ (Equation 6.4.3)

The weight FINSTUWTijk in Equation 6.4.3 is the final sampling weight: the base weight

WBijk multiplied to adjustments for school nonresponse and student nonresponse. FINSTUWTijk also

includes factors incorporating trimming and poststratification adjustments. Section 6.4.1 discusses the

adjustments made in the base weights to account for school nonresponse. It is divided into the following

sections:

 Approach to school nonresponse adjustments;

 Selection of school nonresponse cells;
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

User's Guide and Technical Report 6-12

 The results of the CHAID analysis;1

 HSTS school nonresponse adjustments; and

 School nonresponse adjustments for the NAEP-HSTS linked weights.

6.4.1 Approach to School Nonresponse Weighting Adjustments

The most widely accepted paradigm for nonresponse weighting adjustments is the quasirandomization approach (Oh and Scheuren (1983)). In this approach, nonresponse cells are defined based

on characteristics of the schools that are known to be related to response. For example, if it is known that

private schools generally respond at a lower rate than public schools, then public/private status should be

one characteristic used in generating nonresponse cells. Under this approach, all schools in the sample are

assigned to a nonresponse cell based on their characteristics.

Under the quasi-randomization paradigm, Westat models nonresponse as if it were

equivalent to another stage of sampling. Within each nonresponse cell it is assumed that the responding

schools are a simple random sample from the set of all HSTS schools in the cell. In other words, there are

no systematic differences in nonresponse rates within subcategories contained in each cell. If this

assumption is valid, then the use of the quasi-randomization weighting adjustment eliminates any

nonresponse bias.2

The critical assumption under this approach is that the response rate is homogeneous within

the nonresponse cells. For example, if the nonresponse cells are based only on public/private school

status, and there are considerable differences in response rates between high-minority and low-minority

schools, then this divergence of response rates within the public/private cells causes bias in the study

results. On the other hand, only nonresponse cells are wanted for which the response rate is in fact

heterogeneous across cells. Using more cells rather than less could increase variability and, if many of the

cells have the same underlying response rate, then no bias reduction could be achieved by having the

larger number of cells. For the HSTS, Westat chose nonresponse cells that were heterogeneous in

response rate between cells. Westat also chose a set of cells that was as small in number as possible while

satisfying these properties.

 

1 See Section 6.4.2 for a description of CHAID.

2 For further discussion regarding these assumptions and model see Little and Rubin (1987), Section 4.4.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

6-13 User's Guide and Technical Report

6.4.2 Selection of School Nonresponse Cells

All eligible responding schools within each selected nonresponse cell receive the same

school nonresponse weighting adjustment to their weights. This nonresponse adjustment is formally

defined in Section 6.4.4, Equation 6.4.4. It is important that response rates be as uniform as possible

within each nonresponse cell. For example, suppose that the nonresponse cells are based on Census

region alone, so that the Northeast census region would be one nonresponse cell. Then all schools within

the Northeast region would receive the same school nonresponse weighting adjustment, say 1.5. This

nonresponse adjustment would be the reciprocal of a response rate of 2/3.

However, suppose that high-minority schools within this cell have a response rate of 1/5,

with low minority schools having a much higher response rate of 9/10. Then low-minority schools would

be overrepresented in this sample by a factor of 9/2, and a nonresponse bias would be incurred for any

characteristic that is related to minority status. The response rate is not uniform within the response cell

but may be uniform within response cells defined by both census region and minority status. In this case,

the small number of high minority schools would receive a school nonresponse adjustment of 5, with the

large number of low-minority schools receiving a school nonresponse adjustment of 1.11. High- and lowminority schools would then be represented correctly in the final estimators.

This need for a uniform response rate within cells requires us to make nonresponse cells as

small as possible to capture every characteristic that may be related to both “response propensity” and

survey characteristics of interest. At the same time, it is important that the sample sizes within individual

response cells do not become too small, because this could seriously increase sampling variability. Thus,

we need to assign nonresponse cells that are homogeneous in response propensity within cells but also

have reasonably large sample sizes within each cell.

Four potential nonresponse variables were checked in the analysis.

1. Metropolitan/nonMetropolitan PSU status.

2. NAEP region (see Section 2.2 for a definition of NAEP region).

3. Public/Catholic/nonCatholic private status.

4. High minority status: whether or not the school has greater than 15 percent minority

students.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

User's Guide and Technical Report 6-14

Nonresponse cells were defined based on crossclassifications of these school and PSU

characteristics. The cells were defined as having responding sample sizes greater than 6 and an

adjustment factor less than or equal to 2, with as much difference in response rates between cells as is

possible. Cells with small differences in nonresponse rates were collapsed, whether or not they satisfied

the 6 sample size minimum or the maximum adjustment factor of 2.

CHAID is the name given to one version of the Automatic Interaction Detector (AID) that

has been developed for categorical variables. Kass (1980) presents the theory underlying the CHAID

technique. The CHAID methodology creates a cell structure based on splitting the data set progressively

in a tree structure. The iterative splitting along each newly created branch is done by choosing the “best”

variable which has not yet been used on that branch, using modified χ2 tests. The χ2 tests are modified

using Bonferroni-type adjustments to prevent variables from being “favored” simply because they have

more categories.

6.4.3 The School Nonresponse Cells: Results of the CHAID Analysis

The CHAID analysis was carried out using unweighted response rates, where cooperating

substitute schools were included in the analysis. Of the 301 eligible original schools in the HSTS sample,

241 cooperated, which resulted in an unweighted response rate of 80 percent. Of the 60 nonrespondent

original schools, 23 were replaced with substitutes that participated. Including the substitutes, there were

264 schools that participated in the HSTS, which resulted in a response rate of 87.7. The analysis was

carried out using the four characteristics indicated in Section 6.4.2, with response status as the binary

dependent variable. Polychotomous variables such as NAEP region were not combined into coarser

categories, as is an option with CHAID. The best primary variables in terms of heterogeneity of response

was found to be high minority status and school type status. The assignment of high-minority status was

applicable to public schools only, since all nonpublic schools were assigned the same minority status

(low). The counts of schools and response rates are given in Table 6-6.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

6-15 User's Guide and Technical Report

Table 6-6. Response rates for public and nonpublic schools, unweighted

School Type

Total HSTS original

sample schools

(eligible only)

Unweighted response

rate by type of school,

before substitution

Unweighted response

rate by type of school,

after substitution

Public- high minority 165 90.1 93.3

Public – low minority 102 69.6 84.3

Nonpublic 34 58.8 70.6

Total 301 80.0 87.7

The high-minority public schools were further broken out into two cells based on NAEP

region. The nonWest region schools were further broken out by Metropolitan PSU status.

The low-minority public schools were broken out into four branches based on NAEP region.

Two of these NAEP region groupings were divided into two cells. The Southeast and West region schools

were broken out separately by Metropolitan PSU status.

The nonpublic schools were broken out into two cells based on NAEP regions. One group

consisted of Northeast and Southeast schools, and the other group consisted of Central and West schools.

There were a total of 11 nonresponse cells defined. Table 6-7 presents these cells, the total

count of HSTS respondents in each cell, and the school nonresponse adjustment factors within the cells.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

User's Guide and Technical Report 6-16

Table 6-7. School nonresponse adjustment factors for the HSTS weights

School nonresponse cell

Number of HSTS

respondent schools

School nonresponse

adjustment factors

(SCNRF0)

Nonpublic

Northeast, South 13 1.76

Midwest, West 11 1.24

Public – High minority status

Northeast 28 1.14

South, non-metro area 20 1.00

South, metro area 34 1.04

Midwest 16 1.13

West, non-metro 13 1.20

West, metro 43 1.08

Public – Low minority status

Northeast, South, Midwest, non-metro area 25 1.51

Northeast, South, Midwest, metro area 33 1.22

West 28 1.05

6.4.4 HSTS School Nonresponse Adjustments

The HSTS school nonresponse adjustments were computed using the school nonresponse

cells selected from the CHAID analysis. The nonresponse adjustments were the reciprocals of weighted

response rates computed for each cell. The weights used in these weighted response rates were the

numbers of 12th graders in each school, divided by the probability of selection of the school.

The school base weight is computed as:

SCBWT0 = PSUWGT_M × QSCHWT12 × SCH_WT12 × TRPSUWT × TRSCHWT (Equation 6.4.4)

where the weighting factors are defined in Section 6.3.1. Cooperating substitute schools received the

values of SCBWT0 from the original sampled school that it replaced.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

6-17 User's Guide and Technical Report

The school nonresponse adjustment factor for the HSTS weights is designated SCNRF0. It is

computed for school nonresponse cell c as follows:

∑ ×

∑ ×

=

∈

∈

Cc ij

ij ij

Bc ij

ij ij

c SCBWT G

SCBWT G

SCNRF

0

0

0 (Equation 6.4.5)

where,

Gij = The estimated number of grade-eligible students in school j (the values of Gij were

based on QED or PSS data or updated grade enrollment values from field operations);

set Bc = Consists of all in-scope originally sampled schools in school nonresponse cell c; and

set Cc = Consists of all schools in school nonresponse cell c that ultimately participated

(including substitutes).

The school nonresponse adjustment factors SCNRF0, as computed using Equation 6.4.5, are

shown in Table 6-7.

6.4.5 School Nonresponse Adjustment for the NAEP-HSTS Linked Weights

The difference in the school nonresponse adjustment for linked weights with the

corresponding adjustment for the HSTS weights is due to the smaller set of responding schools in the

former case. Westat designated as responding schools only those that were assigned the particular

assessment session type in question, that cooperated with the NAEP assessment, and that sent us usable

transcripts for the HSTS study.

The school nonresponse cells selected in the CHAID analysis, as discussed in Section 6.4.2,

were initially used for the linked weight. However, for reading, the adjustment was done separately by

sample type. The differences in response rates and responding sample sizes should be negligible, so

nonresponse cells that are found to have the desired properties for the HSTS weights should also have the

same properties with linked weights. It was necessary to collapse the CHAID cells, since there were

smaller numbers of schools due to the allocation to session types.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

User's Guide and Technical Report 6-18

The session base weight is computed as:

SESSBWT0 = PSUWGT_M × QSCHWT12 × SCH_WT12 × TRPSUWT × TRSCHWT × SA_WT × SAADJ

× STYWT (Equation 6.4.6)

where the weighting factors are defined in Section 6.3.1. Cooperating substitutes received the value of

SESSBWT0 from the original sampled school that it replaced.

The session nonresponse adjustment factor for the linked weights is designated SESNRF0. It

is computed for session nonresponse cell c as follows for each session type (writing/civics, reading, and

civics trend):

∑

∑

×

×

=

c

c

C

ij ij

B

ij ij

c SESSBWT G

SESSBWT G

SESSNRF

0

0

0 (Equation 6.4.7)

where,

Gij = The estimated number of grade-eligible students in school ij (the values of Gij were

based on QED or PSS data or updated grade enrollment values from field operations);

set Bc = Consists of all in-scope originally sampled schools in session nonresponse cell c; and

set Cc = Consists of all schools in session nonresponse cell c that ultimately participated

(including substitutes).

The session nonresponse adjustment factors SESSNRF0, as computed using Equation 6.4.7,

are shown in Table 6-8. Also shown are the collapsing schemes for each session. Initial cells with the

same letter form one final cell. Only one session nonresponse adjustment is computed and shown for each

final cell.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

6-19 User's Guide and Technical Report

Table 6-8. Session nonresponse adjustment factors for the linked weights

Writing/Civics Reading (S2/S3) Civics Trend

Initial nonresponse cell

Final

Cell SESSNRF0

Final

Cell SESSNRF0

Final

Cell SESSNRF0

Nonpublic

Northeast, Southeast a 1.70 a/c 1.62/1.61 a 1.00

Central, West a 1.70 a/c 1.62/1.61 a 1.00

Public – high-minority status

Northeast a 1.70 b/ 1.31/1.54 1.53

Southeast, nonmetro area 1.00 1.17/1.00 c 1.56

Southeast, metro area 1.21 1.23/1.13 c 1.56

Central 1.37 b/ 1.31/1.22 c 1.56

West, nonmetro 1.21 /d 1.00/1.43 c 1.56

West, metro 1.40 /d 1.32/1.43 c 1.56

Public – low-minority status

Northeast, Southeast, Central, non-metro area 1.51 a/ 1.62/1.00 a 1.00

Northeast, Southeast, Central, metro area 1.36 a/c 1.62/1.61 b 1.38

West 1.20 1.17/1.17 b 1.38

6.5 Student Weight Adjustments

The final weight for each student is the base weight multiplied by a number of special

factors. These factors in their usual order of implementation are as follows:

1. An adjustment for nonresponse at the school level (or session level for the linked

weights);

2. An adjustment for unusable or missing student transcripts (or absent students or

assessed or excluded students with missing or unusable transcripts for the linked

weights);

3. An adjustment for “large” weights (trimming); and

4. An adjustment to known CPS student population totals (poststratification).

This is the “usual” order of implementation for weighting in surveys of this kind (such as

1998 NAEP). The adjustment for nonresponse at the school level was discussed in Section 6.4. We also

need to adjust the weights for nonresponse at the student level. These adjustments are discussed in
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

User's Guide and Technical Report 6-20

Sections 6.5.1 through 6.5.4. In general practice, adjustment for poststratification is the last step, since the

final weights should generally aggregate exactly to the poststratification control totals. Thus, any

nonresponse adjustments are computed first, followed by a trimming adjustment for large weights,

followed by the final poststratification step to generate weights that aggregate exactly to known control

totals.

The trimming adjustments are discussed in Sections 6.5.5 and 6.5.6. For the reading

assessment for the linked weights, reporting factors are computed in order to define the reporting

populations. The calculation of the reporting factors is explained in Section 6.5.7. The poststratification

adjustments are discussed in Sections 6.5.8 and 6.5.9.

6.5.1 Student Nonresponse Adjustment: HSTS Weights

For a small percent of graduated students it was not possible to obtain a transcript. In

addition, some transcripts were considered unusable, since the number of standardized credits shown on

the transcript was less than the number of credits required to graduate by the school. An adjustment is

necessary in the weights of graduated students with transcripts to account for missing and unusable

transcripts. To do this adjustment correctly, it is necessary to have the complete set of graduated students,

with or without transcripts. Students who did not graduate were not included in this adjustment, but they

were retained in the process for poststratification. There are a few students, however, for whom no

transcripts were received and the graduation status was unknown. Among these students, a certain percent

was imputed as graduating, based on overall percentages of graduating students. The remainder were

imputed as nongraduating.

The imputation process was a standard hot-deck imputation (see, for example, Little and

Rubin (1987), Section 4.5.3). For each student with unknown graduation status, a “donor” was randomly

selected (without replacement) from the set of all students with known graduation status from the same

region, school type, race/ethnicity, age class, school, and gender, in hierarchical order. The two

race/ethnicity categories were (1) white, Asian, or Pacific Islander and (2) black, Hispanic, American

Indian, or other. There were two age classes (born before 10/79; born during or after 10/79).

Each student with known graduation status in a cell could be used up to three times as a

donor for a student in the same cell with unknown graduation status. If insufficient donors were available
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

6-21 User's Guide and Technical Report

within the cell, then donors were randomly selected from students in another cell with similar

characteristics to the cell in question. A donor had at least to be from the same region, type of school, race

category, and age category.

Table 6-9 presents counts of the number of students with known and unknown graduation

status, of those with known status who graduated or did not graduate, and of those with unknown status

who were imputed as graduating or not graduating.

Table 6-9. Counts and percents of graduating seniors known and imputed

Known graduation status Imputed graduation status

Status

Number of

students

Percent of

students

Number of

students

Percent of

students

Not graduating 3,328 11.6 14 7.4

Graduating 25,248 88.4 174 92.6

All seniors 28,576 100.0 188 100.0

Note that the percent of students that was imputed as not graduating (7.4 percent) was lower than the

corresponding percent of students confirmed as not graduating. This occurred because the students with

unknown graduation status tended to fall into groups with lower percents of nongraduating students.3

6.5.2 CHAID Analysis to Choose Student Nonresponse Cells

As with school nonresponse, our approach to nonresponse adjustments for missing and

unusable transcripts was to choose nonresponse cells for students and assign nonresponse weighting

adjustments that are uniform within each cell. These cells should be homogeneous in terms of response

propensity within cells, while being heterogeneous in response propensity across cells. The sample size

should not be too small in any one cell, so a minimum responding sample size of 30 will be required for

each nonresponse cell.

 

3 The percent of nongraduates among students of unknown graduation status may be higher than was imputed. In general, graduation status is

missing from our records because schools could not provide it. Since providing transcripts of graduation is a major function of American high

schools, there is a strong presumption that if a high school does not know a senior's graduation status, that student did not graduate.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

User's Guide and Technical Report 6-22

The nonresponse cells were chosen after an analysis using CHAID (see Section 6.4.2 for a

discussion of CHAID). The predictive variables used included census region, public/Catholic/

nonCatholic private status of school, race/ethnicity, age class, and gender. Any graduates missing any of

these values were assigned imputed values using a hot-deck procedure.

The CHAID analysis chose 17 cells as nonresponse cells, of which two cells were collapsed

during the nonresponse adjustment process. These cells were homogeneous in response rate within cell,

and heterogeneous in response rate between cells. Table 6-10 presents these cells, with counts of students

with usable transcripts and their corresponding student nonresponse adjustment factors.

6.5.3 Computation of Student Nonresponse Adjustments: HSTS Weights

The student transcript nonresponse adjustment factor for the h-th adjustment class was

computed as follows:

∑ ×

∑ ×

=

∈

∈

( )

( )

0

0

ijk GR h Bijk c

ijk G h Bijk c

h W SCNRF

W SCNRF

MTADJ (Equation 6.5.1)

The set G(h) includes all graduated students in the h-th adjustment class, with the set GR(h)

containing the subset of these students with complete and usable transcripts. The first factor in each term

of each summation is the student base weight, discussed in Section 6.3.1. The second term is simplified to

comprise the school nonresponse adjustment corresponding to student k within school j within PSU i,

discussed in Section 6.4.4. Table 6-10 presents the final student nonresponse adjustment factors for the 16

nonresponse cells for the HSTS weights.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

6-23 User's Guide and Technical Report

Table 6-10. Student nonresponse adjustment cells and factors for HSTS weights

Cell

number Nonresponse cell

Number of

responding

students

Nonresponse

adjustment

factors

1 Northeast; South; public; older; white, Asian or Pacific

Islander

117 1.09

2 Northeast; South; public; older; black, Hispanic, American

Indian, or other; male

130 1.05

3 Northeast; South; public; older; black, Hispanic, American

Indian, or other; female

73 1.05

4 Northeast; South; public; younger 11,906 1.02

5 Northeast; South; nonpublic 576 1.00

6 Midwest; older 91 1.06

7 Midwest; younger; male 2,356 1.01

8 Midwest; younger; female 2,640 1.01

9 West; white, Asian or Pacific Islander; older 49 1.02

10 West; white, Asian or Pacific Islander; younger; public 4,303 1.01

11 West; white, Asian or Pacific Islander; younger; nonpublic 251 1.00

12 West; black, Hispanic, American Indian, or other; public; older 51 1.04

13 West; black, Hispanic, American Indian, or other; public;

younger

2,167 1.02

14 West; black, Hispanic, American Indian, or other; nonpublic 71 1.00

15 Missing gender; Northeast; Midwest 46 1.17

16 Missing gender; South; West 77 1.47

Note: “Older” is defined as born before 10/79.

6.5.4 Student Nonresponse Adjustments: Linked Weights

Within each school, a random “sample” was selected of the 12th grade students. The

sampled students were then randomly assigned to assessments. Any student determined ineligible at this

point was excluded from an assessment. Many of the students assigned to assessments did not actually

take an assessment exam, either because of a refusal to participate or because of an absence on the day of

the assessment. In addition, assessed students who had missing or unusable transcripts were considered

nonrespondents. Students who did not graduate were considered out of scope for the purpose of
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

User's Guide and Technical Report 6-24

nonresponse adjustment, however, they were retained for poststratification, since the control totals for

poststratification were based on all students, regardless of their graduation status. This section discusses

adjustments made in the linked weights for this student-level nonresponse.

As discussed in Section 6.4, nonresponse is a concern in any study because of the possibility

that the study results will be invalidated by nonresponse bias. Bias could be incurred from a lack of

participation from a subset of students, because this group will be “self-selected.” The 1998 HSTS Study

made adjustments to lower this bias using nonresponse adjustments within a selected group of

nonresponse cells. Similar nonresponse cells and the same methodology for determining nonresponse

adjustments was used as had been used for the 1998 NAEP assessments. However, the actual nonresponse

adjustments for the two studies differ because the set of schools selected for the HSTS study was only a

subset of the original set of schools participating in the NAEP assessment.

The nonresponse cells for HSTS were similar to those used for NAEP. The NAEP

nonresponse cells are based on the NAEP PSU sampling strata and the age and race/ethnicity of the

student. The PSU sampling strata are grouped into stratum groupings to the level of region and

metropolitan status for these cells. A dichotomous age status was used for generating nonresponse cells,

indicating whether the student was born on or before September 30, 1979 or the student was born later. A

dichotomous race/ethnicity status was used for generating nonresponse cells, with the first category white,

Asian, or Pacific Islander; and the second category black, Hispanic, American Indian or other.

Nonresponse adjustment cells were formed separately for the excluded students, so that

weights for excluded students with usable transcripts would account for excluded students without usable

transcripts. For the reading assessment, nonresponse adjustment cells were formed separately within

sample types.

Indicate as ST(h) the set of all students assigned to the particular assessment (reading, 25-

minute writing, 50-minute writing, civics, civics trend) in the h-th student nonresponse cell, and define

STR(h) as the corresponding set of students who actually completed the particular assessment in the h-th

student nonresponse cell. The number of student nonresponse cells formed for each assessment was

reading (59), 25-minute writing (42), 50-minute writing (30), civics (33), and civics trend (11). The

number of cells varies by subject due to collapsing rules of a minimum number of 30 responding students,

and a maximum adjustment factor of 2.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

6-25 User's Guide and Technical Report

If LSTNRADJh is defined as the student nonresponse adjustment factor for the particular

assessment and the h-th student nonresponse cell, then Equation 6.5.2 indicates how these quantities are

computed.

∑ ×

∑ ×

=

∈

∈

( )

( )

0

0

ijk STR h Bijk c

ijk ST h Bijk c

h LW SESNRF

LW SESNRF

LSTNRADJ (Equation 6.5.2)

The first factor in each term of each summation is the student-linked base weight, discussed

in Section 6.3.3. The second term comprises the session nonresponse adjustment corresponding to student

k within school j within PSU i, discussed in Section 6.4.4.

Table 6-11 presents percentiles for the student nonresponse adjustments LSTNRADJh for the

four assessments. There are varying numbers of adjustment cells for each of the assessments. The

minimum and maximum values of these values is given for each assessment in the table. In addition, the

p-th percentile is given for the 10th, 25th, 50th, 75th, and 90th percentiles. The weighted 10th percentile,

for example, is that value of the nonresponse adjustment for which a subset of responding assessed or

excluded students with a smaller or equal adjustment, correspond to 10 percent of the weights. The mean

value is the average of the student nonresponse adjustment factors over all assessed or excluded students

for the particular assessment.

Table 6-11. Distribution of student nonresponse adjustments by assessment

Type of Assessment

Percentile

25-Minute

Writing

50-Minute

Writing Civics Reading Civics Trend

Minimum 1.02 1.00 1.08 1.00 1.05

10th 1.09 1.09 1.10 1.14 1.05

25th 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.14 1.09

50th (median) 1.22 1.19 1.24 1.19 1.13

75th 1.30 1.32 1.28 1.26 1.39

90th 1.35 1.35 1.35 1.33 1.50

Maximum 1.65 1.63 1.67 2.00 1.50

Mean 1.23 1.22 1.24 1.21 1.21
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

User's Guide and Technical Report 6-26

6.5.5 Trimming the Nonresponse Adjusted Student Weights

The students in some schools were assigned extremely large weights because the school was

predicted (on the basis of the QED or PSS data) to have only a few eligible students, yet in fact had a

large number. Other excessively large weights may result from differential response rates. To reduce the

effect of large contributions to variance from a small number of schools, the weights of such schools were

reduced or “trimmed.” The trimming procedure may introduce a small bias but is designed to reduce the

mean square error of sample estimates.

The trimming algorithm is identical to the one that Westat has used for all recent NAEP

survey weights (including the 1998 NAEP weights). The algorithm has the effect of trimming the overall

weight of any school that contributes more than a specified proportion θ to the estimated variance of the

estimated number of students eligible for the HSTS Survey.

The trimming algorithm described in this section defines the trimming adjustments for the

HSTS weights. Let M be the number of responding HSTS schools in the sample. Define SCHR(ij) as the

set of students who were included in the HSTS survey in school ij. Define

0

( ) c h

ijk SCHR ij

xij = ∑ WBijk × SCNRF × MTADJ ∈(Equation 6.5.3)

The quantity xij is the sum of the school and student nonresponse adjusted student base

weights in the school. Define SR as the overall set of schools cooperating with the HSTS survey, and

define

x

M

xij

ij SR

= ∈

∑1 (Equation 6.5.4)

x is the mean value of the xij ‘s over all participating HSTS schools. The following sum of

squares will be used in our trimming procedure:

V xx ij

ij SR

= − ∈

∑( )2 (Equation 6.5.5)
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

6-27 User's Guide and Technical Report

If any school contributes too large a share to this sum of squares, then the school and student

weights will be contributing significantly to the sampling variance of most estimators. We will impose as

a constraint the following requirement: for each school lm SR ∈ such that x x lm > we require that

( ) () x x xx lm ij

ij SR

−≤ − ∈

∑ 2 2 θ (Equation 6.5.6)

We selected the value of θ based on empirical experience in surveys such as NAEP. This

value is 10/M.

In order to impose this requirement, an iterative trimming procedure is carried out on the

student weights. The first step is to compute

θ ij

ij x x

V ( ) ( ( ) ( ))

( )

1

1 1

1

2

= − ij SR ∈ (Equation 6.5.7)

The argument “1” indicates that these are the values of these quantities preceding the first

iteration of the trimming procedure. If no value of θ ij( )1 exceeds 10/M, then trimming is unnecessary. If

at least one value of θ ij( )1 exceeds 10/M (with xij( )1 also exceeding x( )1 ), then choose lm SR ∈ such

that θ lm ( )1 exceeds ) (1 θ ij for all ij not equal to lm, and such that xlm( )1 also exceeds x( )1 . For this

school we will compute an adjusted school base weight (2) wlm which is equal to















 = + − (1)

(1) 1

(1)

10

(1)

(1) (2) (1)

lm lm lm

lm lm

x

M x

x

x

w w

θ (Equation 6.5.8)

wlm ( )1 is equal to the original base weight wlm . After this computation, carry out the

following steps:

1. Recompute xlm as:

x w w SCNRF MTADJ c b

lmk SCHR lm

lm lm k lm (2) (2) 0

( )

∑ |

∈

= (Equation 6.5.9)

2. Reassign x x ij ij ( ) () 2 1 = for all ij SR ∈ not equal to lm.

3. Recompute x( ) 2 and V(2).
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

User's Guide and Technical Report 6-28

At this point, the first iteration is completed. Suppose t-1 iterations have been completed

(t=2,....). Then the t-th iteration will have the following steps:

1. Recompute the θ ij :

θ ij

ij t

x t xt

V t ( ) ( ( ) ( ))( ) = − 2

 ij SR ∈ (Equation 6.5.10)

2. If no value of θ ij( )t exceeds 10/M then further trimming will be unnecessary (all

schools now satisfy the constraint). The trimming algorithm is complete.

3. If at least one value of θ ij( )t exceeds 10/M (with x t ij( ) also exceeding x t( ) ) then

choose lm S ∈ such that θ lm ( )t exceeds θ ij( )t for all ij not equal to lm and such that

x t lm( ) also exceeds x t( ) . For this school we will compute an adjusted school base

weight w t lm ( ) +1 which will be equal to

wt wt

x t

x t

M

t

x t

x t lm lm

lm lm lm

( ) () ( )

() ()

( )

( )

+= + −





 



1  10 1

θ (Equation 6.5.11)

In general, w t lm ( ) will be equal to the original school base weight wlm , unless the school’s

weight was trimmed in an earlier iteration. The final steps of the iteration are as follows:

1. Recompute xlm as:

( 1) ( 1) 0

( ) | c h

lmk SCHR lm

xlm t + = ∑ wlm t + wk lm SCNRF MTADJ ∈

(Equation 6.5.12)

2. Reassign xt xt ij ij ( ) () + = 1 for all ij SR ∈ not equal to lm.

3. Recompute x t( ) +1 and V(t+1).

This ends the t-th iteration. These iterations are continued until there is no further trimming

to be done – that is, until all adjusted weights satisfy the criterion. Suppose T is the final iteration and

x T ij( ) the final school weight for each school ij. We compute a trimming factor ) TRIMFCTR(ij for each

school equal to:

(1)

( ) ( )

ij

ij

x

x T

TRIMFCTR ij = (Equation 6.5.13)
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

6-29 User's Guide and Technical Report

Trimming was necessary for only three of the schools in the HSTS sample. The final

trimming factors for these schools were 0.864, 0.904, 0.987.

6.5.6 Trimming the Linked Base Weights

Trimming was also carried out on the school and student nonresponse adjusted link weights.

The algorithm used was identical to that discussed in Section 6.5.5. Trimming factors were computed for

each school ij for the school and student nonresponse adjusted linked base weights (for each assessment).

For the assessment weights the set of schools that are included in the trimming computations

are designated a SCHR . These include for each assessment all schools that responded in the NAEP

assessment, were assigned to the particular assessment, and participated in the HSTS survey. For the

HSTS weights, the inputs to the trimming algorithm were the summations of nonresponse adjusted base

weights over all students for each school j in PSU i: the xij . Similarly, for the linked weights, for the each

assessment, the corresponding inputs are as follows:

c h

ijk assessed or excluded

ijk SCHR( ij ),

xij = ∑ LWijk × SESSNRF × LSTNRADJ ∈(Equation 6.5.14)

Since the trimming algorithm is oriented toward detecting large weighted contributions from

schools, there were a few student-level weights that needed further trimming. The median student weight,

after applying the trimming algorithm as explained above, multiplied by five, became the cutoff point for

the student weights. The student weights were then trimmed to the cutoff of five times the median student

weight. The trimming factor, LTRIMFCT(ij), was computed as the ratio of the resulting trimmed weight

from the two trimming procedures and the nonresponse adjusted student weight.

For reading, the trimming procedure was done separately by sample type. The following

notes the number of schools trimmed for each assessment using the algorithm explained in detail in

Section 6.5.5: 25-minute writing (3), civics (4), 50-minute writing (3), civics trend (2), reading sample

type 2 (1), reading sample type 3 (1). The following notes the number of student weights trimmed for

each assessment using the median multiplied by five as a cutoff point: 25-minute writing (5), civics (1),

50-minute writing (2), civics trend (0), writing sample type 2 (63), reading sample type 3 (58). The

following notes the lowest trimming factor after each procedure was applied: 25-minute writing (0.54),
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

User's Guide and Technical Report 6-30

civics (0.53), 50-minute writing (0.53), civics trend (0.79), reading sample type 2 (0.61), reading sample

type 3 (0.60). Since many of the trimming factors for reading were close to 1, the number of trimmed

cases is much higher than in any other subject. All trimmed cases came from the same session

nonresponse adjustment cell, which had a relatively high adjustment factor (1.62 for sample type 2, and

1.61 for sample type 3).

6.5.7 Reporting Population Factors: Linked Weights

Each set of trimmed student linked weights for a given sample type in reading sums to the

target population. Reporting factors were assigned to students in order to scale back the trimmed weights

so that final student (reporting) weights within each reporting population (which may combine students

from different sample types) sum to the target population. The reporting factors assigned to students are

specific to the reporting populations defined in Table 6-12. Each assessed and excluded student in the

reporting population for reading received a reporting factor, RPTFCTR, as shown in Table 6-13. Students

that were assessed or excluded in 25-minute writing, 50-minute writing, civics, and civics trend, were

assigned a reporting factor equal to 1.0, since all students are part of the reporting population.

Table 6-12. Reporting populations

Subject Reporting population

Civics All

Civics trend All

Reading A2+A3+B2

25-minute writing All

50-minute writing All

Note: A indicates assessed non SD/LEP students, B indicates assessed SD/LEP students, and 2 or 3 indicates the sample type.

Table 6-13. Reporting factors for assessed and excluded students, reading assessment

Sample Type Non SD/LEP Students SD/LEP Students

2 0.5 1

3 0.5 --
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

6-31 User's Guide and Technical Report

6.5.8 Poststratified Student Weights: HSTS Weights

In most sample surveys, the respondent weights are random variables that are subject to

sampling variability. Even if there was a 100 percent response, the respondent weights would at best

provide unbiased estimates of the various subgroup proportions. However, since unbiasedness refers to

average performance over a conceptually infinite number of replications of the sampling, it is unlikely

that any given estimate, based on the achieved sample, will exactly equal the population value.

Furthermore, the respondent weights have been adjusted for nonresponse and a few extreme weights have

been reduced in size.

To reduce the mean square error of estimates using the sampling weights, these weights will

be further adjusted so that estimated population totals for a specified subgroup population, based on the

sum of student weights for a specified type, will be the same as presumably better estimates based on

composites of estimates from the Current Population Survey. This adjustment, called poststratification, is

intended especially to reduce the mean squared error of estimates relating to student populations that span

several subgroups of the population. The poststratification classes are defined in terms of race/ethnicity

and census region (Northeast, Midwest, South, West).

For the HSTS weights, the post-stratification adjustment factor (PS_ADJg) for the gth poststratification adjustment cell will be:

∑∈

× × × =

( )

_

ijk E g

Bijk c h ijk

g

g W SCNRF0 MTADJ TRIMFCTR

C

PS ADJ (Equation 6.5.15)

The quantity Cg is the 12th grade enrollment control total of students whose 18th birthday

was on or after October 1, 1997 for the gth poststratification class. E(g) is the collection of all students in

the gth poststratification class who were enrolled in 12th grade (including those who did not graduate in

1998) and whose 18th birthday was on or after October 1, 1997. The counts of 12th grade students age 18

and older are not reliable because they include adult education students, therefore they do not enter into

the calculations of PS_ADJ. This procedure has been used since 1988. (See Rust, Bethel, Burke &

Hansen 1990 for further details.) The quantity WBijk is the full sample student base weight for the kth

student in the j

th school in the i

th PSU, which was discussed in Section 6.3.1. The final three factors

comprise the school nonresponse adjustment factor for the HSTS weights, discussed in Section 6.4, the
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

User's Guide and Technical Report 6-32

student nonresponse adjustment factor, discussed in Section 6.5.3, and the trimming factor, discussed in

Section 6.5.5.

Table 6-14 presents the poststratification cells with the CPS control totals for each cell.

Control totals are given in thousands.

Table 6-14. Student poststratification cells and control totals

Poststratification

cell Race/Ethnicity Region

CPS

control total

(000)

1 Black, nonHispanic All 334.9

2 Hispanic All 285.6

3 Other race/ethnicity,

nonHispanic

All 116.0

4 White, nonHispanic Northeast 375.0

5 White, nonHispanic Midwest 531.8

6 White, nonHispanic South 567.4

7 White, nonHispanic West 316.8

Table 6-15 presents the aggregated weights within each poststratification cell (the

denominator of Equation 6.5.15), the control total Cg , and the poststratification factor PSADJ g for the

poststratification cell.

Table 6-15. HSTS poststratification factors

Poststratification

cell

Aggregated

weight

(000)

Control

total

(000)

Poststratification

factor

1 256.5 334.9 1.31

2 220.5 285.6 1.29

3 190.9 116.0 0.61

4 298.8 375.0 1.26

5 452.0 531.8 1.18

6 398.3 567.4 1.42

7 364.6 316.8 0.87
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

6-33 User's Guide and Technical Report

In Table 6-15 and the remaining tables in Section 6.5, the poststratification factor as given is

the unrounded control total divided by the unrounded aggregated weight. The control totals and

aggregated weights given in the tables are the corresponding total rounded to one digit after the decimal

point. The poststratification factor as given may not equal the ratio of the two rounded quantities as given

in all cases.

Note that students at grade 12 who were age 18 or older received the poststratification factor

according to their adjustment class and subject type even though they were not used in calculating the

factor. Finally, the students that did not graduate were removed from the data file, since they are out-ofscope for HSTS.

6.5.9 Poststratified Student Weights: Linked Weights

The poststratification procedure is similar to the corresponding procedure for the HSTS

weights as described in Section 6.5.8, in that the same poststratification categories and control totals are

used. In this case, however, separate adjustments are made for each of the five assessments.

Furthermore, a special poststratification procedure was implemented for the 50-minute

writing assessment. The accommodated SD/LEP students sampled in 50-minute writing were given a

25-minute writing booklet. Therefore, the set of assessed 50-minute writing students did not contain

accommodated students. To allow for comparisons between nonaccommodated students assessed in

25-minute writing to students (all nonaccommodated) in 50-minute writing, for the weighting of students

assessed in 50-minute writing, a special poststratification procedure was done. The poststratification

adjustment factors for 50-minute writing were computed using the set of accommodated students in 25-

minute writing, along with the set of students assessed in 50-minute writing.

For the five assessments each assessment sample represents the full population. For each

assessment the poststratification factor corresponding to poststratification class g is as follows:

∑ × × × × =

∈

excluded

assessed or

( ),

0 _

ijk

ijk E g

Bijk c h ijk ijk

g

g LW SESNRF LSTNRADJ LTRIMFCT RPTFCTR

C

LPS ADJ

(Equation 6.5.16)
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

User's Guide and Technical Report 6-34

The quantity Cg in the numerator of Equation 6.5.16 represents the 12th grade enrollment

control total of students whose 18th birthday was on or after October 1, 1997 for the gth poststratification

class. E(g) is the collection of all students in the gth poststratification class who were enrolled in 12th

grade (including those who did not graduate in 1998) and whose 18th birthday was on or after October 1,

1997. The quantity Bijk LW is the student linked base weights for assessed and excluded students,

discussed earlier in Section 6.3.3.

There are school nonresponse adjustment factors, discussed in Section 6.4.5, and student

nonresponse adjustment factors, discussed in Section 6.5.4. The reporting factors are also included

(described in Section 6.5.7), as well as the trimming factors for the weights, discussed in Section 6.5.6.

Table 6-16 presents the poststratification factors LPS ADJ g _ for each poststratification cell

for the 25-minute writing, civics, reading, civics trend, and 50-minute writing assessments.

Table 6-16. Poststratification factors for the linked weights

Poststratification Factors (000)

Poststratification

Cell

25-minute

writing Civics Reading Civics Trend

50-minute

writing

1 1.40 1.42 1.41 1.24 1.43

2 1.26 1.14 1.19 1.29 1.15

3 0.71 0.80 0.82 0.65 0.76

4 1.45 1.53 1.54 0.88 1.47

5 1.15 1.15 1.13 1.43 1.14

6 1.49 1.47 1.37 1.34 1.57

7 0.88 0.98 0.93 0.83 0.89

As mentioned in 6.5.8, students at grade 12 who were age 18 or older received the

poststratification factor according to their adjustment class and subject type even though they were not

used in calculating the factor. After the poststratification procedure, the students who did not graduate

were removed from the data file, since they are out of scope for HSTS.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

6-35 User's Guide and Technical Report

6.5.10 Final Sampling Weights

Final HSTS sampling weights were assigned to eligible students in the HSTS study, of

which those with usable transcripts were given nonzero weights. These sampling weights are computed as

follows:

0 _ ijk Bijk c MTADJh TRIMFCTRijk PS ADJ g FINSTUWT =W × SCNRF × × × (Equation 6.5.17)

The first factor is the student base weight, discussed in Section 6.3.1. The second and third

factors comprise the school and student nonresponse adjustments, discussed in Section 6.4.4 and Section

6.5.3, respectively. The fourth factor is the school’s trimming factor, discussed in Section 6.5.5. The fifth

factor comprises the student poststratification factors, discussed in Section 6.5.8.

Final linked sampling weights were assigned to all students in the HSTS study for whom

usable transcripts were received and who were assessed (or excluded) using one of the NAEP

assessments. These weights are computed for each assessment as follows:

FINLNKWTijk = LWBijk × SESSNRF0c × LSTNRADJ h × LTRIMFCTijk × RPTFCTRijk × LPS _ ADJ g

(Equation 6.5.18)

The first factor is the assessment student base weight, discussed in Section 6.3.3. The second

and third factors comprise the session and student nonresponse adjustment factors for linked weights,

discussed in Sections 6.4.5 and 6.5.4, respectively. The fourth factor is the linked weight school trimming

factor, discussed in Section 6.6.3. The fifth and sixth factors comprise the reporting factor and the

poststratification factor, discussed in Sections 6.5.7 and 6.5.9, respectively.

Table 6-17 presents the distributions of these final weights for the HSTS weights, and for the

linked weights for 25-minute writing, civics, reading, civics trend, and 50-minute writing. The tables

include the count of students who have nonzero values of these weights, the total sum over all students of

the weights, the minimum and maximum nonzero weights, and the quartiles for these weights. The

coefficient of variation, CV, computed as the standard deviation of the weights divided by the mean of the

weights, is also included.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

User's Guide and Technical Report 6-36

Table 6-17. Distributions of the final HSTS and linked weights

Sample

Distribution

HSTS

weights

25-minute

writing

linked

weights

Civics

linked

weights

Reading

linked

weights

Civics

Trend

linked

weights

50-minute

writing

linked

weights

Students with nonzero

weights

24,904 7,751 3,095 4,922 785 2,296

Total (in thousands) 2,922 2,917 2,982 2,917 2,868 2,892

Minimum 12.16 52.86 151.84 90.85 1,098.84 181.20

25th percentile 67.07 226.65 563.41 296.46 2,474.54 760.42

Median 88.57 306.60 786.24 470.76 3,210.83 1,026.16

75th percentile 156.90 476.32 1,215.71 746.35 4,499.22 1,564.43

Maximum 839.44 1,563.51 3,701.54 2,907.99 11,703.21 5,493.87

CV 68.54 55.69 57.15 69.47 51.46 57.03

Many types of statistics can be estimated with sampling weights. For instance, if there are n

records in the file and the variable of interest is represented by y, the population total for y is estimated by

the formula

∑

=

= n

i

i i Y w y

1

ˆ (1)

where wi is the full sample weight and i y is the observed value of y for the i-th unit in the sample. With

weighted data, the estimate of a population mean is usually found by estimating the population total and

then dividing by the sum of the weights. If the mean of y in the population is represented by Y , then the

formula for the ratio estimate of this quantity is

∑

∑

=

= = n

i

i

n

i

i i

w

w y

Y

1

ˆ 1 (2)

If i y is a variable with =1 i y or = 0 i y , then the resulting quantity is an estimate of a

population proportion.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

6-37 User's Guide and Technical Report

Regression facilitates fitting both linear and logistic regression models to data from surveys

employing complex sample designs. The general linear model is as follows:

Y = Xβ + ε

where Y is the vector of observations for the dependent variable

[ ] Y Y Yn ... = 1 2 Y′

β is the vector of regression parameters

[ ] β = β0 β1 Kβ p ′

X is the n × (p+1) design matrix

































=

n pn

p

p

X X

X X

X X

K

M M

K

K

1

12 2

11 1

1

1

1

1

X ,

and ε is the vector of random errors

[ ] n ε ε ε Kε = 1 2 ′

The weighted least squares estimate of β is given by

b ( ) X'WX X'WY −1 =

where W is the n× n diagonal matrix formed from the n×1 vector of full sample weights

[ ] = w1w2 Kwn w′ associated with the n observations in the sample.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

User's Guide and Technical Report 6-38

6.6 Variance Estimation

For variance estimation, both the 1998 NAEP survey and the 1998 HSTS survey used the

stratified jackknife technique that, as its first step, draws carefully selected subsets of the data. For each

respondent in each subset, a sampling weight is determined as if the chosen subset were, in fact, the

responding sample. This process generates a set of “replicate” weights for each responding sample

member. These replicate weights are used to compute a series of replicate estimators for each survey

characteristic. The variability of these replicate estimators around the original estimator gives a reliable

measure of the sampling variance of the original estimator.

A considerable amount of theoretical and empirical work justifies the jackknife technique as

a variance estimation method for surveys such as the 1998 HSTS survey. In cases where the variance

estimator is simple, the jackknife estimator is usually equal to this variance estimator. Thus, in this

situation, the jackknife would be redundant. The jackknife is valuable because it is also reliable as a

variance estimator when the “correct” variance cannot be computed at all, as is the case with the 1998

HSTS survey. There is a wide range of literature discussing the jackknife; good general overviews of the

theory are provided in Wolter (1985), Chapter 4; Rust (1985); and Kish and Frankel (1974).

The jackknife procedure is generally used at Westat for surveys such as the 1998 HSTS

survey. Westat has used this method for calculating sampling errors for a wide range of survey designs.

Besides being known to be generally reliable, it is relatively straightforward for secondary analysts to

calculate sampling errors appropriately. For any given survey characteristic, an analyst would need only

to generate a series of estimators using the replicate weights and the original weights. The variance

estimator would then be computed using these “replicate estimators.” In particular, the analyst does not

need to have a complete understanding of the sample design and weighting procedures to calculate these

variance estimators accurately.

The multi-stage sample design for HSTS was complex and involved stratification, unequal

probabilities of selection, and systematic sampling. Because variance computation needs to incorporate

the HSTS complex design in its calculations, standard routines in software packages such as SAS and

SPSS should not be used for computing variances for HSTS.

The replicate weights for HSTS were designed to capture the features of the HSTS sample

design (i.e., effects from implicit stratification resulting from systematic sampling from a sorted list,
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

6-39 User's Guide and Technical Report

effects of PPS sampling), as well as capturing the weighting effects on variance (i.e., nonresponse

adjustment, trimming, poststratification). A discussion is provided in Section 6.6.2 on how to

approximate the number of degrees of freedom associated with variance estimates. Attention should be

given to degrees of freedom when analyzing subgroups in HSTS data.

With HSTS data, means and proportions can be computed, along with their variance

estimates. Furthermore, using the replicate weights, one can compute variance estimates for complex

functions of estimates, including ratios, differences of ratios, and log-odds ratios. For instance, one can

compute standard errors, variances, and confidence intervals for the specified survey estimates and

calculates chi-square tests of independence for two-way tables of weighted frequencies. One can also

compute estimated coefficients for linear and logistic regression models and perform significance testing

of a subset of linear combinations of variables. WesVar is a software package that can compute standard

errors using the replicate weights on the HSTS files. For further documentation on using WesVar, please

refer to the WesVar Complex Samples User’s Guide.

The basic idea behind replication is to select subsamples repeatedly from the whole sample,

calculate the statistic of interest for each subsample, and then use the variability among these subsample

or replicate statistics to estimate the variance of the full sample statistic. Different ways of creating

subsamples from the full sample result in different replication methods. The subsamples are called

replicates and the statistics calculated from these replicates are called replicate estimates. The

computations are explained in the next section.

Resulting variances are different depending on the software package being used. The

magnitude of the differences between the results from the software packages depends on several factors,

including type of analysis, impact of systematic sampling, and impact of weighting procedures. It is

important for the user to explain how the standard errors were computed. Furthermore, data users are

encouraged to consult the software developers of WesVar, SUDAAN, and STATA.

Broene and Rust (1998) prepared a Westat report to the National Center for Education

Statistics (NCES) documenting their evaluation of statistical software packages for NCES data sets. At

the time of the evaluation, both SUDAAN and STATA used a linearization approach to variance

estimation; SUDAAN’s latest version includes replication methods. Broene and Rust’s paper mentions

that SUDAAN is probably the most powerful of the three packages, but may be the most difficult to learn.

They conclude that WesVar was both easy to learn and powerful but lacks some of the model fitting
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

User's Guide and Technical Report 6-40

capabilities that SUDAAN has. Furthermore, they mention that Stata is more limited in its survey data

analysis capabilities and can be slower to run, but it does enable one to easily plot and examine predicted

values and residuals when model-fitting. They mention that all three packages compute standard errors

for proportions and for continuous statistics such as means, totals, ratios, and differences in these

quantities. For categorical analysis, SUDAAN and WesVar were recommended.

Since the Broene and Rust report, several enhancements were made to each software

package. Table 6-18 compares some current features of each package (WesVar 4.0 (due for release in the

second half of 2000), SUDAAN 7.5, and Stata 6.0). Note that Stata is fully programmable, meaning that,

if Stata does not already have a specific function, a program may be created to satisfy individual needs.

6.6.1 Computation of Replicate Base Weights

The 1998 HSTS sample was a subsample of the PSUs and schools selected into the 1998

NAEP sample. Replicate weights for the HSTS were created carefully by generating random samples of

the original sample that was drawn for the HSTS. In all, there were 62 replicate weights to be consistent

with other NAEP weighting products. However, the number of “active” replicates for the HSTS is less

than 62. That is, we created 47 random subsamples (or replicates), and the remaining 15 replicates are

copies of the original sample and do not contribute to the variance estimates. The following paragraphs

provide information as to how to use the replicate weights to calculate variance estimates, and how the

replicate weights were formed.

The estimated sampling variance of a parameter estimator t is the sum of M squared

differences (where M is the number of replicate weights developed):

2

1

( ) ( ) ˆVar t t t

M

i

= ∑ i − =

where ti denotes the estimator of the parameter of interest, obtained using the ith set of

replicate weights in place of the original sample of full sample weights.

Of the 47 active replicate weights formed, 18 act to reflect the amount of sampling variance

contributed by the noncertainty strata of PSUs, with the remaining 29 replicate weights reflecting the

variance contribution of the certainty PSU samples.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

6-41 User's Guide and Technical Report

Table 6-18. Analysis capabilities for WesVar, SUDAAN, and Stata

WesVar SUDAAN Stata

Standard errors and design effects for means, totals, proportions,

ratios X X X

Standard errors for Quantiles X X X

Finite population correction factor:

1st stage only, equal probabilities of selection

1st stage only, unequal probabilities of selection

X X

X

X

Linear regression X X X

Logistic regression:

Dichotomous

Polychotomous

X

X

X

X

X

X

Probit models X

Loglinear models X X

Tests of independence in tables X X X

Linear contrasts, differences X X X

Survival analysis X X

Graphics X

Batch processing available X X X

Output useful for importing into spreadsheets X X X

Estimates and confidence Intervals for odds ratios in logistic

regression

XXX

Tests in logistic regression models X X

Adjust replicate weights for nonresponse X

Correlation matrices (in addition to covariance matrices) X X

Design effects X X X
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

User's Guide and Technical Report 6-42

The derivation of the 18 replicate weights reflecting the variance of the noncertainty PSUs

involved first defining pairs of the 36 selected HSTS PSUs in a manner that models the design as one in

which two PSUs are drawn with replacement per stratum. This definition of pairs (or variance strata) is

undertaken in a manner closely reflective of the actual design, in that PSUs are pairs that are drawn from

similar subuniverses. The 36 noncertainty HSTS selected PSUs, drawn from the set of 72 NAEP selected

PSUs, which were drawn from 72 strata, were formed into 18 pairs of PSUs, where the pairs were

composed of PSUs from adjacent subuniverses. Whereas the actual sample design was to select one PSU

with probability proportional to size from each of 72 strata, and then select a subsample of 36 PSUs from

the 72 NAEP selected PSUs, for variance estimation purposes the design is regarded as calling for the

selection of two PSUs with probability proportional to size with replacement from each of 18 strata. This

procedure likely gives a small positive bias to estimates of sampling error.

The procedure for obtaining the 29 active sets of replicate weights to estimate the sampling

variance from the certainty PSUs is analogous. The first stage of sampling in this case is at the school

level, and the derivation of replicate weights must reflect appropriately the sampling of schools within

certainty PSUs.

Within the 22 certainty PSUs, a sample of schools was drawn systematically within each.

Using the schools listed in order of sample selection within each of eight “combinations” of NAEP region

and type of school (public, nonpublic), successive schools were grouped into variance strata (i.e., PAIR).

The number of variance strata within a combination depended on the number of schools in the

combination, or indirectly assigned in proportion to the relative size of the combination. Thus, generally

speaking, the largest combination was assigned the largest numbers of replicates (or variance strata).

When splitting the combinations, the schools were split into groups of (as close as possible) equal size,

based on the ordering at the time of sample selection. One variance stratum was assigned to each

replicate. Within each variance stratum in each combination, schools were alternately numbered 1 or 2

starting randomly to arrive at the variance groups.

The student replicate weight for the i

th pair of variance units, for the 47 pairs corresponding

to values of i from 1 to 47, is computed as follows:

1. Let WB generically represent (in the concept of linked or unlinked weights) the base

weight of a school, as described in Section 6.4, which accounts for the various

components of the selection probability for the school.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

6-43 User's Guide and Technical Report

2. At random, one variance unit in each pair is denoted as unit number 1, while the other

is denoted as unit number 2. The i

th replicate base weight Wbi is given by:

W if the school is from neither unit in pair 

2 W if the school belongsto unit number 2 of pair

if the school belongsto unit number 1 of pair

W

B i

B i

i

Bi = ×

0

The idea behind the jackknife method is to create random subsamples from the existing full

sample, then compute the statistic of interest for each of the subsamples and compare each of them to the

full sample estimate in order to measure the sampling variance. The above step is how the school base

weights are reweighted for a random subsample that results from the exclusion of one school among a

pair of schools. Basically, the random dropping of one school from the full sample creates a random

reduced sample (or replicate sample) of schools.

3. The ith student replicate weight is obtained by applying the various school and student

nonresponse adjustments, the weight trimming, reporting factors (for linked weights

only), and poststratification to the i

th set of replicate base weights, using procedures

identical to those used to obtain the final student weights from the set of student base

weights.

The computation of final replicate school base weights is discussed in step 2. It is only for

this component that the replicate weights differ from the full sample school weights. The remaining

weights and adjustments are computed as they were for the full sample weights. In principle, the replicate

weights should repeat the entire process of computing the final weights using the new replicate base

weights. This replication captures any components of variability introduced to the final weights by these

processes. This was done for the HSTS and linked weights for all processes (school nonresponse, student

nonresponse, poststratification), except for the trimming step preceding poststratification, and the two

CHAID analyses which selected school and missing transcript nonresponse cells.

The same trimming factors and CHAID categories were used for calculating the replicate

weights as for the main weights. The components of variability introduced by these processes should be

relatively small, so the complexity of replicating these processes led us to forgo replication of these

processes along with the basic nonresponse and poststratification steps. Note that the trimming process

was also not replicated in the development of the 1998 NAEP replicate weights.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

User's Guide and Technical Report 6-44

6.6.2 Degrees of Freedom of the Variance Estimate

It is important to have an indication of the number of degrees of freedom to attribute to the

jackknife variance estimator Vaˆr(t) of Var(t). The degrees of freedom of a variance estimator provide

information on the stability of that estimator: the higher the number of degrees of freedom, the lower the

variability of the estimator. In practical terms, the number of degrees of freedom of the variance estimator

corresponds to the number of residual degrees of freedom that can be assumed for inferential procedures.

Since the jackknife procedure estimates the sampling variability of the statistic by assessing

the effect of change in the sample at the paired first-stage sampling unit (FSSU) level, the number of

degrees of freedom of the variance estimator v(t) is at most equal to M, the number of FSSU pairs. The

maximum number of degrees of freedom equals the number of independent pieces of information used to

generate the variance. In the case of data from the HSTS, the pieces of information are 47 squared

differences ( ) t t i − 2 , each supplying at most one degree of freedom (regardless of how many individuals

were sampled within any FSSU). Again, there are 62 replicates to be consistent with other NAEP

weighting products, however, only 47 are “active” replicates.

The number of degrees of freedom of the sample variance estimator can be strictly less than

the number of FSSU pairs. For example, suppose that the statistic t is a mean for some subgroup, and no

members of that subgroup can come from either FSSU in the i

th FSSU pair. (Examples of such subgroups

are any PSU-level partitioning of the population, such as region.) In this instance, neither member of the

FSSU pair i directly contributes to the estimate of t, so that the pseudoreplicate ti would nearly equal the

statistic t. If the replicate weights used to generate ti had not received poststratification adjustments, the

resulting pseudoreplicate ti would be identical to the overall estimate t so that ( ) t t i − =2 0 . In this case,

such an FSSU pair would impart no information on the variability of the statistic t and thus contribute 0

degrees of freedom to the variance.

The approach for the 1998 HSTS survey is to err on the side of being overly conservative in

assigning degrees of freedom. For any estimate of the full population, it is recommended that confidence

intervals based on the t distribution with 25 degrees of freedom be used. This is probably conservative,

but there is little practical difference between confidence bounds for t distributions with more than 25

degrees of freedom.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

6-45 User's Guide and Technical Report

For estimates of subpopulations that are national (not concentrated in a single region),

confidence intervals based on the t distribution with 10 degrees of freedom are recommended. Again this

is likely to be conservative for most subpopulations based on gender, race/ethnic status, urban/rural status,

and so forth, which are represented within most of the FSSU pairs in the study.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

 7-1 User's Guide and Technical Report

7. 1998 HIGH SCHOOL TRANSCRIPT STUDY DATA FILES 

Data from the 1998 High School Transcript Study are organized into eight data files 

encompassing the different levels of information: (1) Master CSSC File; (2) Course Offerings File; 

(3) School File; (4) Student File; (5) Linked Weights File; (6) SD/LEP Questionnaire File; (7) Tests and 

Honors File; and (8) Transcript File. In addition there are four NAEP files that provide information of 

students’ NAEP testing participation. Except for the Master CSSC File (which is not related to individual 

schools or students), all files can be linked by PSU and school identifiers. The Student, SD/LEP 

Questionnaire, Transcript, Linked Weights, and Tests and Honors Files can be linked by student 

identifiers; and the Master CSSC can be linked to the Course Offerings or Transcript File by CSSC 

number. 

To identify a specific school, the PSU and school IDs must be used in combination. Each 

school has a unique PSU/School ID combination and all student IDs are unique. For students in the 232 

schools that are fully linked to NAEP, student IDs are their 10-digit NAEP booklet numbers. All other 

students were assigned unique 10-digit IDs beginning with 990. 

Weights, developed using the procedures described in Chapter 3, are contained in the 

Student File and the Linked Weights File. Westat has provided the final student weight (FINSTUWT) in 

the Student File and the final usable linked weight (FINLNKWT) in the Linked Weights File so that data 

analyses can be weighted up to national totals. The final student weight should be used in analyses 

involving only transcript data. The weights in the Linked Weights File should be used in analyses 

involving both transcript data and data obtained from NAEP data files. 

There are two versions of the 1998 High School Transcript Study data files: the restricted 

use data files and the public use data files. All values in this report are based on the restricted use data 

files. To ensure the confidentiality of students, data in the School File, Course Offering File, and 

Transcript File that would identify the state in which a school is located have either been set to missing 

(as in the FIPS State Code in the School File) or set to generic values (e.g., a course title of “Mississippi 

History” was set to “State History”). In addition, the number of teachers and enrollment values in the 

School File and some race/ethnicity values in the Student File have been set to missing. The data in the 

remaining files are identical in both the restricted use and public use versions. 
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 

1998 High School Transcript Study

User's Guide 7-2

Because of confidentiality legislation, secondary users who wish to obtain a copy of the 

restricted-use data files must apply for an NCES restricted data license. If your organization does not 

already have a restricted data license, you need to obtain a copy of the “NCES Field Restricted Use Data 

Procedures Manual.” There is a four-page checklist in this document that details the steps involved in 

obtaining a license. You may request a copy from the following contact person or you may view and 

download the manual from the NCES web site at http://nces.ed.gov/statprog/rudman. 

 Cynthia Barton (202) 502-7307 

cynthia_barton@ed.gov

If your organization already has a restricted data license, you may only need to have it 

amended to add any additional datasets or to add additional names as authorized users of the data. Note that, 

in a college or university setting, only faculty can serve as the primary project officer. Graduate students 

may be listed as authorized users only. 

To obtain a restricted data license (or to amend an existing license), a secondary user generally 

must send a letter addressed to the Data Security Office, formally requesting the data. The mailing address 

of the Data Security Office is: 

 Data Security Office 

 Department of Education/NCES 

 1990 K Street NW 

 Room 9061 

 Washington, DC 20006 

Please include the following information in your request: 

 The name of the data set(s) you wish to use; 

 The purpose for the loan of the data; 

 The length of time you will need the data; 

 An affidavit of nondisclosure for each person who will have access to the data, 

promising to keep the data completely confidential. 
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

 7-3 User's Guide and Technical Report

7.1 Master CSSC File 

The Master CSSC File contains all codes in the modified version of the Classification of 

Secondary School Courses (CSSC) used in this study. This file is included as part of the Tabulations 

Report. There are 2,271 records, sorted by CSSC number. In addition to the original 6-digit CSSC codes 

created in 1982, the file contains the codes added for the 1987, 1990 and 1994 studies and 83 additional 

codes added or revised during the current study. 

The new codes are documented in the Tabulations Report. These codes were added when 

courses were encountered on the transcripts that were clearly different from codes already contained in 

the CSSC. No new 2-digit or 4-digit categories were added during the 1998 transcript study. 

A special education flag (SPEDFLAG), an expansion to the CSSC initiated during the 1987 

transcript study, was retained as part of the current version of the CSSC. When a course on a transcript 

was limited in enrollment to special education students, it was coded using the regular CSSC code with a 

special education indicator of “0” or “2.”1

 Any course not so limited has the special education flag set to 

“1.” 

As in the 1990 and 1994 transcript studies, all CSSC entries have been coded with a 

sequence flag. A “0” value for the sequence flag indicates that the course is not part of an instructional 

sequence. A “1” indicates that the course is the first course in an instructional sequence, and a “2” 

indicates that the course is an advanced course in an instructional sequence (i.e., not the initial course in 

the sequence). The CSSC Master File is organized by the CSSC code and contains four variables: the 

CSSC course code, the special education flag, the sequence flag, and the standard course title. 

7.2 Course Offerings File 

The Course Offerings File is organized by school and contains one record for each course 

listed in the school’s course catalog or appearing on a student’s transcript as a non-transfer course taken at 

that school. Each of the 38,359 records contains the PSU, school ID, course title, course CSSC code, 

 

1

 The values of the SPEDFLAG variable are as follows: 0 = a functional level course limited in enrollment to special education students; 1 = a 

regular course not limited in enrollment to special education students; 2 = a special education course not at the functional level, but limited in 

enrollment to special education students. 
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 

1998 High School Transcript Study

User's Guide 7-4

special education flag, the source of the catalog (e.g., generated from transcripts or from a schoolprovided catalog) and six additional pieces of information about the course: (1) the location of the course 

(including various off-campus locations); (2) the language of instruction; (3) whether or not it was 

remedial or below-grade-level course; (4) whether or not it was an honors-level course; (5) if it was a 

combination course (i.e., composed of more than one part, requiring more than one CSSC code for 

accurate description); (6) if it was part of an instructional sequence. The file is sorted by the PSU and 

school IDs. 

The Course Offerings File is a complete listing of courses offered in all participating schools 

that provided us with school-level course catalogs. It contains all courses listed in the school-level course 

catalogs received and any non-transfer courses listed on the transcripts not otherwise appearing in the 

catalogs. For example, in a school with grades 10 through 12 whose students all take 9th grade in a junior 

high, the 9th-grade courses are not treated as transfer courses, but appear as if they were offered by the 

high school. This treatment provides a more balanced picture of the courses available to American 

students in 4 years of high school than would be provided by treating such courses as transfer courses. For 

the 18 schools from which we did not receive a catalog, the list of unique course titles appearing on the 

sampled transcripts is the only available source of course-offering entries. A complete listing of all 

courses included on the transcripts can be extracted only from the Transcript File, since transfer courses 

do not appear in the Course Offerings File. 

7.3 School File 

The School File is sorted by PSU and school ID and contains one record for each of the 264 

participating schools. School variables gathered during the Transcript Study are included as well as the 

school’s responses to the NAEP School Questionnaire (for these schools that participated in NAEP). A 

copy of the School Questionnaire is in Appendix A. 

7.4 Student File 

The Student File contains one record for each of the 25,422 graduates who were identified. 

Since 518 transcripts were not received, full transcript information is included for 24,904 graduated 

students for whom transcripts were obtained and coded. 
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

 7-5 User's Guide and Technical Report

Students are identified by PSU, School, and Student ID variables, and the file is sorted by 

this group of variables. The file contains the demographic information gathered for each student, 

sampling information, weights to be used in analysis, and replicate weights for variance estimation. The 

final student weight for each student is the variable FINSTUWT. The component weights used to derive 

the final student weight are also included. In addition, the file contains a flag indicating whether or not the 

student is disabled and a condition variable indicating the specific nature of the disability when 

applicable.2

 The file also contains a series of derived variables including one designating the student’s 

academic track as academic, vocational, both, or neither, and summaries of the student’s course-taking 

record by major educational topic. 

Note that 518 students for whom no transcripts were obtained had final student weights 

(FINSTUWT) of zero. There are 337 students receiving regular or honors diplomas (EXSTAT=1 or 2) 

whose transcripts do not have enough codable courses to account for at least 75 percent of the Carnegie 

Units required by their schools to graduate (i.e., GRREQFLG=4) who were given final weights of zero. In 

other words, only transcripts fully documenting at least 3 years of high school received positive weights. 

There are 46 students with a GRREQFLG value of 4 who were given positive weights. Thirty-three of 

these received special education diplomas and 13 received certificates of attendance. Their transcripts 

fully documented at least 3 years of high school even though the total number of credits is less than 75 

percent of the total required for a regular diploma. 

The weights included on the Student File are for all students in the study, both those that can 

be linked to the NAEP assessment and those that cannot. Analyses of just the linked students must take 

into account a different set of nonresponse adjustments than the unlinked weights (see Chapter 6). The 

appropriate weights to be used in such a linked analysis are contained in the Linked Weights File. 

 

2

 The values of the disabling condition code are 00-not disabled, 01-multiple disabilities, 02-mentally retarded, 03-hard of hearing, 04-deaf, 05-

speech-impaired, 06-visually impaired/blind, 07-deaf/blind, 08-emotionally disturbed, 09-orthopedically impaired, 10-learning disabled, 11-

other disability, and 99-not ascertained. 
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 

1998 High School Transcript Study

User's Guide 7-6

7.5 Linked Weights Files (NAEP Civics, NAEP Reading, NAEP 25-minute Writing, and 

NAEP 50-minute Writing) 

The Linked Weights Files contains the set of weights needed to perform analyses on the 

subset of schools and students fully linked to the NAEP assessment. Because different sets of schools 

were eligible to participate in the NAEP and the HSTS studies, and because different sets of schools 

chose to participate in each, different school-level nonresponse adjustments need to be used when 

constructing student weights. For similar reasons, different student-level nonresponse adjustments need to 

be used when constructing student weights. Furthermore, since the main 1998 NAEP study consisted of 

four parallel sets of assessments (Civics, Reading, 25- and 50-minute Writing), separate sets of weights 

need to be used for each assessment. A separate set of weights is provided for students who were 

excluded from the NAEP assessments on the basis of a disability or limited English proficiency. 

The Linked Weights File contains one record for each of the 18,064 graduates for whom we 

have NAEP booklet numbers. As in the Student File, students are identified by the combination of PSU, 

School, and Student ID variables. The file is sorted by these identifier variables. The first three digits of 

the student ID identify the assessment in which the student participated. Values between 001-022 indicate 

Reading; 201-243, Writing; and 301-332, Civics.3

 For ease of use, this file also contains the demographic 

variables included on the Student File. The final usable linked weight variable is FINLNKWT. 

7.6 SD/LEP Questionnaire File 

School special education staff members were asked to fill out an SD/LEP Questionnaire for 

each disabled student and each student with Limited English Proficiency sampled for NAEP. The 

SD/LEP Questionnaire File contains one record for each of 1,237 students, with data from these 

completed questionnaires. The file is sorted by PSU, School, and Student ID. 

 

3

 One other set of student ID prefixes appears on the Student File, but not on the Linked Weights File. The prefix "990" is used for all non-linked 

students -- that is, students in schools for whom a sample was drawn in the field for the transcript study. 
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

 7-7 User's Guide and Technical Report

7.7 Test and Honors File 

The Test and Honors File contains information on standardized test scores and honors that 

appear on high school transcripts. Of the transcripts collected, 8,278 (32.6 percent) contained either 

standardized test scores or notations regarding honors and awards that students received. The Tests and 

Honors File lists this information. Because of the relatively small percentage of transcripts represented, 

the data in this file should be used with caution. 

As in the Student File, students are identified by the combination of PSU, School, and 

Student ID variables. The file is sorted by these identifier variables. Each entry on a transcript is 

identified with a unique sequence number. The course sequence number is a course ID given to each 

course, and is assigned individually to each student. The combination of PSU, school, Student ID, and 

course sequence number allows for a unique ID for every single course within the Transcript File. Entries 

are sorted by sequence number within student. Each entry also contains an indicator of the record type 

(“T” = test, “H” = honor), the month and year of the test or honor (if available), the semester (Fall or 

Spring, if available), and a 40 character description of the honor or the test. 

For most tests, Westat has provided the test score. Although it was not always possible to 

provide meaningful entries for some test scores (e.g., some schools reported SRA tests with percentiles 

and some with scaled scores) and the subtests which are reported varied tremendously, we provide 

complete scores for the PSAT math and verbal subtests, the SAT math and verbal subtests, and ACT 

composite subtests. The remaining test information is of interest in so far as it can be used to determine 

the distribution of test data being reported on high school transcripts. The file contains 21,594 records. 

7.8 Transcript File 

The Transcript File contains one record for each course appearing on the sampled students’ 

transcripts. This is an extremely large file, containing 1,126,661 records. Courses are identified by PSU, 

School, Student ID, and course sequence number (within students). The records in the file are sorted by 

PSU, school, student ID, and course sequence number. Variables for each course record include grade 

level when taken, school year when taken, course title, grade received (original and standardized), credit 

received (original and standardized), course CSSC code, if taught off campus, if taught in a language 

other than English, if it is a remedial or below-grade-level course, and if it is an honors course. 
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 

1998 High School Transcript Study

User's Guide 7-8

7.9 NAEP Data Files 

There are three NAEP data files containing proficiency scores for each student who 

completed the assessment. These files are the 1998 NAEP Civics Data File, the 1998 NAEP Reading 

Data File, and the 1998 NAEP Writing Data File. 

These files contain the NAEP scores for 1998 graduates who participated in a NAEP 

assessment in a school that is fully linked to the High School Transcript Study. In the case of the Civics 

and Writing scores, these files contain scores for all graduates who participated in NAEP. In the case of 

the Reading scores, these files contain scores for all graduates who participated in the NAEP Reading 

assessment, but do not contain scores for a large number of graduates who were part of a special 

psychometric study that did not provide comparable scores. 

Because NAEP scores are designed to provide accurate group estimates rather than studentlevel information, they are “conditioned” on other variables (e.g., Parents’ Education Level and NAEP 

region) in the NAEP datasets to provide more unbiased estimates when NAEP data are analyzed in 

conjunction with the conditioning variables.4

 The conditioning process has the effect of increasing the 

bias when analyses are made between NAEP scores and variables not in the conditioning set. In order to 

make the transcript data as usable as possible, Westat asked the Educational Testing Service to add 

transcript study variables to the conditioning process. The following variables were included in this 

analysis: 

 ACAD_TRK Student Program 

 CLRANK/CLSIZE Class Rank divided by Class Size 

 EXSTAT Student Exit Status 

 GPA_C Calculated GPA 

 GRREQFLG Graduation Requirements Level Flag 

 HCFLAG Student Disability Status 

 

4

 See Chapter 6 for a detailed discussion of conditioning. 
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

 7-9 User's Guide and Technical Report

 REGION Census Region 

 STUB0100 - STUB1600 These “stub” variables represent the number of credits 

 students received in various subject areas. These are 

 defined in detail in Appendix D. 

 STUB2001 - STUB 2005 New Basics Curriculum categories. These variables 

 represent variants of academically oriented course- 

 taking patterns recommended in the Nation at Risk 

 report. They are defined in detail in Appendix D. 

All the variables normally used by Educational Testing Service for conditioning the NAEP 

scores were also considered in the conditioning process. Thus all the variables in the transcript study 

Student File can be safely used in analyses involving NAEP scores. Because additional variables were 

included in the conditioning of NAEP scores for the transcript study, the NAEP scores reported in these 

files are slightly different from those contained in the records for the same students distributed solely as 

NAEP data. 

As discussed in Chapter 3, because fewer schools and students participated in both NAEP 

and HSTS than in either study alone, a different set of nonresponse adjustments applies to analyses using 

variables from both studies than for analyses confined to a single study. The weights in the Linked 

Weights File should be used in analyses comparing the NAEP data to the transcript data, rather than the 

weights contained in the Student File. Note that if we do not have a complete transcript for a student, his 

or her weight is set to zero in the Linked Weights File. 

The PSU, School, and Student IDs in the NAEP data files have the same structure as the 

corresponding variables in other transcript study files. If the need arises to match transcript study records 

with records obtained from NAEP files obtained from other sources, the analyst needs to be aware of the 

following differences in naming conventions as shown in Table 7-1. 
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 

1998 High School Transcript Study

User's Guide 7-10

Table 7-1. Naming conventions 

Transcript Study Record Identifier 

NAEP Record Identifier (other than those 

distributed with the transcript files) 

Variable Name Field Length Variable Name Field Length 

PSU 3 PSU 3 

SCHOOL 3 SCH 3 

STUDENT 10 BOOK 

BKSER 

CHKDIG 

3 

6 

1 

The student identifier, STUDENT, in the transcript study is created by concatenating the 

NAEP book number (BOOK, which identifies the form of the assessment which was administered), the 

book serial number (BKSER), and the check digit (CHKDIG). The values of STUDENT are sufficient to 

uniquely identify a student in either the 1998 HSTS files or the 1998 NAEP files.5

Table 7-2 summarizes the number of records in each NAEP data file and the corresponding 

number of nonzero weights in the Linked Weights File. 

Table 7-2. Comparison of records and nonzero weights in the Linked Weights File 

NAEP Data File Number of Records Number of Nonzero Weights 

Civics 3,032 3,095 

Reading 4,826 4,922 

Writing 7,558 10,047 

The 4,826 nonzero weights in the reading file are associated with the 4,922 students whose reading 

assessments were conditioned and whose transcript data appear in the files. 

 

5

 For students not linked to NAEP, the first 3 digits of the variable STUDENT are “990.” The next 4 digits are a unique school identifier 

generated solely to ensure that the student identifiers are unique. The last 3 digits were sequentially assigned, starting with 001, to students 

within a school. 
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The 1998 High School Transcript Study

8-1 User's Guide and Technical Report

8. REFERENCES

Broene, P. and Rust, K. (1998). Strengths and limitations of using SUDAAN, STATA, and WesVarPC for

computing variances from National Center for Education Statistics data sets. Westat report

prepared under contract for NCES.

Cochran, W.G. (1977). Sampling techniques, 3rd ed. New York: Wiley.

Kass, G.V. (1980). An exploratory technique for investigating large quantities of categorical data. Applied

Statistics, 29, 119-127.

Kish, L. and Frankel, M. (1974). Inference from complex samples. Journal of the Royal Statistical

Society, Series B, 36, 1-22.

Krenzke, T., Rust, K., Wallace, L., and Yansanah, I. (2000). 1998 NAEP sampling and weighting report.

Rockville, MD: Westat.

Krewski, D. and Rao, J. (1981). Inference from stratified samples: properties of linearization, jackknife

and balanced repeated replication. Annals of Statistics, 9, 1010-1019.

Legum, S., Caldwell, N., Goksel, H., Haynes, J., Hynson, C., Rust, K., and Blecher, N. (1993). The 1990

High School Transcript Study technical report. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education,

Office of Educational Research and Improvement NCES 93-117.

Legum, S., Caldwell, N., Davis, B., Haynes, J., Hill, T., Litavecz, S., Rizzo, L., Rust, K., and Vo, N.

(1997). The 1994 High School Transcript Study technical report, Washington, DC: U.S.

Department of Education, Office of Educational Research and Improvement NCES, 97-262.

Little, R. J. A. and Rubin, D.B. (1987). Statistical analysis with missing data. New York: Wiley.

Ludwig, M.J., Olivetti, L., Sandberg, N., and Waite, B. (1982). A classification of secondary school

courses. Alexandria, VA: Evaluation Technologies, Inc.

Morgan, R., Hunt, E., and Carpenter, J. (1991). Classification of instructional programs. NCES 91-396.

U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Research and Improvement.

National Commission on Excellence in Education (1983). A Nation at risk: The imperative for

educational reform. Washington, DC. (ERIC No. ED 226 006)

Oh, H.L. and Scheuren, F.S. (1983). Weighting adjustments for unit nonresponse. In W.G. Madow, I.

Olkin, and D.B. Rubin (Eds.), Incomplete Data in Sample Surveys, Vol. II: Theory and Annotated

Bibliography. New York: Academic Press.

Rust, K. (1985). Variance estimation for complex estimators in sample surveys. Journal of Official

Statistics, 1(4), 381-397.

Rust, K., Bethel, J., Burke, J., and Hansen, M. (1990). The 1998 National Assessment of Educational

Progress: Sample and weighting procedures, final report. Rockville, MD: Westat.

Wolter, K. (1985). Introduction to variance estimation. New York: Springer-Verlag.
Appendix A

School Questionnaire












Appendix B

School Information Form

















Appendix C

SD/LEP Student Questionnaire

0










Appendix D

Codebook for Linked Weights File
 1998 HIGH SCHOOL TRANSCRIPT STUDY

 CODEBOOK FOR LINKED WEIGHTS FILE

 January 1, 2000

 Question Column

 Name Number(s)

 ________ _________

 PSU 0001-0003 Primary Sampling Unit

 _____________________

 103-494 = PSU

 SCHOOL 0004-0007 School ID (within PSU)

 ______________________

 3011-3574 = School (within PSU)

 NOTE : Both PSU and school ID must be

 combined to uniquely identify a school within

 the data file.

 STUDENT 0008-0017 Student ID (within School)

 __________________________

 0000000001 - 9899999999 = Linked

 9900000000 - 9909999999 = Unlinked

 NOTE : Student IDs are unique. They

 correspond to NAEP booklet numbers. Only

 students in schools fully linked to NAEP are

 included in this file.

 SUBJECT 0018 Session Flag

 ____________

 1 = 50 - minute writing

 2 = Reading

 3 = Civics

 4 = 25 - minute writing

 EXSTAT 0019 Student Exit Status

 ___________________

 1 = Standard Diploma

 2 = Honors Diploma

 3 = Diploma with Special

 Education Adjustments

4 = Certificate of Attendance

5 = Certificate of Completion

 GRAD_IMP 0020 Imputation flag for variable EXSTAT

 ___________________________________

 0 = No

 1 = Yes

 [1]
 Question Column

 Name Number(s)

 ________ _________

 DRVDRACE 0021 Student Race/ethnicity

 ______________________

 1 = White (Not Hispanic)

 2 = Black (Not Hispanic)

 3 = Hispanic (Mexican,

 Mexican-American, Chicano,

 Puerto Rican, Cuban, other

 Spanish or Hispanic Descent)

 4 = Asian or Pacific Islander

 5 = American Indian or Alaskan

 Native

 6 = Other

 RACE_IMP 0022 Imputation flag for variable DRVDRACE

 _____________________________________

 0 = No

 1 = Yes

 GRADE 0023-0024 Student Grade Level in 1997-98

 ______________________________

 12 = Twelfth Grade

 NOTE : Grade the student was in during the

 1997-98 school year.

 SEX 0025 Student Gender

 ______________

 1 = Male

 2 = Female

 9 = Not Reported

 BIRTHMO 0026-0027 Student Month Born

 __________________

 01-12 = Month Born

 BIRTHYR 0028-0029 Student Year Born

 _________________

 1976-83 = Year Born

 BIRT_IMP 0030 Imputation flag for variable BIRTYR

 ___________________________________

 0 = No

 1 = Yes

 [2]
 Question Column

 Name Number(s)

 ________ _________

 HCFLAG 0031 Student Disability Status

 _________________________

 0 = Not Disabled

1 = Disabled

9 = Not Reported

 NOTE : HCFLAG is based on a determination of

 whether the student is disabled and in a

 special education program, using the best

 information available.

 HCTYPE 0032-0033 Description of student's disability

 ___________________________________

 00 = Not disabled

 01 = Multiple responses

 02 = Learning disability

 03 = Hearing impairment

 04 = Visual impairment/blindness

 05 = Speech impairment

 06 = Mental or cognitive

 impairment

 07 = Emotional disturbance

 08 = Orthopedic impairment

 09 = Traumatic brain injury

 10 = Other

 99 = Not response

 NOTE : This variable was obtained from the

 SD/LEP Questionnaire which was completed by

 school personnel.

 PSU_WGT 0034-0045 NAEP PSU Weight

 _______________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 QSCHWT12 0046-0057 School Weight, Conditional on PSU

 _________________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 [3]
 Question Column

 Name Number(s)

 ________ _________

 SCH_WT12 0058-0069 NAEP School Weight, Conditional on PSU

 ______________________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 TRPSUWT 0070-0081 PSU Weight, Conditional on PSU

 ______________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 TRSCHWT 0082-0093 School Weight, Conditional on School, PSU

 _________________________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 SA_WT 0094-0105 School Weight, Conditional on School, PSU

 _________________________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 SA_ADJ 0106-0117 Poststratification Adjustment Factor

 ____________________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 [4]
 Question Column

 Name Number(s)

 ________ _________

 SAMPTYWT 0118-0129 Sample Type Weight, Conditional on School

 _________________________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 YRRND_FC 0130-0141 Year - round School Factor

 __________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 STUSA_WT 0142-0153 Student Sampling (Within School) Weight

 _______________________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 SESNRF0 0154-0165 School/Session Nonresponse Adjustment Factor

 ____________________________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 LSTUBW0 0166-0177 Student Base Weight

 ___________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 LSTNRADJ 0178-0189 Student Nonresponse Adjustment Factor

 _____________________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 [5]
 Question Column

 Name Number(s)

 ________ _________

 LTRIMFCT 0190-0201 Student Trimming Factor

 _______________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 LRPTFCTR 0202-0213 Student Reporting Factor

 ________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 LPS_ADJ 0214-0225 Postratification Adjustment Factor

 __________________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 FINLNKWT 0226-0237 Final Usable Linked Student Weight

 __________________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 REPWT1 0238-0249 Jackknife Replicate Weight1

 ___________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 REPWT2 0250-0261 Jackknife Replicate Weight2

 ___________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 [6]
 Question Column

 Name Number(s)

 ________ _________

 REPWT3 0262-0273 Jackknife Replicate Weight3

 ___________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 REPWT4 0274-0285 Jackknife Replicate Weight4

 ___________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 REPWT5 0286-0297 Jackknife Replicate Weight5

 ___________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 REPWT6 0298-0309 Jackknife Replicate Weight6

 ___________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 REPWT7 0310-0321 Jackknife Replicate Weight7

 ___________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 REPWT8 0322-0333 Jackknife Replicate Weight8

 ___________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 [7]
 Question Column

 Name Number(s)

 ________ _________

 REPWT9 0334-0345 Jackknife Replicate Weight9

 ___________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 REPWT10 0346-0357 Jackknife Replicate Weight10

 ____________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 REPWT11 0358-0369 Jackknife Replicate Weight11

 ____________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 REPWT12 0370-0381 Jackknife Replicate Weight12

 _____________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 REPWT13 0382-0393 Jackknife Replicate Weight13

 ____________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 REPWT14 0394-0405 Jackknife Replicate Weight14

 ____________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 [8]
 Question Column

 Name Number(s)

 ________ _________

 REPWT15 0406-0417 Jackknife Replicate Weight15

 ____________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 REPWT16 0418-0429 Jackknife Replicate Weight16

 ____________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 REPWT17 0430-0441 Jackknife Replicate Weight17

 ____________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 REPWT18 0442-0453 Jackknife Replicate Weight18

 ____________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 REPWT19 0454-0465 Jackknife Replicate Weight19

 ____________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 REPWT20 0466-0477 Jackknife Replicate Weight20

 ____________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 [9]
 Question Column

 Name Number(s)

 ________ _________

 REPWT21 0478-0489 Jackknife Replicate Weight21

 ____________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 REPWT22 0490-0501 Jackknife Replicate Weight22

 ____________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 REPWT23 0502-0513 Jackknife Replicate Weight23

 ____________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 REPWT24 0514-0525 Jackknife Replicate Weight24

 ____________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 REPWT25 0526-0537 Jackknife Replicate Weight25

 ____________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 REPWT26 0538-0549 Jackknife Replicate Weight26

 ____________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 [10]
 Question Column

 Name Number(s)

 ________ _________

 REPWT27 0550-0561 Jackknife Replicate Weight27

 ____________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 REPWT28 0562-0573 Jackknife Replicate Weight28

 ____________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 REPWT29 0574-0585 Jackknife Replicate Weight29

 ____________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 REPWT30 0586-0597 Jackknife Replicate Weight30

 ____________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 REPWT31 0598-0609 Jackknife Replicate Weight31

 ____________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 REPWT32 0610-0621 Jackknife Replicate Weight32

 ____________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 [11]
 Question Column

 Name Number(s)

 ________ _________

 REPWT33 0622-0633 Jackknife Replicate Weight33

 ____________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 REPWT34 0634-0645 Jackknife Replicate Weight34

 ____________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 REPWT35 0646-0657 Jackknife Replicate Weight35

 ____________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 REPWT36 0658-0669 Jackknife Replicate Weight36

 ____________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 REPWT37 0670-0681 Jackknife Replicate Weight37

 ____________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 REPWT38 0682-0693 Jackknife Replicate Weight38

 ____________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 [12]
 Question Column

 Name Number(s)

 ________ _________

 REPWT39 0694-0705 Jackknife Replicate Weight39

 ____________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 REPWT40 0706-0717 Jackknife Replicate Weight40

 ____________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 REPWT41 0718-0729 Jackknife Replicate Weight41

 ____________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 REPWT42 0730-0741 Jackknife Replicate Weight42

 ____________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 REPWT43 0742-0753 Jackknife Replicate Weight43

 ____________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 REPWT44 0754-0765 Jackknife Replicate Weight44

 ____________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 [13]
 Question Column

 Name Number(s)

 ________ _________

 REPWT45 0766-0777 Jackknife Replicate Weight45

 ____________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 REPWT46 0778-0789 Jackknife Replicate Weight46

 ____________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 REPWT47 0790-0801 Jackknife Replicate Weight47

 ____________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 REPWT48 0802-0813 Jackknife Replicate Weight48

 ____________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 REPWT49 0814-0825 Jackknife Replicate Weight49

 ____________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 REPWT50 0826-0837 Jackknife Replicate Weight50

 ____________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 [14]
 Question Column

 Name Number(s)

 ________ _________

 REPWT51 0838-0849 Jackknife Replicate Weight51

 ____________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 REPWT52 0850-0861 Jackknife Replicate Weight52

 ____________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 REPWT53 0862-0873 Jackknife Replicate Weight53

 ____________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 REPWT54 0874-0885 Jackknife Replicate Weight54

 ____________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 REPWT55 0886-0897 Jackknife Replicate Weight55

 ____________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 REPWT56 0898-0909 Jackknife Replicate Weight56

 ____________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 [15]
 Question Column

 Name Number(s)

 ________ _________

 REPWT57 0910-0921 Jackknife Replicate Weight57

 ____________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 REPWT58 0922-0933 Jackknife Replicate Weight58

 ____________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 REPWT59 0934-0945 Jackknife Replicate Weight59

 ____________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 REPWT60 0946-0957 Jackknife Replicate Weight60

 ____________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 REPWT61 0958-0969 Jackknife Replicate Weight61

 ____________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 REPWT62 0970-0981 Jackknife Replicate Weight62

 ____________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 [16]
 Question Column

 Name Number(s)

 ________ _________

 REPGRP1 0982-0983 Jackknife Replicate Group Number 1

 __________________________________

 1-47 = Jackknife Replicate Group

 Number 1

 DROPGRP 0984 Jackknife Dropout Group Number 1

 ________________________________

 1-2 = Jackknife Dropout Group

 Number

 ACAD_TRK 0985 Academic Track

 ______________

 1 = Academic

 2 = Vocational

 3 = Both

 4 = Neither

 TYPLOC_R 0986 Community Type (Data available in Restricted Use Only file)

 ___________________________________________________________

 1 = Large City

 2 = Mid-size City

 3 = Urban Fringe of Large City

 4 = Urban Fringe of Mid-size City

 5 = Large Town

 6 = Small Town

 7 = Other Rural

 NAEPREGN 0987 NAEP Region

 ___________

 1 = Northeast

 2 = Southeast

 3 = Central

 4 = West

 PUBPRIV 0988 Public/Nonpublic School

 _______________________

 1 = Public

 2 = Private

 [17]
1998 HIGH SCHOOL TRANSCRIPT STUDY

Linked Weights File

NAEP PSU Weight

 Cumulative Cumulative

PSU_WGT Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-----------------------------------------------------------------

1.00 - 38.61 18064 100.00 18064 100.00

PSS Weight

 Cumulative Cumulative

QSCHWT12 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-------------------------------------------------------------

1.00 18064 100.00 18064 100.00

School Weight, Conditional on PSU

 Cumulative Cumulative

SCH_WT12 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-----------------------------------------------------------------

1.00 - 62.36 18064 100.00 18064 100.00

HSTS PSU Wt, Cond on NAEP PSU

 Cumulative Cumulative

TRPSUWT Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

----------------------------------------------------------------

1.00 - 2.00 18064 100.00 18064 100.00

HSTS Sch Wt, Cond on Sch, PSU

 Cumulative Cumulative

TRSCHWT Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

----------------------------------------------------------------

1.00 - 6.00 18064 100.00 18064 100.00
Linked Weights File

Session Allocation Wt, Cond on School

 Cumulative Cumulative

SA_WT Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

----------------------------------------------------------------

1.00 - 3.77 18064 100.00 18064 100.00

Session Alloc Adj Fctr, Cond on Sess

Cumulative Cumulative

SA_ADJ Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-----------------------------------------------------------

1.00 18064 100.00 18064 100.00

Sample Type Weight, Cond on School

 Cumulative Cumulative

SAMPTYWT Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

----------------------------------------------------------------

1.00 - 2.00 18064 100.00 18064 100.00

Year-round School Factor

 Cumulative Cumulative

YRRND_FC Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

----------------------------------------------------------------

1.00 - 1.50 18064 100.00 18064 100.00

Student Sampling (Within school) Wt

 Cumulative Cumulative

STUSA_WT Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-----------------------------------------------------------------

1.00 - 53.72 18064 100.00 18064 100.00
Linked Weights File

School/Session Nonresponse Adj Factor

 Cumulative Cumulative

SESNRF0 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

----------------------------------------------------------------

1.00 - 1.70 18064 100.00 18064 100.00

Student Base Weight

 Cumulative Cumulative

LSTUBW0 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------------

46.12 - 5767.00 18064 100.00 18064 100.00

Student Nonresponse Adjustment Factor

 Cumulative Cumulative

LSTNRADJ Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

----------------------------------------------------------------

1.00 - 2.00 18064 100.00 18064 100.00

Student Trimming Factor

 Cumulative Cumulative

LTRIMFCT Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

----------------------------------------------------------------

0.52 - 1.00 18064 100.00 18064 100.00

Student Reporting Factor

 Cumulative Cumulative

LRPTFCTR Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

----------------------------------------------------------------

0.50 - 1.00 18064 100.00 18064 100.00
Linked Weights File

Poststratification Adjustment Factor

 Cumulative Cumulative

LPS_ADJ Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

----------------------------------------------------------------

0.70 - 1.57 18064 100.00 18064 100.00

Final Usable Linked Student Weight

 Cumulative Cumulative

FINLNKWT Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------------

52.86 - 5493.88 18064 100.00 18064 100.00

Jackknife Replicate Weight 1

 Cumulative Cumulative

LREPWT1 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------------

 0 84 0.47 84 0.47

53.11 - 6959.55 17980 99.53 18064 100.00

Jackknife Replicate Weight 2

 Cumulative Cumulative

LREPWT2 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------------

 0 140 0.78 140 0.78

53.01 - 6639.02 17924 99.22 18064 100.00
Linked Weights File

Jackknife Replicate Weight 3

 Cumulative Cumulative

LREPWT3 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------------

 0 509 2.82 509 2.82

52.79 - 5626.69 17555 97.18 18064 100.00

Jackknife Replicate Weight 4

 Cumulative Cumulative

LREPWT4 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------------

 0 503 2.78 503 2.78

52.90 - 9490.69 17561 97.22 18064 100.00

Jackknife Replicate Weight 5

 Cumulative Cumulative

LREPWT5 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------------

 0 108 0.60 108 0.60

52.86 - 5460.91 17956 99.40 18064 100.00

Jackknife Replicate Weight 6

 Cumulative Cumulative

LREPWT6 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------------

 0 383 2.12 383 2.12

52.76 - 5535.56 17681 97.88 18064 100.00
Linked Weights File

Jackknife Replicate Weight 7

 Cumulative Cumulative

LREPWT7 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------------

 0 332 1.84 332 1.84

52.86 - 5475.28 17732 98.16 18064 100.00

Jackknife Replicate Weight 8

 Cumulative Cumulative

LREPWT8 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------------

 0 157 0.87 157 0.87

52.86 - 5569.74 17907 99.13 18064 100.00

Jackknife Replicate Weight 9

 Cumulative Cumulative

LREPWT9 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------------

 0 456 2.52 456 2.52

52.82 - 5473.49 17608 97.48 18064 100.00

Jackknife Replicate Weight 10

 Cumulative Cumulative

LREPWT10 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------------

 0 288 1.59 288 1.59

52.96 - 6591.32 17776 98.41 18064 100.00
Linked Weights File

Jackknife Replicate Weight 11

 Cumulative Cumulative

LREPWT11 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------------

 0 120 0.66 120 0.66

52.86 - 5514.49 17944 99.34 18064 100.00

Jackknife Replicate Weight 12

 Cumulative Cumulative

LREPWT12 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------------

 0 192 1.06 192 1.06

52.86 - 6609.54 17872 98.94 18064 100.00

Jackknife Replicate Weight 13

 Cumulative Cumulative

LREPWT13 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------------

52.86 - 5520.60 18064 100.00 18064 100.00

Jackknife Replicate Weight 14

 Cumulative Cumulative

LREPWT14 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------------

 0 444 2.46 444 2.46

41.80 - 5573.35 17620 97.54 18064 100.00
Linked Weights File

Jackknife Replicate Weight 15

 Cumulative Cumulative

LREPWT15 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------------

 0 466 2.58 466 2.58

46.30 - 5743.19 17598 97.42 18064 100.00

Jackknife Replicate Weight 16

 Cumulative Cumulative

LREPWT16 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------------

 0 268 1.48 268 1.48

49.87 - 5514.28 17796 98.52 18064 100.00

Jackknife Replicate Weight 17

 Cumulative Cumulative

LREPWT17 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------------

 0 275 1.52 275 1.52

55.10 - 5345.94 17789 98.48 18064 100.00

Jackknife Replicate Weight 18

 Cumulative Cumulative

LREPWT18 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------------

 0 192 1.06 192 1.06

54.74 - 6341.75 17872 98.94 18064 100.00
Linked Weights File

Jackknife Replicate Weight 19

 Cumulative Cumulative

LREPWT19 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------------

52.85 - 5494.41 18064 100.00 18064 100.00

Jackknife Replicate Weight 20

 Cumulative Cumulative

LREPWT20 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------------

 0 19 0.11 19 0.11

53.13 - 5345.77 18045 99.89 18064 100.00

Jackknife Replicate Weight 21

 Cumulative Cumulative

LREPWT21 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------------

 0 169 0.94 169 0.94

52.68 - 5495.25 17895 99.06 18064 100.00

Jackknife Replicate Weight 22

 Cumulative Cumulative

LREPWT22 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------------

52.86 - 5685.54 18064 100.00 18064 100.00

Jackknife Replicate Weight 23

 Cumulative Cumulative

LREPWT23 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------------

 0 192 1.06 192 1.06

52.71 - 5916.48 17872 98.94 18064 100.00
Linked Weights File

Jackknife Replicate Weight 24

 Cumulative Cumulative

LREPWT24 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------------

 0 165 0.91 165 0.91

52.86 - 5399.35 17899 99.09 18064 100.00

Jackknife Replicate Weight 25

 Cumulative Cumulative

LREPWT25 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------------

 0 183 1.01 183 1.01

52.87 - 6015.81 17881 98.99 18064 100.00

Jackknife Replicate Weight 26

 Cumulative Cumulative

LREPWT26 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------------

 0 197 1.09 197 1.09

52.86 - 5310.19 17867 98.91 18064 100.00

Jackknife Replicate Weight 27

 Cumulative Cumulative

LREPWT27 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------------

 0 188 1.04 188 1.04

52.86 - 5644.68 17876 98.96 18064 100.00
Linked Weights File

Jackknife Replicate Weight 28

 Cumulative Cumulative

LREPWT28 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------------

 0 99 0.55 99 0.55

52.86 - 5493.88 17965 99.45 18064 100.00

Jackknife Replicate Weight 29

 Cumulative Cumulative

LREPWT29 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------------

 0 182 1.01 182 1.01

52.86 - 5503.26 17882 98.99 18064 100.00

Jackknife Replicate Weight 30

 Cumulative Cumulative

LREPWT30 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------------

 0 174 0.96 174 0.96

52.86 - 5480.80 17890 99.04 18064 100.00

Jackknife Replicate Weight 31

 Cumulative Cumulative

LREPWT31 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------------

 0 225 1.25 225 1.25

52.86 - 5493.58 17839 98.75 18064 100.00
Linked Weights File

Jackknife Replicate Weight 32

 Cumulative Cumulative

LREPWT32 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------------

 0 100 0.55 100 0.55

51.51 - 5488.34 17964 99.45 18064 100.00

Jackknife Replicate Weight 33

 Cumulative Cumulative

LREPWT33 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------------

 0 133 0.74 133 0.74

56.08 - 5631.76 17931 99.26 18064 100.00

Jackknife Replicate Weight 34

 Cumulative Cumulative

LREPWT34 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------------

 0 213 1.18 213 1.18

53.75 - 5678.32 17851 98.82 18064 100.00

Jackknife Replicate Weight 35

 Cumulative Cumulative

LREPWT35 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------------

 0 214 1.18 214 1.18

53.74 - 5513.29 17850 98.82 18064 100.00
Linked Weights File

Jackknife Replicate Weight 36

 Cumulative Cumulative

LREPWT36 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------------

 0 76 0.42 76 0.42

47.39 - 5299.78 17988 99.58 18064 100.00

Jackknife Replicate Weight 37

 Cumulative Cumulative

LREPWT37 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------------

 0 189 1.05 189 1.05

55.23 - 5439.74 17875 98.95 18064 100.00

Jackknife Replicate Weight 38

 Cumulative Cumulative

LREPWT38 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------------

 0 161 0.89 161 0.89

52.91 - 5467.29 17903 99.11 18064 100.00

Jackknife Replicate Weight 39

 Cumulative Cumulative

LREPWT39 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------------

 0 160 0.89 160 0.89

52.54 - 5489.96 17904 99.11 18064 100.00
Linked Weights File

Jackknife Replicate Weight 40

 Cumulative Cumulative

LREPWT40 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------------

 0 286 1.58 286 1.58

53.51 - 5664.48 17778 98.42 18064 100.00

Jackknife Replicate Weight 41

 Cumulative Cumulative

LREPWT41 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------------

 0 176 0.97 176 0.97

54.28 - 5272.77 17888 99.03 18064 100.00

Jackknife Replicate Weight 42

 Cumulative Cumulative

LREPWT42 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------------

 0 25 0.14 25 0.14

52.65 - 5603.22 18039 99.86 18064 100.00

Jackknife Replicate Weight 43

 Cumulative Cumulative

LREPWT43 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------------

 0 18 0.10 18 0.10

52.92 - 5529.04 18046 99.90 18064 100.00
Linked Weights File

Jackknife Replicate Weight 44

 Cumulative Cumulative

LREPWT44 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------------

52.71 - 5571.30 18064 100.00 18064 100.00

Jackknife Replicate Weight 45

 Cumulative Cumulative

LREPWT45 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------------

 0 83 0.46 83 0.46

52.81 - 7571.27 17981 99.54 18064 100.00

Jackknife Replicate Weight 46

 Cumulative Cumulative

LREPWT46 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

---------------------------------------------------------------------

50.28 - 10615.23 18064 100.00 18064 100.00

Jackknife Replicate Weight 47

 Cumulative Cumulative

LREPWT47 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------------

 0 145 0.80 145 0.80

53.26 - 6035.17 17919 99.20 18064 100.00

Jackknife Replicate Weight 48

 Cumulative Cumulative

LREPWT48 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------------

52.86 - 5493.88 18064 100.00 18064 100.00
Linked Weights File

Jackknife Replicate Weight 49

 Cumulative Cumulative

LREPWT49 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------------

52.86 - 5493.88 18064 100.00 18064 100.00

Jackknife Replicate Weight 50

 Cumulative Cumulative

LREPWT50 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------------

52.86 - 5493.88 18064 100.00 18064 100.00

Jackknife Replicate Weight 51

 Cumulative Cumulative

LREPWT51 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------------

52.86 - 5493.88 18064 100.00 18064 100.00

Jackknife Replicate Weight 52

 Cumulative Cumulative

LREPWT52 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------------

52.86 - 5493.88 18064 100.00 18064 100.00

Jackknife Replicate Weight 53

 Cumulative Cumulative

LREPWT53 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------------

52.86 - 5493.88 18064 100.00 18064 100.00
Linked Weights File

Jackknife Replicate Weight 54

 Cumulative Cumulative

LREPWT54 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------------

52.86 - 5493.88 18064 100.00 18064 100.00

Jackknife Replicate Weight 55

 Cumulative Cumulative

LREPWT55 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------------

52.86 - 5493.88 18064 100.00 18064 100.00

Jackknife Replicate Weight 56

 Cumulative Cumulative

LREPWT56 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------------

52.86 - 5493.88 18064 100.00 18064 100.00

Jackknife Replicate Weight 57

 Cumulative Cumulative

LREPWT57 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------------

52.86 - 5493.88 18064 100.00 18064 100.00

Jackknife Replicate Weight 58

 Cumulative Cumulative

LREPWT58 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------------

52.86 - 5493.88 18064 100.00 18064 100.00
Linked Weights File

Jackknife Replicate Weight 59

 Cumulative Cumulative

LREPWT59 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------------

52.86 - 5493.88 18064 100.00 18064 100.00

Jackknife Replicate Weight 60

 Cumulative Cumulative

LREPWT60 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------------

52.86 - 5493.88 18064 100.00 18064 100.00

Jackknife Replicate Weight 61

 Cumulative Cumulative

LREPWT61 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------------

52.86 - 5493.88 18064 100.00 18064 100.00

Jackknife Replicate Weight 62

 Cumulative Cumulative

LREPWT62 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------------

52.86 - 5493.88 18064 100.00 18064 100.00

Primary Sampling Unit

 Cumulative Cumulative

PSU Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------

103-494 18064 100.00 18064 100.00
Linked Weights File

School ID (within PSU)

 Cumulative Cumulative

SCHOOL Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------

3011-3574 18064 100.00 18064 100.00

Student ID (within School)

 Cumulative Cumulative

STUDENT Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-------------------------------------------------------------

Linked 18064 100.00 18064 100.00

NAEP Subject

 Cumulative Cumulative

SUBJECT Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------------

1-50-minute writing 2296 12.71 2296 12.71

2-Reading 4922 27.25 7218 39.96

3-Civics 3095 17.13 10313 57.09

4-25-minute writing 7751 42.91 18064 100.00

Student Exit Status

 Cumulative Cumulative

EXSTAT Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

1-Standard Diploma 16638 92.11 16638 92.11

2-Honors Diploma 999 5.53 17637 97.64

3-Spec Ed Diploma 158 0.87 17795 98.51

4-Cert of Attendance 147 0.81 17942 99.32

5-Cert of Completion 122 0.68 18064 100.00
Linked Weights File

Imputation flag for Grad Stat

 Cumulative Cumulative

GRAD_IMP Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-------------------------------------------------------------

No 18064 100.00 18064 100.00

Student Race/ethnicity

 Cumulative Cumulative

DRVDRACE Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------------

1-White 10787 59.72 10787 59.72

2-Black 3361 18.61 14148 78.32

3-Hispanic 2589 14.33 16737 92.65

4-Asian/Pacific Isl 1143 6.33 17880 98.98

5-American Indian 171 0.95 18051 99.93

6-Other 13 0.07 18064 100.00

Imputation flag for Der_Race

 Cumulative Cumulative

RACE_IMP Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-------------------------------------------------------------

No 18057 99.96 18057 99.96

Yes 7 0.04 18064 100.00

Student Grade Level in 1997-98

 Cumulative Cumulative

GRADE Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------

Twelfth Grade 18064 100.00 18064 100.00
Linked Weights File

Student Gender

Cumulative Cumulative

SEX Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-----------------------------------------------------------------

1-Male 8523 47.18 8523 47.18

2-Female 9539 52.81 18062 99.99

Not reported 2 0.01 18064 100.00

Student Month Born

 Cumulative Cumulative

BIRTHMO Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------

January 1458 8.07 1458 8.07

February 1372 7.60 2830 15.67

March 1421 7.87 4251 23.53

April 1455 8.05 5706 31.59

May 1454 8.05 7160 39.64

June 1495 8.28 8655 47.91

July 1566 8.67 10221 56.58

August 1656 9.17 11877 65.75

September 1674 9.27 13551 75.02

October 1607 8.90 15158 83.91

November 1395 7.72 16553 91.64

December 1511 8.36 18064 100.00

Student Year Born

 Cumulative Cumulative

BIRTHYR Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------

1976 17 0.09 17 0.09

1977 77 0.43 94 0.52

1978 555 3.07 649 3.59

1979 5873 32.51 6522 36.10

1980 11347 62.82 17869 98.92

1981 188 1.04 18057 99.96

1982 5 0.03 18062 99.99

1983 2 0.01 18064 100.00
Linked Weights File

Imputation flag for birthdate

 Cumulative Cumulative

BIRT_IMP Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-------------------------------------------------------------

No 18043 99.88 18043 99.88

Yes 21 0.12 18064 100.00

Student Disability Status

 Cumulative Cumulative

HCFLAG Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-------------------------------------------------------------------

0-Not Disabled 461 2.55 461 2.55

1-Disabled 776 4.30 1237 6.85

9-Not Reported 16827 93.15 18064 100.00

Disabling Condition

 Cumulative Cumulative

HCTYPE Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

00-Not disabled 461 2.55 461 2.55

01-Multidisabled 74 0.41 535 2.96

02-Learning disabled 502 2.78 1037 5.74

03-Hearing impaired 9 0.05 1046 5.79

04-Visual impaired 6 0.03 1052 5.82

05-Speech impaired 4 0.02 1056 5.85

06-Mental impaired 119 0.66 1175 6.50

07-Emotional disturb 23 0.13 1198 6.63

08-Orthopedic impair 8 0.04 1206 6.68

09-Traumatic brain I 4 0.02 1210 6.70

10-Other 27 0.15 1237 6.85

99-Not Reported 16827 93.15 18064 100.00

Jackknife Replicate Group Number 1

 Cumulative Cumulative

REPGRP1 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------

1 - 47 18064 100.00 18064 100.00
Linked Weights File

Jackknife Dropout Group Number 1

 Cumulative Cumulative

DROPGRP Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------

1 - 2 18064 100.00 18064 100.00

Academic Track

 Cumulative Cumulative

ACAD_TRK Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-----------------------------------------------------------------

1-Academic 12677 70.18 12677 70.18

2-Vocational 606 3.35 13283 73.53

3-Both 3769 20.86 17052 94.40

4-Neither 1012 5.60 18064 100.00

Community Type

 Cumulative Cumulative

TYPLOC_R Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

1-Large city 2578 14.27 2578 14.27

2-Mid-size city 3360 18.60 5938 32.87

3-Urban fringe of large 4765 26.38 10703 59.25

4-Urban fringe of mid 2304 12.75 13007 72.01

5-Large town 106 0.59 13113 72.59

6-Small town 2622 14.52 15735 87.11

7-Other rural 2329 12.89 18064 100.00

NAEP Region

 Cumulative Cumulative

NAEPREGN Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

----------------------------------------------------------------

1-Northeast 2834 15.69 2834 15.69

2-Southeast 5202 28.80 8036 44.49

3-Central 3700 20.48 11736 64.97

4-West 6328 35.03 18064 100.00
Linked Weights File

Public/Nonpublic School

 Cumulative Cumulative

PUBPRIV Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

----------------------------------------------------------------

1-Public 17302 95.78 17302 95.78

2-Nonpublic 762 4.22 18064 100.00
Appendix E

Codebook for SD/LEP Student Questionnaire File
 1998 HIGH SCHOOL TRANSCRIPT STUDY

 CODEBOOK FOR SD/LEP QUESTIONNAIRE

 January 1, 2000

 Question Column

 Name Number(s)

 ________ _________

 PSU 0001-0003 Primary Sampling Unit

 _____________________

 103-494 = PSU

 SCHOOL 0004-0007 School ID (within PSU)

 ______________________

 3011-3574 = School (within PSU)

 NOTE : Both PSU and school ID must be

 combined to uniquely identify a school within

 the data file.

 STUDENT 0008-0017 Student ID (within School)

 __________________________

 0000000001-

 9899999999 = Student ID (NAEP Booklet

 Number)

 9900000000-

 9909999999 = Student ID (Student Not

 Linked to NAEP)

 NOTE : Student IDs are unique. ID's

 beginning with numbers less than 9, represent

 the NAEP booklet numbers used by these

 students. ID's beginning with 990 are

 students for whom no NAEP booklet number is

 available. Most of these students come from

 schools which did not participate in NAEP.

 The remainder are for students at NAEP schools

 for which a new sample of students was drawn

 for the transcript study.

 EXSTAT 0018 Student Exit Status

 ___________________

 1 = Standard Diploma

 2 = Honors Diploma

 3 = Diploma with Special

 Education Adjustments

 4 = Certificate of Attendance

5 = Certificate of Completion

 [1]
 Question Column

 Name Number(s)

 ________ _________

 DRVDRACE 0019 Student Race/ethnicity

 ______________________

 1 = White (Not Hispanic)

 2 = Black (Not Hispanic)

 3 = Hispanic (Mexican,

 Mexican-American, Chicano,

 Puerto Rican, Cuban, Other

 Spanish or Hispanic Descent)

 4 = Asian or Pacific Islander

 5 = American Indian or Alaskan

 Native

 6 = Other

 NOTE : For students who participated in NAEP,

 this variable comes from NAEP files. For

 other students, this variable was recorded

 during the transcript study. The NAEP data

 were reviewed during transcript collection and

 updated as necessary.

 SEX 0020 Student Gender

 ______________

 1 = Male

 2 = Female

 9 = Missing

 NOTE : For students who participated in NAEP,

 this variable comes from NAEP files. For

 other students, this variable was recorded

 during the transcript study. The NAEP data

 were reviewed during transcript collection and

 updated as necessary.

 BIRTHMO 0021-0022 Student Month Born

 __________________

 01-12 = Month Born

 99 = Missing

 NOTE : For students who participated in NAEP,

 this variable comes from NAEP files. For

 other students, this variable was recorded

 during the transcript study. The NAEP data

 were reviewed during transcript collection and

 updated as necessary.

 [2]
 Question Column

 Name Number(s)

 ________ _________

 BIRTHYR 0023-0024 Student Year Born

 _________________

 76-83 = Year Born

 99 = Missing

 NOTE : For students who participated in NAEP,

 this variable comes from NAEP files. For

 other students, this variable was recorded

 during the transcript study. The NAEP data

 were reviewed during transcript collection and

 updated as necessary.

 HCFLAG 0025 Student Disability Status

 _________________________

 0 = Not Disabled

 1 = Disabled

 3 = Unknown

 NOTE : HCFLAG is based on a determination of

 whether the student is disabled. If at least

 one item in the “Student with Disability”

 section was checked, then the HCFLAG was set

 to 1 (disabled).

 Q00 0026 Person Who Completed Questionnaire

 __________________________________

0 = Multiple persons

1 = Principal

2 = Special Education Teacher

3 = Bilingual Education Teacher

4 = Classroom Teacher

5 = Other person

8 = Not reported

 Q01 0027 Student Has a Physical/Mental Disability (SD)

 _____________________________________________

 0 = Multiple responses

1 = No

2 = Yes

8 = Not reported

9 = Unknown

 Q02 0028 Student Has Limited English Proficiency

 _______________________________________

0 = Multiple responses

1 = No

2 = Yes

8 = Not reported

9 = Unknown

 [3]
 Question Column

 Name Number(s)

 ________ _________

 Q03 0029-0030 Description of Student's Disability

 ___________________________________

 01 = Multidisabled

 02 = Learning disabled

 03 = Hearing impaired

 04 = Visual impaired

 05 = Speech impaired

 06 = Mental impaired

 07 = Emotionally disturbed

 08 = Orthopedically impaired

 09 = Traumatic brain injury

 10 = Other Disability

 99 = Not reported

 Q04 0031 Degree of Student's Disability

 ______________________________

 1 = Profound

 2 = Severe

 3 = Moderate

 4 = Mild

8 = Missing

9 = Unknown

 Q05 0032 Does student have an individual education plan (IEP)?

 _____________________________________________________

 0 = Multiple response

 1 = Yes, student has IEP

 2 = Yes, student has IEP equivalent

3 = No

8 = Not reported

9 = Unknown

 Q06 0033 Does IEP team determine student NAEP participation?

 ___________________________________________________

0 = Multiple responses

1 = No

2 = Yes

8 = Not reported

9 = Unknown

 Q07 0034 Does student’s cognitive function prevent NAEP participation?

 _____________________________________________________________

0 = Multiple responses

1 = No

2 = Yes

8 = Not reported

9 = Unknown

 [4]
 Question Column

 Name Number(s)

 ________ _________

 Q08 0035-0036 Percentage of Time Student Mainstreamed

 In Academic Subjects?

 _____________________

0 = Multiple responses

1 = 0%

2 = 1 – 24%

3 = 25 – 49%

4 = 50 – 74%

5 = 75 – 99%

6 = 100%

77 = Don’t Know

88 = Not reported

99 = Unknown

 Q09 0037-0038 Percentage of Total School Day Student Spends

 In Special Education Program?

 _____________________________

0 = Multiple responses

1 = 0%

2 = 1 – 24%

3 = 25 – 49%

4 = 50 – 74%

5 = 75 – 99%

6 = 100%

77 = Don’t Know

88 = Not reported

99 = Unknown

 Q10 0039-0040 In Which Areas Student Receiving Special Instruction?

 _____________________________________________________

00 = Multiple responses

01 = Language development

02 = Reading

03 = Mathematics

04 = Speech

05 = Self-control and deportment

06 = Personal care and basic life skills

07 = Vocational education

08 = Other

09 = No special education instruction

88 = Not reported

 Q11 0041-0042 Grade Level Receiving Reading/Language Arts?

 ____________________________________________

 00 = Multiple response

 01 = Lower-Kindergarten

 02 = Kindergarten

 03 = Grade 1

 04 = Grade 2

 05 = Grade 3

 06 = Grade 4

 07 = Grade 5

 08 = Grade 6

 09 = Grade 7

 10 = Grade 8

 11 = Grade 9

12 = Grade 10

13 = Grade 11

14 = Grade 12

 15 = Not taking subject

 77 = Don’t know

 88 = Not reported

 99 = Unknown

 [5]
 Question Column

 Name Number(s)

 ________ _________

 Q12 0043-0044 Grade Level Receiving Mathematics?

 __________________________________

 00 = Multiple response

 01 = Lower-Kindergarten

 02 = Kindergarten

 03 = Grade 1

 04 = Grade 2

 05 = Grade 3

 06 = Grade 4

 07 = Grade 5

 08 = Grade 6

 09 = Grade 7

10 = Grade 8

11 = Grade 9

12 = Grade 10

13 = Grade 11

14 = Grade 12

 15 = Not taking subject

 77 = Don’t know

 88 = Not reported

 99 = Unknown

 Q13 0045 Any Accommodations/Adaptations Used For Achievement

 Testing for this Student?

 _________________________

0 = Cannot be tested

1 = No

2 = Yes

8 = Not reported

9 = Unknown

 Q14 0046-0047 Presentation Accommodations Used?

 _________________________________

00 = Multiple response

01 = Read directions aloud

02 = Read problems aloud

03 = Signing of directions

04 = Use of taped version of test

05 = Assistance with interpretation of directions

06 = Braille edition of test

07 = Large-print edition of test

08 = Use of magnifying equipment

09 = Other presentation accommodation

88 = Not reported

 Q15 0048-0049 Response Accommodations Used?

 _____________________________

00 = Multiple response

01 = Response in Braille

02 = Response in sign language

03 = Oral responses

04 = Pointing to answers

05 = Tape recording of answers

06 = Use of computer to respond

07 = Use of typewriter to respond

08 = Use of calculator to respond

09 = Use of template to respond

10 = Use of specially designed writing tool

11 = Other response accommodation

88 = Not reported

 [6]
 Question Column

 Name Number(s)

 ________ _________

 Q16 0050 Setting Accommodation Used?

 ___________________________

0 = Multiple response

1 = Tested in small group

2 = Tested individually

3 = Other setting accommodation

8 = Not reported

 Q17 0051 Timing Accommodation Used?

 __________________________

0 = Multiple response

1 = Extended time

2 = More breaks during test

3 = Test sessions over several days

4 = Other timing accommodations

8 = Not reported

 Q18 0052 Could Student Participate in NAEP Assessments

 Without Accommodations or Adaptations?

 ______________________________________

0 = Multiple response

1 = No

2 = Yes

8 = Not reported

9 = Unknown

 Q19 0053 If Accommodations or Adaptations Available, Would

 Student Participate in NAEP Assessments?

 ________________________________________

0 = Multiple response

1 = Without accommodations or adaptations

2 = With accommodations or adaptations

3 = Student can not participate

 in NAEP assessments

8 = Not reported

9 = Unknown

 Q20 0054 How Long Has Student Lived in United States?

 ____________________________________________

0 = Multiple response

1 = All his/her life

2 = More than five years but not

 all his/her life

3 = 3 – 5 years

4 = Less than 3 years

7 = Don’t know

8 = Not reported

9 = Unknown

 [7]
 Question Column

 Name Number(s)

 ________ _________

 Q21 0055 What is Student’s First or Native Language?

 ___________________________________________

1 = Spanish

2 = Another language

8 = Not reported

9 = Unknown

 Q22 0056 Since Reaching School Age, How Regularly Student

 Attended School in United States or Another Country?

 ____________________________________________________

1 = Continuously

2 = Intermittently

3 = Little or not at all

7 = Don’t know

8 = Not reported

9 = Unknown

 Q23 0057 How Many Years Student Enrolled in School Where English

 Primary Language of Instruction?

 ________________________________

1 = Not applicable; Current school’s

 primary language of instruction

 not English

2 = 1 year

3 = 2 years

4 = 3 years

5 = 4 or more years

7 = Don’t know

8 = Not reported

9 = Unknown

 Q24 0058 Complete School Years Student Receiving Academic

 Instruction in English?

 _______________________

1 = Not applicable; Student does not

 receive academic instruction

 primarily in English

2 = 1 year

3 = 2 years

4 = 3 years

5 = 4 or more years

7 = Don’t know

8 = Not reported

9 = Unknown

 Q25 0059 How Many Years Student Received Academic Instruction

 Designed for Students With LEP?

 _______________________________

1 = Not applicable; Student does not

 receive academic instruction designed

 for LEP students

2 = 1 year

3 = 2 years

4 = 3 years

5 = 4 or more years

7 = Don’t know

8 = Not reported

9 = Unknown

 [8]
 Question Column

 Name Number(s)

 ________ _________

 Q26 0060 In What Language Has Student Received

 LEP Instruction?

 ________________

1 = English only

2 = Primarily English, with some instruction

 in first language

3 = About equally in English and in first

 language

4 = Primarily in first language, with some

 instruction in English

5 = First language only

7 = Don’t know

8 = Not reported

9 = Unknown

 Q27 0061 In What Language Student Best Demonstrates Reading Ability?

 ___________________________________________________________

0 = Multiple response

1 = English

2 = Spanish

3 = Another language

7 = Don’t know

8 = Not reported

9 = Unknown

 Q28 0062 In What Language Student Best Demonstrates Writing Ability?

 ___________________________________________________________

0 = Multiple response

1 = English

2 = Spanish

3 = Another language

7 = Don’t know

8 = Not reported

9 = Unknown

 Q29 0063 Percentage of Student’s Academic Instruction

 Provided in Native Language This School Year?

 _____________________________________________

1 = 0%

2 = 1 – 24%

3 = 25 – 49%

4 = 50 – 74%

5 = 75 – 99%

6 = 100%

8 = Not reported

9 = Unknown

 Q30 0064 Student Received Any Reading/Language Arts

 Instruction During School Year?

 _______________________________

0 = Multiple response

1 = Special designed instruction

 in English

2 = Native language instruction

3 = Mainstreamed with no special

 designed instruction

8 = Not reported

9 = Unknown

 [9]
 Question Column

 Name Number(s)

 ________ _________

 Q31 0065 Student Received Any Mathematics

 Instruction During School Year?

 _______________________________

1 = Multiple response

2 = Special designed instruction

 in English

3 = Native language instruction

4 = Mainstreamed with no special

 designed instruction

8 = Not reported

9 = Unknown

 Q32 0066-0067 What Grade Level of Instruction Student Receiving

 Reading/Language Arts?

 ______________________

00 = Multiple response

01 = Native language only

02 = Lower-Kindergarten

03 = Kindergarten

04 = Grade 1

05 = Grade 2

06 = Grade 3

07 = Grade 4

08 = Grade 5

09 = Grade 6

10 = Grade 7

11 = Grade 8

12 = Grade 9

13 = Grade 10

14 = Grade 11

15 = Grade 12

88 = Not reported

99 = Unknown

 Q33 0068-0069 What Grade Level of Instruction Student Receiving

 Mathematics?

 ____________

00 = Multiple response

01 = Native language only

02 = Lower-Kindergarten

03 = Kindergarten

04 = Grade 1

05 = Grade 2

06 = Grade 3

07 = Grade 4

08 = Grade 5

09 = Grade 6

10 = Grade 7

11 = Grade 8

12 = Grade 9

13 = Grade 10

14 = Grade 11

15 = Grade 12

88 = Not reported

99 = Unknown

 [10]
 Question Column

 Name Number(s)

 ________ _________

 Q34 0070 Proficiency in Understanding English

 ____________________________________

 0 = Multiple response

 1 = Good (LEP advanced)

 2 = Fair (LEP intermediate)

 3 = Poor (LEP beginning)

 4 = No Proficiency

7 = Don't Know

 8 = Missing

9 = Unknown

 Q35 0071 Proficiency in Speaking English

 _______________________________

 0 = Multiple response

 1 = Good (LEP advanced)

 2 = Fair (LEP intermediate)

 3 = Poor (LEP beginning)

 4 = No Proficiency

7 = Don't Know

 8 = Missing

9 = Unknown

 Q36 0072 Proficiency in Reading English

 ______________________________

 0 = Multiple response

 1 = Good (LEP advanced)

 2 = Fair (LEP intermediate)

 3 = Poor (LEP beginning)

 4 = No Proficiency

7 = Don't Know

 8 = Missing

9 = Unknown

 Q37 0073 Proficiency in Writing English

 ______________________________

 0 = Multiple response

 1 = Good (LEP advanced)

 2 = Fair (LEP intermediate)

 3 = Poor (LEP beginning)

 4 = No Proficiency

7 = Don't Know

 8 = Missing

9 = Unknown

 Q38 0074 Any Accommodations or Adaptations Used For

 Achievement Testing For Student?

 ________________________________

1 = Student can not be tested

2 = No

3 = Yes

8 = Not reported

9 = Unknown

 [11]
 Question Column

 Name Number(s)

 ________ _________

 Q39 0075 Which Accommodations or Adaptations Used For

 Achievement Testing For Student?

 ________________________________

0 = Multiple response

1 = Native language version of test

2 = Word lists or glossaries

3 = English / native language dictionary

4 = Help from a native speaker in

 interpreting directions and questions

5 = Directions read aloud in English

6 = Questions read aloud in English

7 = Extended time

8 = Other

9 = Not reported

 Q40 0076 Could Student Participate Meaningfully in NAEP Assessment

 Without Adaptations or Accommodations?

 ______________________________________

0 = Multiple response

1 = No

2 = Yes

8 = Not reported

9 = Unknown

 Q41 0077 If Accommodations/Adaptations Available, How Would

 Student Participate in NAEP Assessment?

 _______________________________________

0 = Multiple response

1 = In English without accommodations

 or adaptations

2 = In English with accommodations

 or adaptations

3 = In his/her native language

4 = In his/her native language with

 accommodations or adaptations

5 = Would not participate

8 = Not reported

9 = Unknown

 [12]
1998 HIGH SCHOOL TRANSCRIPT STUDY

SD/LEP File

Primary Sampling Unit

 Cumulative Cumulative

PSU Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------

103-494 1237 100.00 1237 100.00

School ID (within PSU)

 Cumulative Cumulative

SCHOOL Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------

3011-3574 1237 100.00 1237 100.00

Student ID (within School)

 Cumulative Cumulative

STUDENT Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-------------------------------------------------------------

Linked 1237 100.00 1237 100.00

Student Exit Status

 Cumulative Cumulative

EXSTAT Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

1-Standard Diploma 1034 83.59 1034 83.59

2-Honors Diploma 21 1.70 1055 85.29

3-Spec Ed Diploma 130 10.51 1185 95.80

4-Cert of Attendance 47 3.80 1232 99.60

5-Cert of Completion 5 0.40 1237 100.00
SD/LEP File

Student Race/Ethnicity

 Cumulative Cumulative

DRVDRACE Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------------

1-White 573 46.32 573 46.32

2-Black 216 17.46 789 63.78

3-Hispanic 331 26.76 1120 90.54

4-Asian/Pacific Isl 102 8.25 1222 98.79

5-American Indian 13 1.05 1235 99.84

6-Other 2 0.16 1237 100.00

Student Gender

 Cumulative Cumulative

SEX Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

---------------------------------------------------------------

1-Male 737 59.58 737 59.58

2-Female 499 40.34 1236 99.92

9-Missing 1 0.08 1237 100.00

Student Month Born

 Cumulative Cumulative

BIRTHMO Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------

January 101 8.16 101 8.16

February 87 7.03 188 15.20

March 88 7.11 276 22.31

April 88 7.11 364 29.43

May 112 9.05 476 38.48

June 97 7.84 573 46.32

July 107 8.65 680 54.97

August 120 9.70 800 64.67

September 120 9.70 920 74.37

October 118 9.54 1038 83.91

November 103 8.33 1141 92.24

December 96 7.76 1237 100.00
SD/LEP File

Student Year Born

 Cumulative Cumulative

BIRTHYR Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------

1976 13 1.05 13 1.05

1977 40 3.23 53 4.28

1978 153 12.37 206 16.65

1979 592 47.86 798 64.51

1980 427 34.52 1225 99.03

1981 11 0.89 1236 99.92

1982 1 0.08 1237 100.00

Student Disability Status

 Cumulative Cumulative

HCFLAG Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

---------------------------------------------------------------------

Not Disabled 461 37.27 461 37.27

Disabled 776 62.73 1237 100.00

Person Who Completed Questionnaire

 Cumulative Cumulative

Q00 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

1-Principal 34 2.75 34 2.75

2-Spec Ed Teacher 476 38.48 510 41.23

3-Bilingual Ed Teacher 49 3.96 559 45.19

4-Classroom Teacher 44 3.56 603 48.75

5-Other 227 18.35 830 67.10

8-Not reported 407 32.90 1237 100.00
SD/LEP File

STUDENT HAS PHYSICAL/MENTAL DISABILITY

 Cumulative Cumulative

Q01 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-------------------------------------------------------------------

1-No 304 24.58 304 24.58

2-Yes 727 58.77 1031 83.35

8-Not reported 164 13.26 1195 96.60

9-Unknown 42 3.40 1237 100.00

STUDENT HAS LIMITED ENGLISH PROFICIENCY

 Cumulative Cumulative

Q02 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-------------------------------------------------------------------

1-No 597 48.26 597 48.26

2-Yes 271 21.91 868 70.17

8-Not reported 327 26.43 1195 96.60

9-Unknown 42 3.40 1237 100.00

DESCRIPTION OF DISABILITY

 Cumulative Cumulative

Q03 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

01-Multidisabled 74 5.98 74 5.98

02-Learning disabled 502 40.58 576 46.56

03-Hearing impaired 9 0.73 585 47.29

04-Visual impaired 6 0.49 591 47.78

05-Speech impaired 4 0.32 595 48.10

06-Mental impaired 119 9.62 714 57.72

07-Emotional disturbed 23 1.86 737 59.58

08-Orthopedic impaired 8 0.65 745 60.23

09-Traumatic brain injury 4 0.32 749 60.55

10-Other 27 2.18 776 62.73

99-Not Reported 461 37.27 1237 100.00
SD/LEP File

DEGREE OF STUDENT'S DISABILITY

 Cumulative Cumulative

Q04 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------

Profound 21 1.70 21 1.70

Severe 125 10.11 146 11.80

Moderate 251 20.29 397 32.09

Mild 373 30.15 770 62.25

Missing 423 34.20 1193 96.44

Unknown 44 3.56 1237 100.00

STUDENT HAS INDIVIDUAL EDUCATION PLAN

 Cumulative Cumulative

Q05 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

----------------------------------------------------------------------

0-Multiple resp 2 0.16 2 0.16

1-Yes, IEP 754 60.95 756 61.12

2-Yes, equivalent 10 0.81 766 61.92

3-No 17 1.37 783 63.30

8-Not reported 412 33.31 1195 96.60

Unknown 42 3.40 1237 100.00

IEP TEAM DETERMINES PARTICIPATION

 Cumulative Cumulative

Q06 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-------------------------------------------------------------------

1-No 536 43.33 536 43.33

2-Yes 237 19.16 773 62.49

8-Not reported 422 34.11 1195 96.60

9-Unknown 42 3.40 1237 100.00
SD/LEP File

COGNITIVE FUNCTION PREVENTS PARTICIPATE

 Cumulative Cumulative

Q07 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-------------------------------------------------------------------

1-No 575 46.48 575 46.48

2-Yes 205 16.57 780 63.06

8-Not reported 415 33.55 1195 96.60

9-Unknown 42 3.40 1237 100.00

PERCENT TIME MAINSTREAMED IN ACADEMICS

 Cumulative Cumulative

Q08 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------

Multiple resp 2 0.16 2 0.16

0% 127 10.27 129 10.43

1-24% 87 7.03 216 17.46

25-49% 68 5.50 284 22.96

50-74% 109 8.81 393 31.77

75-99% 223 18.03 616 49.80

100% 161 13.02 777 62.81

Don't know 9 0.73 786 63.54

Not reported 409 33.06 1195 96.60

Unknown 42 3.40 1237 100.00

PERCENT SCHOOL DAY IN SPECIAL ED PROGRAM

 Cumulative Cumulative

Q09 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------

Multiple resp 1 0.08 1 0.08

0% 98 7.92 99 8.00

1-24% 255 20.61 354 28.62

25-49% 134 10.83 488 39.45

50-74% 108 8.73 596 48.18

75-99% 92 7.44 688 55.62

100% 90 7.28 778 62.89

Don't know 11 0.89 789 63.78

Not reported 406 32.82 1195 96.60

Unknown 42 3.40 1237 100.00
SD/LEP File

Instructed in Special Education Program

 Cumulative Cumulative

Q10 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

---------------------------------------------------------------------

00-Multiple resp 464 37.51 464 37.51

01-Language dev 32 2.59 496 40.10

02-Reading 47 3.80 543 43.90

03-Mathematics 29 2.34 572 46.24

04-Speech 5 0.40 577 46.65

05-Self-control 5 0.40 582 47.05

06-Personal care 1 0.08 583 47.13

07-Vocational Ed 26 2.10 609 49.23

08-Other 79 6.39 688 55.62

09-No special ed 89 7.19 777 62.81

88-Not reported 460 37.19 1237 100.00

GRADE LEVEL RECEIVING READING/LANGUAGE

 Cumulative Cumulative

Q11 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

00-Multiple response 6 0.49 6 0.49

01-Lower-Kindergarten 5 0.40 11 0.89

02-Kindergarten 10 0.81 21 1.70

03-Grade 1 25 2.02 46 3.72

04-Grade 2 24 1.94 70 5.66

05-Grade 3 53 4.28 123 9.94

06-Grade 4 48 3.88 171 13.82

07-Grade 5 45 3.64 216 17.46

08-Grade 6 50 4.04 266 21.50

09-Grade 7 31 2.51 297 24.01

10-Grade 8 26 2.10 323 26.11

11-Grade 9 42 3.40 365 29.51

12-Grade 10 29 2.34 394 31.85

13-Grade 11 25 2.02 419 33.87

14-Grade 12 262 21.18 681 55.05

15-Not taking subject 65 5.25 746 60.31

77-Don't know 40 3.23 786 63.54

88-Not reported 409 33.06 1195 96.60

Unknown 42 3.40 1237 100.00
SD/LEP File

GRADE LEVEL RECEIVING MATHEMATICS

 Cumulative Cumulative

Q12 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

01-Lower-Kindergarten 6 0.49 6 0.49

02-Kindergarten 11 0.89 17 1.37

03-Grade 1 15 1.21 32 2.59

04-Grade 2 21 1.70 53 4.28

05-Grade 3 46 3.72 99 8.00

06-Grade 4 32 2.59 131 10.59

07-Grade 5 27 2.18 158 12.77

08-Grade 6 29 2.34 187 15.12

09-Grade 7 16 1.29 203 16.41

10-Grade 8 23 1.86 226 18.27

11-Grade 9 31 2.51 257 20.78

12-Grade 10 35 2.83 292 23.61

13-Grade 11 49 3.96 341 27.57

14-Grade 12 124 10.02 465 37.59

15-Not taking subject 271 21.91 736 59.50

77-Don't know 48 3.88 784 63.38

88-Not reported 411 33.23 1195 96.60

Unknown 42 3.40 1237 100.00

ADAPTATIONS USED FOR ACHIEVEMENT TESTING

 Cumulative Cumulative

Q13 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

1-Cannot be tested 191 15.44 191 15.44

2-No 240 19.40 431 34.84

3-Yes 353 28.54 784 63.38

8-Not reported 411 33.23 1195 96.60

Unknown 42 3.40 1237 100.00
SD/LEP File

Presentation Accomodations

 Cumulative Cumulative

Q14 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

00-Multiple response 136 10.99 136 10.99

01-Read directions 65 5.25 201 16.25

02-Read problems 11 0.89 212 17.14

03-Sign directions 2 0.16 214 17.30

04-Taped test 3 0.24 217 17.54

05-Interpret directions 28 2.26 245 19.81

07-Large-print test 4 0.32 249 20.13

08-Magnifying equipment 1 0.08 250 20.21

09-Other 29 2.34 279 22.55

88-Not reported 958 77.45 1237 100.00

Response Accomodations

 Cumulative Cumulative

Q15 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

00-Multiple response 20 1.62 20 1.62

02-Sign language 2 0.16 22 1.78

03-Oral responses 10 0.81 32 2.59

06-Use computerer 7 0.57 39 3.15

08-Use calculator 44 3.56 83 6.71

10-Special writing tool 1 0.08 84 6.79

11-Other 45 3.64 129 10.43

88-Not reported 1108 89.57 1237 100.00

Setting Accomodations

 Cumulative Cumulative

Q16 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------------

0-Multiple response 49 3.96 49 3.96

1-Small group 220 17.78 269 21.75

2-Individually 28 2.26 297 24.01

3-Other 11 0.89 308 24.90

8-Not reported 929 75.10 1237 100.00
SD/LEP File

Timing Accomodations

 Cumulative Cumulative

Q17 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------------

0-Multiple response 106 8.57 106 8.57

1-Extend time 250 20.21 356 28.78

8-Not reported 881 71.22 1237 100.00

CAN PARTICIPATE IN NAEP WITHOUT ADAPT

 Cumulative Cumulative

Q18 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-------------------------------------------------------------------

1-No 431 34.84 431 34.84

2-Yes 336 27.16 767 62.00

8-Not reported 428 34.60 1195 96.60

9-Unknown 42 3.40 1237 100.00

HOW PARTICIPATE IN NAEP WITH SD ADAPT

 Cumulative Cumulative

Q19 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

1-Without adaptation 220 17.78 220 17.78

2-With adaptation 322 26.03 542 43.82

3-Cannot participate 225 18.19 767 62.00

8-Not reported 428 34.60 1195 96.60

Unknown 42 3.40 1237 100.00
SD/LEP File

HOW LONG STUDENT LIVED IN U.S.

 Cumulative Cumulative

Q20 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

1-All his/her life 74 5.98 74 5.98

2-More than 5 yrs 78 6.31 152 12.29

3-3-5 years 95 7.68 247 19.97

4-Less than 3 yrs 60 4.85 307 24.82

7-Don't know 34 2.75 341 27.57

8-Not reported 854 69.04 1195 96.60

Unknown 42 3.40 1237 100.00

STUDENT'S FIRST OR NATIVE LANGUAGE

 Cumulative Cumulative

Q21 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

1-Spanish 187 15.12 187 15.12

2-Another Language 127 10.27 314 25.38

8-Not reported 881 71.22 1195 96.60

Unknown 42 3.40 1237 100.00

SINCE SCHOOL AGE, HOW REGULAR ATTENDANCE

 Cumulative Cumulative

Q22 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

---------------------------------------------------------------------

1-Continuously 250 20.21 250 20.21

2-Intermittently 19 1.54 269 21.75

3-Little or none 6 0.49 275 22.23

7-Don't know 56 4.53 331 26.76

8-Not reported 864 69.85 1195 96.60

Unknown 42 3.40 1237 100.00
SD/LEP File

YEARS ENROLLED WHERE ENGLISH IS PRIMARY

 Cumulative Cumulative

Q23 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

----------------------------------------------------------------------

1-Not applicable 1 0.08 1 0.08

2-1 year 17 1.37 18 1.46

3-2 years 32 2.59 50 4.04

4-3 years 63 5.09 113 9.14

5-4 years or more 189 15.28 302 24.41

7-Don't know 24 1.94 326 26.35

8-Not reported 869 70.25 1195 96.60

Unknown 42 3.40 1237 100.00

YEARS RECEIVING INSTRUCTION IN ENGLISH

 Cumulative Cumulative

Q24 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

----------------------------------------------------------------------

1-Not applicable 6 0.49 6 0.49

2-1 year 24 1.94 30 2.43

3-2 years 48 3.88 78 6.31

4-3 years 54 4.37 132 10.67

5-4 years or more 166 13.42 298 24.09

7-Don't know 28 2.26 326 26.35

8-Not reported 869 70.25 1195 96.60

Unknown 42 3.40 1237 100.00

YEARS RECEIVE INSTRUCT DESIGNED FOR LEP

 Cumulative Cumulative

Q25 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

----------------------------------------------------------------------

1-Not applicable 73 5.90 73 5.90

2-1 year 26 2.10 99 8.00

3-2 years 43 3.48 142 11.48

4-3 years 54 4.37 196 15.84

5-4 years or more 92 7.44 288 23.28

7-Don't know 29 2.34 317 25.63

8-Not reported 878 70.98 1195 96.60

Unknown 42 3.40 1237 100.00
SD/LEP File

SPEC INSTRUCTION PROVIDED IN WHAT LANG

 Cumulative Cumulative

Q26 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-------------------------------------------------------------------

1-English only 148 11.96 148 11.96

2-Most English 71 5.74 219 17.70

3-Half English 18 1.46 237 19.16

4-Some English 8 0.65 245 19.81

7-Don't know 20 1.62 265 21.42

8-Not reported 930 75.18 1195 96.60

Unknown 42 3.40 1237 100.00

LANGUAGE BEST DEMONSTRATE READING ABILTY

 Cumulative Cumulative

Q27 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------------

0-Multiple response 2 0.16 2 0.16

1-English 124 10.02 126 10.19

2-Spanish 76 6.14 202 16.33

3-Another Language 50 4.04 252 20.37

7-Don't know 33 2.67 285 23.04

8-Not reported 910 73.57 1195 96.60

Unknown 42 3.40 1237 100.00

LANGUAGE BEST DEMONSTRATE WRITING ABILTY

 Cumulative Cumulative

Q28 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------------

1-English 131 10.59 131 10.59

2-Spanish 74 5.98 205 16.57

3-Another Language 42 3.40 247 19.97

7-Don't know 37 2.99 284 22.96

8-Not reported 911 73.65 1195 96.60

Unknown 42 3.40 1237 100.00
SD/LEP File

PERCENT INSTRUCTION NATIVE LANG

 Cumulative Cumulative

Q29 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-------------------------------------------------------------------

1-0% 193 15.60 193 15.60

2-1-24% 38 3.07 231 18.67

3-25-49% 16 1.29 247 19.97

4-50-74% 6 0.49 253 20.45

5-75-99% 9 0.73 262 21.18

6-100% 24 1.94 286 23.12

8-Not reported 909 73.48 1195 96.60

Unknown 42 3.40 1237 100.00

WHICH SPECIAL LEP READING INSTRUCTION

 Cumulative Cumulative

Q30 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------------

1-Special design 167 13.50 167 13.50

2-Native language 5 0.40 172 13.90

3-Mainstreamed 113 9.14 285 23.04

8-Not reported 910 73.57 1195 96.60

Unknown 42 3.40 1237 100.00

WHICH SPECIAL LEP MATH INSTRUCTION

 Cumulative Cumulative

Q31 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------------

1-Special design 82 6.63 82 6.63

2-Native language 10 0.81 92 7.44

3-Mainstreamed 177 14.31 269 21.75

8-Not reported 926 74.86 1195 96.60

Unknown 42 3.40 1237 100.00
SD/LEP File

ENGLISH GRADE LEVEL RECEIVING READING

 Cumulative Cumulative

Q32 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

00-Multiple response 3 0.24 3 0.24

02-Lower-Kindergarten 1 0.08 4 0.32

03-Kindergarten 2 0.16 6 0.49

05-Grade 2 3 0.24 9 0.73

06-Grade 3 3 0.24 12 0.97

07-Grade 4 2 0.16 14 1.13

08-Grade 5 3 0.24 17 1.37

09-Grade 6 5 0.40 22 1.78

10-Grade 7 8 0.65 30 2.43

11-Grade 8 14 1.13 44 3.56

12-Grade 9 29 2.34 73 5.90

13-Grade 10 18 1.46 91 7.36

14-Grade 11 26 2.10 117 9.46

15-Grade 12 209 16.90 326 26.35

88-Not reported 869 70.25 1195 96.60

Unknown 42 3.40 1237 100.00

ENGLISH GRADE LEVEL RECEIVING MATH

 Cumulative Cumulative

Q33 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

00-Multiple response 1 0.08 1 0.08

02-Lower-Kindergarten 1 0.08 2 0.16

03-Kindergarten 1 0.08 3 0.24

04-Grade 1 1 0.08 4 0.32

05-Grade 2 3 0.24 7 0.57

06-Grade 3 2 0.16 9 0.73

08-Grade 5 1 0.08 10 0.81

09-Grade 6 4 0.32 14 1.13

10-Grade 7 1 0.08 15 1.21

11-Grade 8 6 0.49 21 1.70

12-Grade 9 19 1.54 40 3.23

13-Grade 10 39 3.15 79 6.39

14-Grade 11 43 3.48 122 9.86

15-Grade 12 174 14.07 296 23.93

88-Not reported 899 72.68 1195 96.60

Unknown 42 3.40 1237 100.00
SD/LEP File

PROFICIENCY IN UNDERSTANDING ENGLISH

 Cumulative Cumulative

Q34 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

1-Good (LEP adv) 211 17.06 211 17.06

2-Fair (LEP inter) 90 7.28 301 24.33

3-Poor (LEP begin) 16 1.29 317 25.63

7-Don't Know 5 0.40 322 26.03

8-Missing 873 70.57 1195 96.60

Unknown 42 3.40 1237 100.00

PROFICIENCY IN SPEAKING ENGLISH

 Cumulative Cumulative

Q35 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

0-Multiple resp 1 0.08 1 0.08

1-Good (LEP adv) 191 15.44 192 15.52

2-Fair (LEP inter) 105 8.49 297 24.01

3-Poor (LEP begin) 18 1.46 315 25.46

4-No Proficiency 2 0.16 317 25.63

7-Don't Know 5 0.40 322 26.03

8-Missing 873 70.57 1195 96.60

Unknown 42 3.40 1237 100.00

PROFICIENCY IN READING ENGLISH

 Cumulative Cumulative

Q36 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

1-Good (LEP adv) 171 13.82 171 13.82

2-Fair (LEP inter) 111 8.97 282 22.80

3-Poor (LEP begin) 29 2.34 311 25.14

4-No Proficiency 3 0.24 314 25.38

7-Don't Know 9 0.73 323 26.11

8-Missing 872 70.49 1195 96.60

Unknown 42 3.40 1237 100.00
SD/LEP File

PROFICIENCY IN WRITING ENGLISH

 Cumulative Cumulative

Q37 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

1-Good (LEP adv) 149 12.05 149 12.05

2-Fair (LEP inter) 123 9.94 272 21.99

3-Poor (LEP begin) 37 2.99 309 24.98

4-No Proficiency 3 0.24 312 25.22

7-Don't Know 8 0.65 320 25.87

8-Missing 875 70.74 1195 96.60

Unknown 42 3.40 1237 100.00

ACCOMM FOR ACHIEVEMENT TESTING EXISTS

 Cumulative Cumulative

Q38 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

1-Cannot be tested 7 0.57 7 0.57

2-No 250 20.21 257 20.78

3-Yes 69 5.58 326 26.35

8-Not reported 869 70.25 1195 96.60

Unknown 42 3.40 1237 100.00

ACCOMMODATIONS FOR ACHIEVEMENT TESTING

 Cumulative Cumulative

Q39 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------------

0-Multiple response 44 3.56 44 3.56

1-Native language 5 0.40 49 3.96

2-Word lists 1 0.08 50 4.04

3-Dictionary 4 0.32 54 4.37

4-Interpreter 3 0.24 57 4.61

5-Directions read 8 0.65 65 5.25

6-Questions read 1 0.08 66 5.34

7-Extended time 6 0.49 72 5.82

9-Not reported 1165 94.18 1237 100.00
SD/LEP File

PARTICIPATE IN NAEP W/O ACCOMMODATIONS

 Cumulative Cumulative

Q40 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-------------------------------------------------------------------

1-No 86 6.95 86 6.95

2-Yes 235 19.00 321 25.95

8-Not reported 874 70.65 1195 96.60

9-Unknown 42 3.40 1237 100.00

HOW PARTICIPATE IN NAEP WITH LEP ADAPTS

 Cumulative Cumulative

Q41 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------------

0-Multiple response 2 0.16 2 0.16

1-English-no adapt 159 12.85 161 13.02

2-English-adapt 90 7.28 251 20.29

3-Native language 20 1.62 271 21.91

4-Native-adapt 10 0.81 281 22.72

5-Not participate 23 1.86 304 24.58

8-Not reported 891 72.03 1195 96.60

Unknown 42 3.40 1237 100.00
Appendix F

Codebook for Test and Honors File
 1998 HIGH SCHOOL TRANSCRIPT STUDY

 CODEBOOK FOR TEST AND HONORS FILE

 January 1, 2000

 Question Column

 Name Number(s)

 ________ _________

 PSU 0001-0003 Primary Sampling Unit

 _____________________

 103-494 = PSU

 SCHOOL 0004-0007 School ID (within PSU)

 ______________________

 3011-3574 = School ID

 NOTE : Both PSU and school ID must be

 combined to uniquely identify a school within

 the data file.

 STUDENT 0008-0017 Student ID (within school)

 __________________________

 0000000001-

 9899999999 = Student ID (NAEP booklet

 number)

 9900000000-

 9909999999 = Student ID (Student not

 linked to NAEP)

 TH_SEQ 0018-0019 Test and Honors File Sequence Number

 ____________________________________

 01-17 = Sequence Number

 NOTE : STUDENT and TH_SEQ must be combined to

 uniquely identify a test and honors record

 within the data file. The TH_SEQ numbers do

 not necessarily reflect the order in which

 tests were taken or honors received.

 TH_DESCR 0020-0059 Description of Test or Honor

 ____________________________

 Alphanumeric = Description of the test or

 honor

 NOTE : This description was recorded directly

 from the transcript. Some standardization of

 spellings and abbreviations has been performed

 in order to reduce the number of distinct

 entries.

 [1]
 Question Column

 Name Number(s)

 ________ _________

 TH_YEAR 0060-0061 Year of Test or Honor

 _____________________

 93-98 = Year of Test or Honor

 99 = Missing

 TH_MONTH 0062-0063 Month of Test or Honor

 ______________________

 01-12 = Month of Test or Honor

 99 = Missing

 TH_TYPE 0064 Record Type (Test or Honor)

 ___________________________

 T = Test

 H = Honor

 TH_SCORE 0065-0066 Standardized Test Score

 _______________________

 Alphanumeric = Test Score

 ? = Missing

 NOTE : As reported on transcript (reported

 only for TH_TYPE = T)

 [2]
1998 HIGH SCHOOL TRANSCRIPT STUDY

Test and Honors File

Primary Sampling Unit

 Cumulative Cumulative

PSU Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------

103 - 494 21594 100.00 21594 100.00

School ID (within PSU)

Cumulative Cumulative

SCHOOL Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

----------------------------------------------------------------

3011 - 3574 21594 100.00 21594 100.00

Student ID (Within School)

 Cumulative Cumulative

STUDENT Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-------------------------------------------------------------

Linked 20603 95.41 20603 95.41

Unlinked 991 4.59 21594 100.00

Record Seq Num (Within Student)

Cumulative Cumulative

TH_SEQ Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-----------------------------------------------------------

1-17 21594 100.00 21594 100.00

T/H Description

Cumulative Cumulative

TH_DESCR Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Alphanumeric Description 21594 100.00 21594 100.00
Test and Honors File

Year of Test or Honor

 Cumulative Cumulative

TH_YEAR Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------

1993 2 0.01 2 0.01

1994 39 0.18 41 0.19

1995 679 3.14 720 3.33

1996 5790 26.81 6510 30.15

1997 11800 54.64 18310 84.79

1998 2587 11.98 20897 96.77

Missing 697 3.23 21594 100.00

Month of Test or Honor

 Cumulative Cumulative

TH_MONTH Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------

January 878 4.07 878 4.07

February 289 1.34 1167 5.40

March 810 3.75 1977 9.16

April 906 4.20 2883 13.35

May 1284 5.95 4167 19.30

June 2059 9.54 6226 28.83

July 19 0.09 6245 28.92

August 5 0.02 6250 28.94

September 171 0.79 6421 29.74

October 4102 19.00 10523 48.73

November 2085 9.66 12608 58.39

December 2408 11.15 15016 69.54

Missing 6578 30.46 21594 100.00

Record Type (T=Test H=Honor)

 Cumulative Cumulative

TH_TYPE Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------

Honor 1738 8.05 1738 8.05

Test 19856 91.95 21594 100.00
Test and Honors File

Standardized Test Score

 Cumulative Cumulative

TH_SCORE Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-------------------------------------------------------------

Numeric 19700 91.23 19700 91.23

Missing 1894 8.77 21594 100.00
Appendix G

Codebook for Transcript File
1998 HIGH SCHOOL TRANSCRIPT STUDY

 CODEBOOK FOR TRANSCRIPT FILE

 January 1, 2000

 Question Column

 Name Number(s)

 ________ _________

 PSU 0001-0003 Primary Sampling Unit

 _____________________

 103-494 = PSU

 SCHOOL 0004-0007 School ID (within PSU)

 ______________________

 3011-3574 = School ID

 NOTE : Both PSU and school ID must be

 combined to uniquely identify a school within

 the data file.

 STUDENT 0008-0017 Student ID (within School)

 __________________________

 0000000001-

 9899999999 = Student ID (NAEP booklet

 number)

 9900000000-

 9909999999 = Student ID (Student not

 linked to NAEP)

 NOTE : Student IDs are unique within the data

 file.

 SEQUENCE 0018-0020 Course Sequence Number (within Student)

 _______________________________________

 010-990 = Sequence Number

 999 = Missing

 NOTE : Student ID (STUDENT) and Course

 Sequence Number (SEQUENCE) must be combined to

 uniquely identify a course within the data

 file. The course sequence numbers do not

 necessarily reflect the order in which courses

 were taken. Courses are numbered in

 increments of 10 (010,020,030...) except for

 the components of combination courses (e.g.,

 Health/Driver Ed) which were split during

 processing to accurately code course content.

 These courses are numbered in increments of 1

 (010,011...).

 GRADLEV 0021-0022 Grade Level in Which Course Taken

 _________________________________

 09 = Ninth Grade

 10 = Tenth Grade

 11 = Eleventh Grade

 12 = Twelfth Grade

 99 = Missing

 [1]
 Question Column

 Name Number(s)

 ________ _________

 YEARSPAN 0023-0027 School Year in Which Course Taken

 _________________________________

 87-88 = 1987 - 1988 School Year

 88-89 = 1988 - 1989 School Year

 89-90 = 1989 - 1990 School Year

 90-91 = 1990 - 1991 School Year

 91-92 = 1991 - 1992 School Year

 92-93 = 1992 - 1993 School Year

 93-94 = 1993 - 1994 School Year

 94-95 = 1994 - 1995 School Year

 95-96 = 1995 - 1996 School Year

 96-97 = 1996 - 1997 School Year

 97-98 = 1997 - 1998 School Year

99-99 = Missing

??-?? = Unknown

 NOTE : Occasionally other year spans such as

 75 - 76 appear on the transcripts. These have

 been entered on the data file as they appear

 on the transcripts.

 CRSENAME 0028-0050 Course Title

 ____________

 Alphanumerics = Title of Course Appearing on

 Transcript

 NOTE : Left justified

 CRSEGRAD 0051-0053 Course Grade

 ____________

 A-F, I, NG, P, U, W, WF, WP = Grade Earned, if alpha

 0-998 = Grade Earned, if numeric

 NOTE : As reported on transcript, left

 justified

 STDGRAD 0054-0055 Standardized Grade

 __________________

 01 = A

 02 = B

 03 = C

 04 = D

 05 = F

 06 = Pass or Satisfactory

 07 = Unsatisfactory

 08 = Withdrew

 09 = Incomplete

 10 = Non Graded

11 = Blank

12 = Withdrew Failing

13 = Withdrew Passing

 NOTE : Course grades reported by schools as

 numeric or as a set of different codes have

 been standardized onto the above scale.

 [2]
 Question Column

 Name Number(s)

 ________ _________

 RAWCRED 0056-0060 Course Credits Earned (as on Transcript)

 ________________________________________

 0-98999 = Numeric

 99999 = Missing

 NOTE : Left justified. There is an implied

 decimal between positions 2 and 3.

 NOTE : When the credits reported on the

 transcript were not numeric, they were

 converted to numeric values. for example,

 "NC" was changed to "0".

 CRSECARN 0061-0065 Course Carnegie Units

 _____________________

 0-98999 = Numeric

 99999 = Missing

 NOTE : Credits from each school were

 multiplied by a school-specific conversion

 factor. For each school, the reported credit

 value reflecting one class period for one

 school year of contact time was determined.

 The conversion factor is that value which,

 when multiplied by the credit value, yields a

 value of 1000.

 CSSC 0066-0071 Course CSSC Code

 ________________

 010111-600000 = CSSC Code

 SPEDFLAG 0072 Special Education Flag

 ______________________

 0 = Functional Special Education

 1 = Regular Course

 2 = Resource Special Education

 OFFCAMP 0073 Taught off Campus (Flag)

 ________________________

 0 = No

 1 = Yes, Vocational

 2 = Yes, Special Ed Center

 3 = Yes, Other

 4 = Yes, Multiple Locations

 OTHLANG 0074 Taught in Language Other than English/ESL

 (Flag)

 ______

 0 = No

 1 = Yes

 [3]
 Question Column

 Name Number(s)

 ________ _________

 REMED 0075 Remedial or Below Grade Level (Flag)

 ____________________________________

 0 = No

 1 = Yes

 HONORS 0076 Honors or Gifted/talented Course (Flag)

 _______________________________________

 0 = No

 1 = Yes

 COMBO 0077 Combination Course

 __________________

 1 = Not a Combination Course

 (i.e., Course Not Split)

 2 = Course Split Into 2 Parts

 3 = Course Split Into 3 Parts

 4 = Course Split Into 4 Parts

 5 = Course Split Into 5 Parts

9 = Not Reported

 NOTE: A value of COMBO greater than 1

 indicates that the course was part of a

 combination course that has been split into

 its component parts. Credits were allocated

 equally among the parts.

 TRANSFER 0078 Course Transferred from Another School (Flag)

 _____________________________________________

 0 = No

 1 = Yes

 SEQFLAG 0079 Sequence Flag

 _____________

 0 = Not Part of a Course Sequence

 1 = Introductory Course in a

 Course Sequence

 2 = Advanced Course in a Course

 Sequence

9 = Unknown

 [4]
1998 HIGH SCHOOL TRANSCRIPT STUDY

Transcripts File

Primary Sampling Unit

 Cumulative Cumulative

PSU Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------

103-494 1126661 100.00 1126661 100.00

School ID (within PSU)

 Cumulative Cumulative

SCHOOL Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------

3011-3574 1126661 100.00 1126661 100.00

Student ID (within School)

 Cumulative Cumulative

STUDENT Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-------------------------------------------------------------

Linked 1062323 94.29 1062323 94.29

Unlinked 64338 5.71 1126661 100.00

Course Sequence Number (within Student)

 Cumulative Cumulative

SEQUENCE Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-------------------------------------------------------------

010-990 1126649 100.00 1126649 100.00

Missing 12 0.00 1126661 100.00
Transcripts File

Grade Level in Which Course Taken

Cumulative Cumulative

GRADLEV Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

----------------------------------------------------------------------

09-Ninth Grade 289523 25.70 289523 25.70

10-Tenth Grade 291087 25.84 580610 51.53

11-Eleventh Grade 280181 24.87 860791 76.40

12-Twelfth Grade 265756 23.59 1126547 99.99

99-Missing 114 0.01 1126661 100.00

School Year in Which Course Taken

Cumulative Cumulative

YEARSPAN Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

----------------------------------------------------------------

1987 - 1988 8 0.00 8 0.00

1988 - 1989 5 0.00 13 0.00

1989 - 1990 4 0.00 17 0.00

1990 - 1991 8 0.00 25 0.00

1991 - 1992 200 0.02 225 0.02

1992 - 1993 1035 0.09 1260 0.11

1993 - 1994 7853 0.70 9113 0.81

1994 - 1995 283812 25.19 292925 26.00

1995 - 1996 287919 25.56 580844 51.55

1996 - 1997 282076 25.04 862920 76.59

1997 - 1998 263633 23.40 1126553 99.99

Missing 99 0.01 1126652 100.00

Unknown 9 0.00 1126661 100.00

Course Title

 Cumulative Cumulative

CRSENAME Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------

Missing 17 0.00 17 0.00

Alphanumerics 1126644 100.00 1126661 100.00
Transcripts File

Course Grade

 Cumulative Cumulative

CRSEGRAD Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Grade Earned, numeric 258119 22.91 258119 22.91

Grade Earned, alpha 868542 77.09 1126661 100.00

Standardization of Grade

Cumulative Cumulative

STDGRAD Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

----------------------------------------------------------------------

A 366577 32.54 366577 32.54

B 330837 29.36 697414 61.90

C 234864 20.85 932278 82.75

D 108420 9.62 1040698 92.37

F 45233 4.01 1085931 96.38

Pass/Satisfactory 29277 2.60 1115208 98.98

Unsatisfactory 1222 0.11 1116430 99.09

Withdrew 2217 0.20 1118647 99.29

Incomplete 418 0.04 1119065 99.33

Non Graded 7494 0.67 1126559 99.99

Withdrew Failing 9 0.00 1126568 99.99

Withdrew Passing 93 0.01 1126661 100.00

Course Credits Earned (as on Trans.)

 Cumulative Cumulative

RAWCRED Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------

Numeric 1126465 99.98 1126465 99.98

Missing 196 0.02 1126661 100.00

Course Carnegie Units

 Cumulative Cumulative

CRSECARN Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-------------------------------------------------------------

Numeric 1126466 99.98 1126466 99.98

Missing 195 0.02 1126661 100.00
Transcripts File

Course CSSC Code

 Cumulative Cumulative

CSSC Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------

010000-099999 76239 6.77 76239 6.77

100000-199999 109599 9.73 185838 16.49

200000-299999 418717 37.16 604555 53.66

300000-399999 185757 16.49 790312 70.15

400000-499999 236152 20.96 1026464 91.11

500000-599999 99279 8.81 1125743 99.92

600000 918 0.08 1126661 100.00

Special Education (Flag)

 Cumulative Cumulative

SPEDFLAG Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------------

0-Functional SpecEd 31910 2.83 31910 2.83

1-Regular Course 1085673 96.36 1117583 99.19

2-Resource SpecEd 9078 0.81 1126661 100.00

Taught off Campus (Flag)

 Cumulative Cumulative

OFFCAMP Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------------

0-No 1115120 98.98 1115120 98.98

1-Yes, Vocational 5135 0.46 1120255 99.43

2-Yes, Special Ed 36 0.00 1120291 99.43

3-Yes, Other 4797 0.43 1125088 99.86

4-Yes, Multiple Loc 1573 0.14 1126661 100.00

Taught in Lang Other than Eng/ESL (Flag)

 Cumulative Cumulative

OTHLANG Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------

0-No 1115995 99.05 1115995 99.05

1-Yes 10666 0.95 1126661 100.00
Transcripts File

Remedial or Below Grade Level (Flag)

Cumulative Cumulative

REMED Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-----------------------------------------------------------

0-No 1123113 99.69 1123113 99.69

1-Yes 3548 0.31 1126661 100.00

Honors or Gifted/Talented Course (Flag)

Cumulative Cumulative

HONORS Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-----------------------------------------------------------

0-No 1035511 91.91 1035511 91.91

1-Yes 91150 8.09 1126661 100.00

Combination Course (Flag)

Cumulative Cumulative

COMBO Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

----------------------------------------------------------------------

1-Not Combination 1079086 95.78 1079086 95.78

2-Split 2 parts 10453 0.93 1089539 96.71

3-Split 3 parts 152 0.01 1089691 96.72

5-Split 5 parts 190 0.02 1089881 96.74

Not reported 36780 3.26 1126661 100.00

Crse Transferred from Another Sch (Flag)

 Cumulative Cumulative

TRANSFER Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-------------------------------------------------------------

0-No 1043926 92.66 1043926 92.66

1-Yes 82735 7.34 1126661 100.00
Transcripts File

Sequence Flag

Cumulative Cumulative

SEQFLAG Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

0-Not Part of a Co 689708 61.22 689708 61.22

1-Intro Course 265728 23.59 955436 84.80

2-Advanced Course 169390 15.03 1124826 99.84

Unknown 1835 0.16 1126661 100.00
Appendix H

Codebook for School File
 1998 HIGH SCHOOL TRANSCRIPT STUDY

 CODEBOOK FOR SCHOOL FILE

 January 1, 2000

 Question Column

 Name Number(s)

 ________ _________

 PSU 0001-0003 Primary Sampling Unit

 _____________________

 103-494 = Primary Sampling Unit

 SCHOOL 0004-0007 School ID (within PSU)

 ______________________

 3011-3574 = School (within PSU)

 NOTE : Both PSU and school ID must be

 combined to uniquely identify a school within

 the data file.

 CATSRCE 0008 Source of Catalog Titles

 ________________________

 0 = Course list generated from

 transcripts

 1 = School provided a

 school-level catalog, a

 district catalog, or a course

 list.

 NOTE : See variable CATTYPE.

 CATTYPE 0009 Type of Catalog Provided by School

 __________________________________

 0 = No Materials Available

 1 = District Level Course Catalog

 2 = School Course List

 3 = School Course Catalog

 NOTE : A course list does not include

 descriptive information regarding course

 content. A course catalog contains

 descriptive information regarding course

 content that was used in assigning CSSC codes.

 LINKED 0010 Sample Type

 ___________

 1 = NAEP Fully Linked

 2 = HSTS Only

 3 = NAEP, Not Linked

 NOTE : In schools where it was possible,

 students who had participated in or had been

 selected for NAEP assessment in 1997-1998

 constituted the sample. Otherwise a new

 sample of students was selected within the

 school.

 [1]
 Question Column

 Name Number(s)

 ________ _________

 STATE 0011-0012 State Code

 __________

 01-56 = FIPS State Code

 NOTE : The STATE variable has been set to

 missing in the public use file.

 STYPE 0013 School Type

 ___________

 1 = Public/State Run

 2 = Religious/Nonpublic

 3 = Catholic

 4 = Bureau of Indian Affairs

 5 = Department of Defense

 TYPLOC_R 0014 Urbanicity (Data available in Restricted Use Only file)

 _______________________________________________________

 1 = Large City

 2 = Mid-size City

 3 = Urban Fringe of Large City

 4 = Urban Fringe of Mid-size City

 5 = Large Town

 6 = Small Town

 7 = Other Rural

 NUMTEACH 0015-0017 Number of Teachers

 __________________

 Blank = Missing

 000-999 = Number of Teachers in School

 NOTE : The number of teachers is from the

 1997 Quality Education Data (QED).

 NOTE : The NUMTEACH variable has been set to

 missing in the public use file.

 ENROLL 0018-0021 School Enrollment

 _________________

 0 = Not Collected

 1 - 9999 = Number of Students

 NOTE : School enrollment is from the 1997

 Quality Education Data (QED).

 NOTE : The ENROLL variable has been set to

 missing in the public use file.

 [2]
 Question Column

 Name Number(s)

 ________ _________

 GRADREQ 0022-0025 Total Number of Credits (Carnegie Units)

 Required for Graduation in This School for the

 Class of 1998

 _____________

 0000 = Not Reported

 0001-9999 = Total Number of Credits

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal between

 positions 3 and 4.

 NONELCR 0026-0029 Number of Specified Non-elective Credits

 Included in the Above (Total Number of Credits

 That Are Specified As Being in Specific

 Fields)

 _______

 Blank = Missing

 0000 = Not Reported

 0001-9999 = Number of Specified

 Non-elective Credits

 (Carnegie Units)

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal between

 positions 3 and 4.

 REQ 0030 Assume Four Year High School?

 ___________________________

 Y = Yes

 N = No

 ? = Not Collected

 COMPTEST 0031 Is There a State or District Competency Test

 That Is Required for Graduation?

 _________________________________

 1 = Yes

 2 = No

8 = No Response

9 = Not Collected

 CLASSFLG 0032 When Graduation Requirements Are Met for the

 Class of 1998

 _____________

 1 = Requirements Are Met for the

 Class of 1998

 NOTE : All graduation requirements were for

 the class of 1998.

 [3]
 Question Column

 Name Number(s)

 ________ _________

 SGRSPAN 0033 Grade Span Code (from QED)

 __________________________

 0 = Not Reported

 1 = Preschool to Grade 12

 2 = Kindergarten to Grade 12

 3 = Grade 5 to Grade 12

 4 = Grade 6 to Grade 12

 5 = Grade 7 to Grade 12

 6 = Grade 8 to Grade 12

 7 = Grade 9 to Grade 12

 8 = Grade 10 to Grade 12

 9 = Grade 11 to Grade 12

 URBAN 0034 Community Type

 ______________

 1 = Large / Midsize City

 2 = Urban Fringe, Large Town

 3 = Small Town, Rural

 Q01 0035 Are twelfth-grade students typically assigned

 to classes by ability and/or achievement

 levels (so that some classes are higher in

 average ability and/or achievement levels than

 others) in English?

 ____________________

 1 = Yes

 2 = No

8 = No Response

9 = Not Collected

 Q02 0036 Are twelfth-grade students typically assigned

 to classes by ability and/or achievement

 levels (so that some classes are higher in

 average ability and/or achievement levels than

 others) in History/civics/social studies?

 __________________________________________

 1 = Yes

 2 = No

8 = No Response

9 = Not Collected

 Q03 0037 Does your school use block scheduling? (Block

 scheduling may involve the scheduling of fewer

 subject on a given day in order to extend the

 time devoted to each subject.)

 ______________________________

 1 = Yes, for all subjects

 2 = Yes, for some subjects

 3 = No

8 = No Response

9 = Not Collected

 [4]
 Question Column

 Name Number(s)

 ________ _________

 Q04 0038 Are computers available to students in your

 twelfth-grade classes—in all classrooms?

 _________________________________________

 1 = Yes

 2 = No

8 = No response

9 = Not Collected

 Q05 0039 Are computers available to students in your

 twelfth-grade classes—grouped in a separate

 computer laboratory available to classes?

 _________________________________________

 1 = Yes

 2 = No

8 = No response

9 = Not Collected

 Q06 0040 Are computers available to students in your

 twelfth-grade classes—available to bring to

 classrooms when needed?

 _________________________________________

 1 = Yes

 2 = No

8 = No response

9 = Not Collected

 Q07 0041 How many computers does your school have

 available to students?

 ______________________

 1 = None

 2 = 1 - 10

 3 = 11 - 25

 4 = 26 - 50

 5 = 51 - 75

 6 = 76 - 100

 7 = More than 100

8 = No Response

9 = Not Collected

 Q08 0042 Which of the following best describes the

 primary way in which your library is staffed?

 ______________________________________________

 1 = No library

 2 = Library in school, no staff

 or only volunteer staff

 available

 3 = Part - time staff

 4 = Full - time staff

8 = No Response

9 = Not Collected

 [5]
Question Column

 Name Number(s)

 ________ _________

 Q09 0043 Approximately what percentages of students in

 your school have parents or guardians who

 participate in a parent-teacher organization?

 ______________________________________________

 1 = Not available at this school

 2 = 0 - 10%

 3 = 11 - 25%

 4 = 26 - 50%

 5 = 51 - 100%

8 = No Response

9 = Not Collected

 

 Q10 0044 Approximately what percentages of students in

 your school have parents or guardians who

 participate in open houses or back-to-school

 nights?

 ________

 1 = Not available at this school

 2 = 0 - 10%

 3 = 11 - 25%

 4 = 26 - 50%

 5 = 51 - 100%

8 = No Response

9 = Not Collected

 Q11 0045 Approximately what percentages of students in

 your school have parents or guardians who

 participate in parent-teacher conferences?

 ___________________________________________

 1 = Not available at this school

 2 = 0 - 10%

 3 = 11 - 25%

 4 = 26 - 50%

 5 = 51 - 100%

8 = No Response

9 = Not Collected

 Q12 0046 Approximately what percentages of students in

 your school have parents or guardians who are

 involved in making school curriculum

 decisions?

 ___________

 1 = Not available at this school

 2 = 0 - 10%

 3 = 11 - 25%

 4 = 26 - 50%

 5 = 51 - 100%

8 = No Response

9 = Not Collected

 [6]
 Q13 0047 Approximately what percentages of students in

 your school have parents or guardians who

 participate in volunteer programs?

 ___________________________________

 1 = Not available at this school

 2 = 0 - 10%

 3 = 11 - 25%

 4 = 26 - 50%

 5 = 51 - 100%

8 = No Response

9 = Not Collected

 Q14 0048 Approximately what percentages of students in

 your school have parents or guardians who

 participate in parenting-skills programs?

 __________________________________________

 1 = Not available at this school

 2 = 0 - 10%

 3 = 11 - 25%

 4 = 26 - 50%

 5 = 51 - 100%

8 = No Response

9 = Not Collected

 Q15 0049 Approximately what percentages of students in

 your school have parents or guardians who

 serve on school advisory committees that

 assist in the governance of the school?

 _______________________________________

 1 = Not available at this school

 2 = 0 - 10%

 3 = 11 - 25%

 4 = 26 - 50%

 5 = 51 - 100%

8 = No Response

9 = Not Collected

 Q16 0050 Approximately what percentages of students in

 your school have parents or guardians who

 serve as assistants in classrooms?

 ___________________________________

 1 = Not available at this school

 2 = 0 - 10%

 3 = 11 - 25%

 4 = 26 - 50%

 5 = 51 - 100%

8 = No Response

9 = Not Collected

 Q17 0051 To what degree is student absenteeism a

 problem in your school?

 ________________________

 1 = Serious

 2 = Moderate

 3 = Minor

 4 = Not a problem

8 = No Response

9 = Not Collected

 [7]
Question Column

 Name Number(s)

 ________ _________

 Q18 0052 To what degree is student tardiness a problem

 in your school?

 ________________

 1 = Serious

 2 = Moderate

 3 = Minor

 4 = Not a problem

8 = No Response

9 = Not Collected

 Q19 0053 To what degree are physical conflicts among

 students a problem in your school?

 ___________________________________

 1 = Serious

 2 = Moderate

 3 = Minor

 4 = Not a problem

8 = No Response

9 = Not Collected

 Q20 0054 To what degree are racial or cultural conflicts

 a problem in your school?

 __________________________

 1 = Serious

 2 = Moderate

 3 = Minor

 4 = Not a problem

8 = No Response

9 = Not Collected

 Q21 0055 To what degree are student health problems a

 problem in your school?

 ________________________

 1 = Serious

 2 = Moderate

 3 = Minor

 4 = Not a problem

8 = No Response

9 = Not Collected

 Q22 0056 To what degree is lack of parent involvement a

 problem in your school?

 ________________________

 1 = Serious

 2 = Moderate

 3 = Minor

 4 = Not a problem

8 = No Response

9 = Not Collected

 [8]
Question Column

 Name Number(s)

 ________ _________

 Q23 0057 To what degree is student use of alcohol a

 problem in your school?

 ________________________

 1 = Serious

 2 = Moderate

 3 = Minor

 4 = Not a problem

8 = No Response

9 = Not Collected

 Q24 0058 To what degree is student use of tobacco a

 problem in your school?

 ________________________

 1 = Serious

 2 = Moderate

 3 = Minor

 4 = Not a problem

8 = No Response

9 = Not Collected

 Q25 0059 To what degree is student use of drugs a

 problem in your school?

 ________________________

 1 = Serious

 2 = Moderate

 3 = Minor

 4 = Not a problem

8 = No Response

9 = Not Collected

 Q26 0060 To what degree are gang activities a problem in

 your school?

 _____________

 1 = Serious

 2 = Moderate

 3 = Minor

 4 = Not a problem

8 = No Response

9 = Not Collected

 Q27 0061 To what degree is student misbehavior in class

 a problem in your school?

 __________________________

 1 = Serious

 2 = Moderate

 3 = Minor

 4 = Not a problem

8 = No Response

9 = Not Collected

 [9]
Question Column

 Name Number(s)

 ________ _________

 Q28 0062 To what degree is student cheating a problem

 in your school?

 ________________

 1 = Serious

 2 = Moderate

 3 = Minor

 4 = Not a problem

8 = No Response

9 = Not Collected

 Q29 0063 To what degree is teacher absenteeism a

 problem in your school?

 ________________________

 1 = Serious

 2 = Moderate

 3 = Minor

 4 = Not a problem

8 = No Response

9 = Not Collected

 Q30 0064 To what degree are physical conflicts between

 students and teachers a problem in your

 school?

 ________

 1 = Serious

 2 = Moderate

 3 = Minor

 4 = Not a problem

8 = No Response

9 = Not Collected

 Q31 0065 To what degree is vandalism a problem in your

 school?

 ________

 1 = Serious

 2 = Moderate

 3 = Minor

 4 = Not a problem

8 = No Response

9 = Not Collected

 Q32 0066 To what degree are student dropouts a problem

 in your school?

 _____________

 1 = Serious

 2 = Moderate

 3 = Minor

 4 = Not a problem

8 = No Response

9 = Not Collected

 [10]
Question Column

 Name Number(s)

 ________ _________

 Q33 0067 To what degree is teen pregnancy a problem in

 your school?

 _____________

 1 = Serious

 2 = Moderate

 3 = Minor

 4 = Not a problem

8 = No Response

9 = Not Collected

 Q34 0068 How would you characterize morale of teachers

 within your school?

 ____________________

 1 = Very Positive

 2 = Somewhat Positive

 3 = Somewhat Negative

 4 = Very Negative

8 = No Response

9 = Not Collected

 Q35 0069 How would you characterize students’ attitudes

 toward academic achievement within your

 school?

 ________

 1 = Very Positive

 2 = Somewhat Positive

 3 = Somewhat Negative

 4 = Very Negative

8 = No Response

9 = Not Collected

 Q36 0070 How would you characterize parental support

 for student achievement within your school?

 ____________________________________________

 1 = Very Positive

 2 = Somewhat Positive

 3 = Somewhat Negative

 4 = Very Negative

8 = No Response

9 = Not Collected

 Q37 0071 How would you characterize regard for school

 property within your school?

 _____________________________

 1 = Very Positive

 2 = Somewhat Positive

 3 = Somewhat Negative

 4 = Very Negative

8 = No Response

9 = Not Collected

 [11]
Question Column

 Name Number(s)

 ________ _________

 Q38 0072 How would you characterize teachers’

 expectations for student achievement within

 your school?

 _____________

 1 = Very Positive

 2 = Somewhat Positive

 3 = Somewhat Negative

 4 = Very Negative

8 = No Response

9 = Not Collected

 Q39 0073 About what percentage of your student body is

 absent on an average day? (Include excused

 and unexcused absences in calculating this

 rate.)

 ______

 1 = 0 - 2%

 2 = 3 - 5%

 3 = 6 - 10%

 4 = 11 - 25%

 5 = 26 - 50%

 6 = More than 50%

8 = No Response

9 = Not Collected

 Q40 0074 About what percentage of your teaching staff

 is absent on an average day? (Include all

 types of absences in calculating this rate.)

 ____________________________________________

 1 = 0 - 2%

 2 = 3 - 5%

 3 = 6 - 10%

 4 = 11 - 25%

 5 = 26 - 50%

 6 = More than 50%

8 = No Response

9 = Not Collected

 Q41 0075 About what percentage of students who are

 enrolled at the beginning of the school year

 is still enrolled at the end of the school

 year? (Exclude students who transfer into the

 school during the school year in figuring this

 rate.)

 ______

 1 = 98 - 100%

 2 = 95 - 97%

 3 = 90 - 94%

4 = 80 - 89%

5 = 70 - 79%

6 = Less than 70%

8 = No Response

9 = Not Collected

 [12]
Question Column

 Name Number(s)

 ________ _________

 Q42 0076 About what percentage of this year’s twelfth

 grade was held back and is repeating twelfth

 grade?

 _______

 0 = 0%

 1 = 1 - 2%

 2 = 3 - 5%

 3 = 6 - 10%

 4 = More than 10%

 8 = No Response

 9 = Not Collected

 Q43 0077 Of the teaching staff in your school last

 year, what percentage left before the end of

 the school year? (Include teachers who missed

 more than one month of school, whether or not

 they returned.)

 _______________

 0 = 0%

 1 = 1 - 2%

 2 = 3 - 5%

 3 = 6 - 10%

 4 = More than 10%

 8 = No Response

9 = Not Collected

 Q44 0078-0081 What is the current enrollment in your school?

 _____________________________________________

 0 = Not Collected

 0001-9999 = Current enrollment

 Q45 0082 Does your school participate in the National

 School Lunch Program?

 ______________________

 1 = Yes

 2 = No

 8 = No Response

 9 = Not Collected

 Q46 0083 During this school year, about what percentage

 of students in your school was eligible to

 receive a free or reduced-price lunch through

 the National School Lunch Program?

 ___________________________________

 1 = 0%

 2 = 1 - 5%

 3 = 6 - 10%

 4 = 11 - 25%

 5 = 26 - 50%

 6 = 51 - 75%

 7 = 76 - 99%

 8 = 100%

 9 = No Response

 0 = Not Collected

 [13]
Question Column

 Name Number(s)

 ________ _________

 Q47 0084 Does your school receive Title 1 funding?

 (Title 1 is a federally funded program

 which provides educational services, such

 as remedial reading or remedial math, to

 children who live in areas with high

 concentration of low - income families.)

 ________________________________________

 1 = Yes

 2 = No

 8 = No Response

 9 = Not Collected

 Q48 0085 Approximately what percentage of students in

 your school receives Title 1 funding? Please

 Please report the percentage of students who

 receives the service as of the day you respond

 to this questionnaire.

 _______________________________________

 1 = None

 2 = 1 - 5%

 3 = 6 - 10%

 4 = 11 - 25%

 5 = 26 - 50%

 6 = 51 - 75%

 7 = 76 - 90%

 8 = Over 90%

 9 = No Response

 0 = Not Collected

 Q49 0086 Approximately what percentage of students in

 your school receives remedial reading

 instruction? Please report the percentage of

 students who receives the service as of the

 day you respond to this questionnaire.

 _______________________________________

 1 = None

 2 = 1 - 5%

 3 = 6 - 10%

 4 = 11 - 25%

 5 = 26 - 50%

 6 = 51 - 75%

 7 = 76 - 90%

 8 = Over 90%

 9 = No Response

 0 = Not Collected

 [14]
Question Column

 Name Number(s)

 ________ _________

 Q50 0087 Approximately what percentage of students in

 your school receives remedial writing

 instruction? Please report the percentage of

 students who receives the service as of the

 day you respond to this questionnaire.

 _______________________________________

 1 = None

 2 = 1 - 5%

 3 = 6 - 10%

 4 = 11 - 25%

 5 = 26 - 50%

 6 = 51 - 75%

 7 = 76 - 90%

 8 = Over 90%

 9 = No Response

 0 = Not Collected

 Q51 0088 Approximately what percentage of students in

 your school receives gifted and talented

 program? Please report the percentage of

 students who receives the service as of the

 day you respond to this questionnaire.

 _______________________________________

 1 = None

 2 = 1 - 5%

 3 = 6 - 10%

 4 = 11 - 25%

 5 = 26 - 50%

 6 = 51 - 75%

 7 = 76 - 90%

 8 = Over 90%

 9 = No Response

 0 = Not Collected

 Q52 0089 About what percentage of last year’s

 twelfth-grade class graduated from high

 school?

 ________

 1 = 99 - 100%

 2 = 95 - 98%

 3 = 90 - 94%

 4 = 75 - 89%

 5 = Less than 75%

 8 = No Response

 9 = Not Collected

 Q53 0090 Of students in last year’s graduating class,

 approximately what percentage has gone on to

 attend two-year colleges?

 __________________________

 1 = None

 2 = 1 - 5%

 3 = 6 - 10%

 4 = 11 - 25%

 5 = 26 - 50%

 6 = 51 - 75%

 7 = 76 - 90%

 8 = Over 90%

 9 = No Response

 0 = Not Collected

 [15]
Question Column

 Name Number(s)

 ________ _________

 Q54 0091 Of students in last year’s graduating class,

 approximately what percentage has gone on to

 attend four-year colleges or universities?

 ___________________________________________

 1 = None

 2 = 1 - 5%

 3 = 6 - 10%

 4 = 11 - 25%

 5 = 26 - 50%

 6 = 51 - 75%

 7 = 76 - 90%

 8 = Over 90%

 9 = No Response

 0 = Not Collected

 [16]
1998 HIGH SCHOOL TRANSCRIPT STUDY

School File

Primary Sampling Unit

 Cumulative Cumulative

PSU Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------

103 - 494 264 100.00 264 100.00

School ID (within PSU)

 Cumulative Cumulative

SCHOOL Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

----------------------------------------------------------------

3011 - 3574 264 100.00 264 100.00

Source of Catalog Titles

 Cumulative Cumulative

CATSRCE Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

----------------------------------------------------------------------

0-Transcript 17 6.44 17 6.44

1-School Provided 247 93.56 264 100.00

Type of Catalog Provided

 Cumulative Cumulative

CATTYPE Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

---------------------------------------------------------------------

0-No Materials 17 6.44 17 6.44

1-District Level 14 5.30 31 11.74

2-School List 19 7.20 50 18.94

3-School Catalog 196 74.24 246 93.18

Not collected 18 6.82 264 100.00
School File

Sample type

Cumulative Cumulative

LINKED Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

1-NAEP Fully Linkd 232 87.88 232 87.88

2-HSTS Only 22 8.33 254 96.21

3-NAEP, Not Linked 10 3.79 264 100.00

FIPS State Code

 Cumulative Cumulative

STATE Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Arizona 3 1.14 3 1.14

Arkansas 3 1.14 6 2.27

California 37 14.02 43 16.29

Colorado 1 0.38 44 16.67

Connecticut 5 1.89 49 18.56

Delaware 6 2.27 55 20.83

Florida 13 4.92 68 25.76

Georgia 17 6.44 85 32.20

Hawaii 4 1.52 89 33.71

Illinois 8 3.03 97 36.74

Indiana 1 0.38 98 37.12

Iowa 4 1.52 102 38.64

Kansas 6 2.27 108 40.91

Kentucky 3 1.14 111 42.05

Louisiana 10 3.79 121 45.83

Maryland 5 1.89 126 47.73

Massachusetts 2 0.76 128 48.48

Michigan 13 4.92 141 53.41

Minnesota 3 1.14 144 54.55

Missouri 2 0.76 146 55.30

Montana 4 1.52 150 56.82

New Jersey 7 2.65 157 59.47

New Mexico 3 1.14 160 60.61

New York 14 5.30 174 65.91

North Carolina 16 6.06 190 71.97

North Dakota 4 1.52 194 73.48

Ohio 7 2.65 201 76.14

Oregon 5 1.89 206 78.03

Pennsylvania 6 2.27 212 80.30

South Carolina 1 0.38 213 80.68

Texas 20 7.58 233 88.26

Utah 6 2.27 239 90.53

Virginia 9 3.41 248 93.94

Washington 8 3.03 256 96.97

Wisconsin 8 3.03 264 100.00
School File

School Type

 Cumulative Cumulative

STYPE Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

1-Public/State Run 240 90.91 240 90.91

2-Religious/Nonpublic 17 6.44 257 97.35

3-Catholic 7 2.65 264 100.00

Urbanicity

 Cumulative Cumulative

TYPLOC_R Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1-Large City 39 14.77 39 14.77

2-Mid-size City 46 17.42 85 32.20

3-Urban Fringe of Large City 64 24.24 149 56.44

4-Urban Fringe of Mid-size City 29 10.98 178 67.42

5-Large Town 1 0.38 179 67.80

6-Small Town 34 12.88 213 80.68

7-Other Rural 51 19.32 264 100.00

Number of Teachers

 Cumulative Cumulative

NUMTEACH Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-------------------------------------------------------------

001-100 207 78.41 207 78.41

101-200 56 21.21 263 99.62

201-300 1 0.38 264 100.00

Number of Students

Cumulative Cumulative

ENROLL Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------

0001-1000 118 44.70 118 44.70

1001-2000 98 37.12 216 81.82

2001-3000 40 15.15 256 96.97

3001-4000 5 1.89 261 98.86

4001-5000 3 1.14 264 100.00
School File

Carn Units Req to Graduate

 Cumulative Cumulative

GRADREQ Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-----------------------------------------------------------------

15-18 9 3.41 9 3.41

19-25 240 90.91 249 94.32

26-28 15 5.68 264 100.00

Number of Non Elect Cred

 Cumulative Cumulative

NONELCR Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-----------------------------------------------------------------

Not reported 20 7.58 20 7.58

 6 - 10 5 1.89 25 9.47

11 - 15 193 73.11 218 82.58

16 - 20 46 17.42 264 100.00

Assume 4 year high school ?

 Cumulative Cumulative

REQ Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------

Not collected 12 4.55 12 4.55

 No 3 1.14 15 5.68

 Yes 249 94.32 264 100.00

Competency Test Required

Cumulative Cumulative

COMPTEST Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

1-Yes 157 59.47 157 59.47

2-No 107 40.53 264 100.00
School File

Requirements for 1998

 Cumulative Cumulative

CLASSFLG Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Requirements Are Met 264 100.00 264 100.00

Grade Span Code (from QED)

 Cumulative Cumulative

SGRSPAN Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------------

1-Preschool to 12th 10 3.79 10 3.79

2-Kinder to 12th 16 6.06 26 9.85

3-5th to 12th 2 0.76 28 10.61

4-6th to 12th 4 1.52 32 12.12

5-7th to 12th 21 7.95 53 20.08

6-8th to 12th 1 0.38 54 20.45

7-9th to 12th 190 71.97 244 92.42

8-10th to 12th 19 7.20 263 99.62

9-11th to 12th 1 0.38 264 100.00

Urbanicity

 Cumulative Cumulative

URBAN Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1-Large/Mid-size City 85 32.20 85 32.20

2-Urban Fringe,Large Town 94 35.61 179 67.80

3-Small Town, Rural 85 32.20 264 100.00

Q01-Assigned by Ability: English?

 Cumulative Cumulative

Q01 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------

1-Yes 153 57.95 153 57.95

2-No 71 26.89 224 84.85

8-No Response 4 1.52 228 86.36

Not collected 36 13.64 264 100.00
School File

Q02-Assigned by Ability: History?

 Cumulative Cumulative

Q02 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------

1-Yes 109 41.29 109 41.29

2-No 112 42.42 221 83.71

8-No Response 7 2.65 228 86.36

Not collected 36 13.64 264 100.00

Q03-Block Scheduling?

 Cumulative Cumulative

Q03 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------

1-Yes-All 63 23.86 63 23.86

2-Yes-Some 21 7.95 84 31.82

3-No 140 53.03 224 84.85

8-No Response 4 1.52 228 86.36

Not collected 36 13.64 264 100.00

Q04-Computers: In Classroom?

 Cumulative Cumulative

Q04 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------

1-Yes 62 23.48 62 23.48

2-No 148 56.06 210 79.55

8-No Response 18 6.82 228 86.36

Not collected 36 13.64 264 100.00
School File

Q05-Computers: Lab Available

 Cumulative Cumulative

Q05 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------

1-Yes 201 76.14 201 76.14

2-No 15 5.68 216 81.82

8-No Response 12 4.55 228 86.36

Not collected 36 13.64 264 100.00

Q06-Computers: Bring to Classroom

 Cumulative Cumulative

Q06 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------

1-Yes 78 29.55 78 29.55

2-No 126 47.73 204 77.27

8-No Response 24 9.09 228 86.36

Not collected 36 13.64 264 100.00

Q07-Number of Computer

 Cumulative Cumulative

Q07 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------------

2- 1-10 5 1.89 5 1.89

3-11-25 14 5.30 19 7.20

4-26-50 40 15.15 59 22.35

5-51-75 24 9.09 83 31.44

6-76-100 34 12.88 117 44.32

7-More than 100 107 40.53 224 84.85

8-No Response 4 1.52 228 86.36

Not collected 36 13.64 264 100.00
School File

Q08-Library Staffing

 Cumulative Cumulative

Q08 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------------

1-No library 4 1.52 4 1.52

2-Vol Staff 1 0.38 5 1.89

3-Part-time 21 7.95 26 9.85

4-Full-time 199 75.38 225 85.23

8-No Response 3 1.14 228 86.36

Not collected 36 13.64 264 100.00

Q09-Parents: In PTA

 Cumulative Cumulative

Q09 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------------

1-Not available 55 20.83 55 20.83

2- 0-10% 76 28.79 131 49.62

3-11-25% 58 21.97 189 71.59

4-26-50% 23 8.71 212 80.30

5-51-100% 11 4.17 223 84.47

8-No Response 5 1.89 228 86.36

Not collected 36 13.64 264 100.00

Q10-Parents: Attend Open House

 Cumulative Cumulative

Q10 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------------

1-Not available 7 2.65 7 2.65

2- 0-10% 21 7.95 28 10.61

3-11-25% 58 21.97 86 32.58

4-26-50% 75 28.41 161 60.98

5-51-100% 64 24.24 225 85.23

8-No Response 3 1.14 228 86.36

Not collected 36 13.64 264 100.00
School File

Q11-Parents: Attend Conference

 Cumulative Cumulative

Q11 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------------

1-Not available 6 2.27 6 2.27

2- 0-10% 17 6.44 23 8.71

3-11-25% 64 24.24 87 32.95

4-26-50% 76 28.79 163 61.74

5-51-100% 61 23.11 224 84.85

8-No Response 4 1.52 228 86.36

Not collected 36 13.64 264 100.00

Q12-Parents: Make Curriculum Decisions

 Cumulative Cumulative

Q12 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------------

1-Not available 24 9.09 24 9.09

2- 0-10% 161 60.98 185 70.08

3-11-25% 30 11.36 215 81.44

4-26-50% 6 2.27 221 83.71

5-51-100% 3 1.14 224 84.85

8-No Response 4 1.52 228 86.36

Not collected 36 13.64 264 100.00

Q13-Parents: Volunteer

 Cumulative Cumulative

Q13 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------------

1-Not available 13 4.92 13 4.92

2- 0-10% 111 42.05 124 46.97

3-11-25% 63 23.86 187 70.83

4-26-50% 29 10.98 216 81.82

5-51-100% 9 3.41 225 85.23

8-No Response 3 1.14 228 86.36

Not collected 36 13.64 264 100.00
School File

Q14-Parents: In Parenting-Skills

 Cumulative Cumulative

Q14 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------------

1-Not available 108 40.91 108 40.91

2- 0-10% 98 37.12 206 78.03

3-11-25% 18 6.82 224 84.85

5-51-100% 1 0.38 225 85.23

8-No Response 3 1.14 228 86.36

Not collected 36 13.64 264 100.00

Q15-Parents: Serve on Advisory Comm

 Cumulative Cumulative

Q15 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------------

1-Not available 27 10.23 27 10.23

2- 0-10% 170 64.39 197 74.62

3-11-25% 21 7.95 218 82.58

4-26-50% 5 1.89 223 84.47

5-51-100% 2 0.76 225 85.23

8-No Response 3 1.14 228 86.36

Not collected 36 13.64 264 100.00

Q16-Parents: Assist in Classrooms

 Cumulative Cumulative

Q16 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------------

1-Not available 99 37.50 99 37.50

2- 0-10% 117 44.32 216 81.82

3-11-25% 5 1.89 221 83.71

4-26-50% 2 0.76 223 84.47

5-51-100% 1 0.38 224 84.85

8-No Response 4 1.52 228 86.36

Not collected 36 13.64 264 100.00
School File

Q17-Problem: Student Absenteeism

 Cumulative Cumulative

Q17 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------------

1-Serious 26 9.85 26 9.85

2-Moderate 73 27.65 99 37.50

3-Minor 90 34.09 189 71.59

4-Not a problem 36 13.64 225 85.23

8-No Response 3 1.14 228 86.36

Not collected 36 13.64 264 100.00

Q18-Student Tardiness

 Cumulative Cumulative

Q18 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------------

1-Serious 19 7.20 19 7.20

2-Moderate 86 32.58 105 39.77

3-Minor 104 39.39 209 79.17

4-Not a problem 16 6.06 225 85.23

8-No Response 3 1.14 228 86.36

Not collected 36 13.64 264 100.00

Q19-Conflicts Among Students

 Cumulative Cumulative

Q19 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------------

1-Serious 1 0.38 1 0.38

2-Moderate 21 7.95 22 8.33

3-Minor 155 58.71 177 67.05

4-Not a problem 48 18.18 225 85.23

8-No Response 3 1.14 228 86.36

Not collected 36 13.64 264 100.00
School File

Q20-Racial Conflicts

 Cumulative Cumulative

Q20 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------------

1-Serious 1 0.38 1 0.38

2-Moderate 10 3.79 11 4.17

3-Minor 116 43.94 127 48.11

4-Not a problem 98 37.12 225 85.23

8-No Response 3 1.14 228 86.36

Not collected 36 13.64 264 100.00

Q21-Health Problems

 Cumulative Cumulative

Q21 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------------

2-Moderate 9 3.41 9 3.41

3-Minor 131 49.62 140 53.03

4-Not a problem 83 31.44 223 84.47

8-No Response 5 1.89 228 86.36

Not collected 36 13.64 264 100.00

Q22-Lack Parent Involvement

 Cumulative Cumulative

Q22 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------------

1-Serious 32 12.12 32 12.12

2-Moderate 82 31.06 114 43.18

3-Minor 72 27.27 186 70.45

4-Not a problem 36 13.64 222 84.09

8-No Response 6 2.27 228 86.36

Not collected 36 13.64 264 100.00
School File

Q23-Student Use of Alcohol

 Cumulative Cumulative

Q23 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------------

1-Serious 16 6.06 16 6.06

2-Moderate 69 26.14 85 32.20

3-Minor 109 41.29 194 73.48

4-Not a problem 31 11.74 225 85.23

8-No Response 3 1.14 228 86.36

Not collected 36 13.64 264 100.00

Q24-Student Use of Tobacco

 Cumulative Cumulative

Q24 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------------

1-Serious 7 2.65 7 2.65

2-Moderate 87 32.95 94 35.61

3-Minor 109 41.29 203 76.89

4-Not a problem 22 8.33 225 85.23

8-No Response 3 1.14 228 86.36

Not collected 36 13.64 264 100.00

Q25-Student Use of Drugs

 Cumulative Cumulative

Q25 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------------

1-Serious 10 3.79 10 3.79

2-Moderate 65 24.62 75 28.41

3-Minor 119 45.08 194 73.48

4-Not a problem 31 11.74 225 85.23

8-No Response 3 1.14 228 86.36

Not collected 36 13.64 264 100.00
School File

Q26-Gang Activities

 Cumulative Cumulative

Q26 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------------

1-Serious 2 0.76 2 0.76

2-Moderate 14 5.30 16 6.06

3-Minor 94 35.61 110 41.67

4-Not a problem 114 43.18 224 84.85

8-No Response 4 1.52 228 86.36

Not collected 36 13.64 264 100.00

Q27-Student Misbehavior in Class

 Cumulative Cumulative

Q27 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------------

1-Serious 6 2.27 6 2.27

2-Moderate 47 17.80 53 20.08

3-Minor 150 56.82 203 76.89

4-Not a problem 20 7.58 223 84.47

8-No Response 5 1.89 228 86.36

Not collected 36 13.64 264 100.00

Q28-Student Cheating

 Cumulative Cumulative

Q28 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------------

1-Serious 5 1.89 5 1.89

2-Moderate 32 12.12 37 14.02

3-Minor 142 53.79 179 67.80

4-Not a problem 44 16.67 223 84.47

8-No Response 5 1.89 228 86.36

Not collected 36 13.64 264 100.00
School File

Q29-Teacher Absenteeism

 Cumulative Cumulative

Q29 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------------

1-Serious 3 1.14 3 1.14

2-Moderate 30 11.36 33 12.50

3-Minor 102 38.64 135 51.14

4-Not a problem 90 34.09 225 85.23

8-No Response 3 1.14 228 86.36

Not collected 36 13.64 264 100.00

Q30-Conflicts With Teachers

 Cumulative Cumulative

Q30 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------------

2-Moderate 1 0.38 1 0.38

3-Minor 50 18.94 51 19.32

4-Not a problem 174 65.91 225 85.23

8-No Response 3 1.14 228 86.36

Not collected 36 13.64 264 100.00

Q31-Vandalism

 Cumulative Cumulative

Q31 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------------

1-Serious 2 0.76 2 0.76

2-Moderate 22 8.33 24 9.09

3-Minor 137 51.89 161 60.98

4-Not a problem 64 24.24 225 85.23

8-No Response 3 1.14 228 86.36

Not collected 36 13.64 264 100.00
School File

Q32-Student Dropout

 Cumulative Cumulative

Q32 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------------

1-Serious 6 2.27 6 2.27

2-Moderate 47 17.80 53 20.08

3-Minor 122 46.21 175 66.29

4-Not a problem 49 18.56 224 84.85

8-No Response 4 1.52 228 86.36

Not collected 36 13.64 264 100.00

Q33-Teen Pregnancy

 Cumulative Cumulative

Q33 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------------

1-Serious 17 6.44 17 6.44

2-Moderate 41 15.53 58 21.97

3-Minor 125 47.35 183 69.32

4-Not a problem 41 15.53 224 84.85

8-No Response 4 1.52 228 86.36

Not collected 36 13.64 264 100.00

Q34-Morale of Teachers

 Cumulative Cumulative

Q34 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------------

1-Very Positive 77 29.17 77 29.17

2-Somewhat Pos 124 46.97 201 76.14

3-Somewhat Neg 23 8.71 224 84.85

8-No Response 4 1.52 228 86.36

Not collected 36 13.64 264 100.00
School File

Q35-Students' Attitudes To Achiev

 Cumulative Cumulative

Q35 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------------

1-Very Positive 51 19.32 51 19.32

2-Somewhat Pos 147 55.68 198 75.00

3-Somewhat Neg 25 9.47 223 84.47

4-Very Negative 2 0.76 225 85.23

8-No Response 3 1.14 228 86.36

Not collected 36 13.64 264 100.00

Q36-Parental Support

 Cumulative Cumulative

Q36 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------------

1-Very Positive 67 25.38 67 25.38

2-Somewhat Pos 142 53.79 209 79.17

3-Somewhat Neg 15 5.68 224 84.85

4-Very Negative 1 0.38 225 85.23

8-No Response 3 1.14 228 86.36

Not collected 36 13.64 264 100.00

Q37-Regard for School Property

 Cumulative Cumulative

Q37 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------------

1-Very Positive 62 23.48 62 23.48

2-Somewhat Pos 134 50.76 196 74.24

3-Somewhat Neg 26 9.85 222 84.09

4-Very Negative 2 0.76 224 84.85

8-No Response 4 1.52 228 86.36

Not collected 36 13.64 264 100.00
School File

Q38-Teachers' Expectations

 Cumulative Cumulative

Q38 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------------

1-Very Positive 113 42.80 113 42.80

2-Somewhat Pos 96 36.36 209 79.17

3-Somewhat Neg 15 5.68 224 84.85

8-No Response 4 1.52 228 86.36

Not collected 36 13.64 264 100.00

Q39-Students Absent on Average Day

 Cumulative Cumulative

Q39 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------------

1- 0-2% 17 6.44 17 6.44

2- 3-5% 87 32.95 104 39.39

3- 6-10% 89 33.71 193 73.11

4-11-25% 29 10.98 222 84.09

5-26-50% 1 0.38 223 84.47

8-No Response 5 1.89 228 86.36

Not collected 36 13.64 264 100.00

Q40-Teachers Absent on Average Day

 Cumulative Cumulative

Q40 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------------

1- 0-2% 104 39.39 104 39.39

2- 3-5% 89 33.71 193 73.11

3- 6-10% 31 11.74 224 84.85

8-No Response 4 1.52 228 86.36

Not collected 36 13.64 264 100.00
School File

Q41-Still Enrolled at End of Year

 Cumulative Cumulative

Q41 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------------

1-98-100% 48 18.18 48 18.18

2-95-97% 72 27.27 120 45.45

3-90-94% 56 21.21 176 66.67

4-80-89% 29 10.98 205 77.65

5-70-79% 11 4.17 216 81.82

6-Less than 70% 6 2.27 222 84.09

8-No Response 6 2.27 228 86.36

Not collected 36 13.64 264 100.00

Q42-Repeating 12th Grade

 Cumulative Cumulative

Q42 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------------

1-0% 78 29.55 78 29.55

2-1-2% 109 41.29 187 70.83

3-3-5% 24 9.09 211 79.92

4-6-10% 7 2.65 218 82.58

5-More than 10% 4 1.52 222 84.09

8-No Response 6 2.27 228 86.36

Not collected 36 13.64 264 100.00

Q43-Teachers Left

 Cumulative Cumulative

Q43 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------------

1-0% 124 46.97 124 46.97

2-1-2% 90 34.09 214 81.06

3-3-5% 9 3.41 223 84.47

4-6-10% 1 0.38 224 84.85

5-More than 10% 1 0.38 225 85.23

8-No Response 3 1.14 228 86.36

Not collected 36 13.64 264 100.00
School File

Q44-Enrollment

 Cumulative Cumulative

Q44 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------

Not collected 48 18.18 48 18.18

0001-1000 98 37.12 146 55.30

1001-2000 85 32.20 231 87.50

2001-3000 30 11.36 261 98.86

3001-4000 2 0.76 263 99.62

4001-5000 1 0.38 264 100.00

Q45-School in National School Lunch

 Cumulative Cumulative

Q45 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------

1-Yes 203 76.89 203 76.89

2-No 22 8.33 225 85.23

8-No Response 3 1.14 228 86.36

Not collected 36 13.64 264 100.00

Q46-Students Eligible for NSLP

Cumulative Cumulative

Q46 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------

Not collected 36 13.64 36 13.64

1- 0% 13 4.92 49 18.56

2- 1-5% 23 8.71 72 27.27

3- 6-10% 27 10.23 99 37.50

4-11-25% 50 18.94 149 56.44

5-26-50% 70 26.52 219 82.95

6-51-75% 27 10.23 246 93.18

7-76-99% 10 3.79 256 96.97

8-100% 2 0.76 258 97.73

9-No Response 6 2.27 264 100.00
School File

Q47-School Receives Chapter 1 Fund

 Cumulative Cumulative

Q47 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------

1-Yes 76 28.79 76 28.79

2-No 148 56.06 224 84.85

8-No Response 4 1.52 228 86.36

Not collected 36 13.64 264 100.00

Q48-Students Receive Chapter 1 Fund

 Cumulative Cumulative

Q48 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------

Not collected 36 13.64 36 13.64

1-None 141 53.41 177 67.05

2- 1-5% 19 7.20 196 74.24

3- 6-10% 13 4.92 209 79.17

4-11-25% 17 6.44 226 85.61

5-26-50% 9 3.41 235 89.02

6-51-75% 1 0.38 236 89.39

7-76-90% 5 1.89 241 91.29

8-Over 90% 11 4.17 252 95.45

9-No Response 12 4.55 264 100.00

Q49-Students In Remedial Reading

 Cumulative Cumulative

Q49 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------

Not collected 37 14.02 37 14.02

1-None 48 18.18 85 32.20

2- 1-5% 79 29.92 164 62.12

3- 6-10% 45 17.05 209 79.17

4-11-25% 30 11.36 239 90.53

5-26-50% 11 4.17 250 94.70

6-51-75% 1 0.38 251 95.08

7-76-90% 1 0.38 252 95.45

9-No Response 12 4.55 264 100.00
School File

Q50-Students In Remedial Writing

 Cumulative Cumulative

Q50 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------

Not collected 36 13.64 36 13.64

1-None 74 28.03 110 41.67

2- 1-5% 65 24.62 175 66.29

3- 6-10% 41 15.53 216 81.82

4-11-25% 24 9.09 240 90.91

5-26-50% 10 3.79 250 94.70

6-51-75% 1 0.38 251 95.08

7-76-90% 2 0.76 253 95.83

9-No Response 11 4.17 264 100.00

Q51-Students In Gifted and Talent

 Cumulative Cumulative

Q51 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------

Not collected 36 13.64 36 13.64

1-None 44 16.67 80 30.30

2- 1-5% 59 22.35 139 52.65

3- 6-10% 57 21.59 196 74.24

4-11-25% 43 16.29 239 90.53

5-26-50% 9 3.41 248 93.94

6-51-75% 1 0.38 249 94.32

7-76-90% 1 0.38 250 94.70

8-Over 90% 2 0.76 252 95.45

9-No Response 12 4.55 264 100.00

Q52-Percent Students Graduated

 Cumulative Cumulative

Q52 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------------

1-99-100% 67 25.38 67 25.38

2-95-98% 113 42.80 180 68.18

3-90-94% 26 9.85 206 78.03

4-75-89% 12 4.55 218 82.58

5-Less than 75% 5 1.89 223 84.47

8-No Response 5 1.89 228 86.36

Not collected 36 13.64 264 100.00
School File

Q53-Attend Two-year College

 Cumulative Cumulative

Q53 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------

Not collected 36 13.64 36 13.64

1-None 5 1.89 41 15.53

2- 1-5% 14 5.30 55 20.83

3- 6-10% 25 9.47 80 30.30

4-11-25% 76 28.79 156 59.09

5-26-50% 80 30.30 236 89.39

6-51-75% 14 5.30 250 94.70

7-76-90% 4 1.52 254 96.21

8-Over 90% 5 1.89 259 98.11

9-No Response 5 1.89 264 100.00

Q54-Attend Four-year College

 Cumulative Cumulative

Q54 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------

Not collected 36 13.64 36 13.64

1-None 3 1.14 39 14.77

2- 1-5% 4 1.52 43 16.29

3- 6-10% 13 4.92 56 21.21

4-11-25% 47 17.80 103 39.02

5-26-50% 82 31.06 185 70.08

6-51-75% 55 20.83 240 90.91

7-76-90% 12 4.55 252 95.45

8-Over 90% 6 2.27 258 97.73

9-No Response 6 2.27 264 100.00
Appendix I

Codebook for Student File
1998 HIGH SCHOOL TRANSCRIPT STUDY

 CODEBOOK FOR STUDENT FILE

 January 1, 2000

 Question Column

 Name Number(s)

 ________ _________

 PSU 0001-0003 Primary Sampling Unit

 _____________________

 103-494 = PSU

 SCHOOL 0004-0007 School ID (Within PSU)

 ______________________

 3011-3574 = School (Within PSU)

 NOTE : Both PSU and School ID must be

 combined to uniquely identify a school within

 the data file.

 STUDENT 0008-0017 Student ID (Within School)

 __________________________

 0000000001-

 9899999999 = Student ID (NAEP Booklet

 Number)

 9900000000-

 9909999999 = Student ID (Student Not

 Linked To NAEP)

 NOTE : Student IDs are unique. ID's

 beginning with numbers less than 9, represent

 the NAEP booklet numbers used by these

 students. ID's beginning with 990 are

 students for whom no NAEP booklet number is

 available. Most of these students come from

 schools which did not participate in NAEP.

 The remainder are for students at NAEP schools

 for which a new sample was drawn for the

 transcript study.

 EXSTAT 0018 Student Exit Status

 ___________________

 1 = Standard Diploma

 2 = Honors Diploma

 3 = Diploma with Special

 Education Adjustments

 4 = Certificate of Attendance

 5 = Certificate of Completion

 9 = Missing

 GRAD_IMP 0019 Imputation flag for variable EXSTAT

 ___________________________________

 0 = Not imputed

 1 = Imputed

 [1]
 Question Column

 Name Number(s)

 ________ _________

 DRVDRACE 0020 Student Race/Ethnicity

 ______________________

 1 = White (Not Hispanic)

 2 = Black (Not Hispanic)

 3 = Hispanic (Mexican,

 Mexican-American, Chicano,

 Puerto Rican, Cuban, Other

 Spanish or Hispanic descent)

 4 = Asian or Pacific Islander

 5 = American Indian or Alaskan

 Native

 6 = Other

 9 = Missing

 NOTE : For students who participated in NAEP,

 this variable comes from NAEP files. For

 other students, this variable was recorded

 during the transcript study.

 NOTE : In the public use version of this

 file, some instances of this variable have

 been set to missing that are not missing in

 the restricted use version. Users of the

 public use file will not be able to replicate

 the frequency distribution for race that

 appears later in this appendix.

 RACE_IMP 0021 Imputation flag for variable DRVDRACE

 _____________________________________

 0 = Not imputed

 1 = Imputed

 GRADE 0022-0023 Student Grade Level In 1997-98

 ______________________________

 12 = Twelfth Grade

 NOTE : Grade the student was in during the

 1997-98 school year. For students who

 participated in NAEP, this variable comes from

 NAEP files. For other students, this variable

 was recorded during the transcript study.

 This particular time frame is the period

 during which NAEP took place.

 [2]
 Question Column

 Name Number(s)

 ________ _________

 SEX 0024 Student Gender

 ______________

 1 = Male

 2 = Female

 9 = Not Reported

 NOTE : For students who participated in NAEP,

 this variable comes from NAEP files. For

 other students, this variable was recorded

 during the transcript study.

 BIRTHMO 0025-0026 Student Month Born

 __________________

 01-12 = Month Born

 NOTE : For students who participated in NAEP,

 this variable comes from NAEP files. For

 other students, this variable was recorded

 during the transcript study.

 BIRTHYR 0027-0028 Student Year Born

 _________________

 76-83 = Year Born

 99 = Missing

 NOTE : For students who participated in NAEP,

 this variable comes from NAEP files. For

 other students, this variable was recorded

 during the transcript study.

 BIRT_IMP 0029 Imputation flag for variable BIRTHYR

 ____________________________________

 0 = Not imputed

 1 = Imputed

 HCFLAG 0030 Student Disability Status

 _________________________

 ? = Non-NAEP Students (no information)

 0 = Not Disabled

 1 = Disabled

 9 = Not reported

 NOTE : HCFLAG is based on a determination of

 whether the student is disabled. If at least

 one item in the “Student with Disability”

 section was checked, then the HCFLAG was set

 to 1 (disabled).

 [3]
 Question Column

 Name Number(s)

 ________ _________

 HCTYPE 0031-0032 Description of student's disability

 ___________________________________

 00 = Not disabled

 01 = Multiple responses

 02 = Learning disability

 03 = Hearing impairment

 04 = Visual impairment/blindness

 05 = Speech impairment

 06 = Mental or cognitive

 impairment

 07 = Emotional disturbance

 08 = Orthopedic impairment

 09 = Traumatic brain injury

 10 = Other

 99 = Not response

 NOTE : This variable was obtained from the

 SD/LEP Questionnaire which was completed by

 school personnel.

 PSU_WGT 0033-0044 NAEP PSU Weight

 _______________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 QSCHWT12 0045-0056 School Weight, Conditional on PSU

 _________________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 SCH_WT12 0057-0068 NAEP School Weight, Conditional on PSU

 ______________________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 [4]
 Question Column

 Name Number(s)

 ________ _________

 TRPSUWT 0069-0080 PSU Weight, Conditional on PSU

 ______________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 TRSCHWT 0081-0092 School Weight, Cond on School, PSU

 __________________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 SCHNRADJ 0093-0104 School Nonresponse Adjustment Factor

 ____________________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 WTHNWT 0105-0116 Student Weight, Conditional on School

 _____________________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 STUBWT 0117-0128 Student Base Weight

 ___________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 [5]
 Question Column

 Name Number(s)

 ________ _________

 STUNRADJ 0129-0140 Student Nonresponse Adjustment Factor

 _____________________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 TRIMFCTR 0141-0152 Student Trimming Factor

 _______________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 PS_ADJ 0153-0164 Poststratification Adjustment Factor

 ____________________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 FINSTUWT 0165-0176 Final Usable Transcript Student Weight

 ______________________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 REPWT1 0177-0188 Jackknife Replicate Weight 1

 ____________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 [6]
 Question Column

 Name Number(s)

 ________ _________

 REPWT2 0189-0200 Jackknife Replicate Weight 2

 ____________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 REPWT3 0201-0212 Jackknife Replicate Weight 3

 ____________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 REPWT4 0213-0224 Jackknife Replicate Weight 4

 ____________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 REPWT5 0225-0236 Jackknife Replicate Weight 5

 ____________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 REPWT6 0237-0248 Jackknife Replicate Weight 6

 ____________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 [7]
 Question Column

 Name Number(s)

 ________ _________

 REPWT7 0249-0260 Jackknife Replicate Weight 7

 ____________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 REPWT8 0261-0272 Jackknife Replicate Weight 8

 ____________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 REPWT9 0273-0284 Jackknife Replicate Weight 9

 ____________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 REPWT10 0285-0296 Jackknife Replicate Weight 10

 _____________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 REPWT11 0297-0308 Jackknife Replicate Weight 11

 _____________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 [8]
 Question Column

 Name Number(s)

 ________ _________

 REPWT12 0309-0320 Jackknife Replicate Weight 12

 _____________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 REPWT13 0321-0332 Jackknife Replicate Weight 13

 _____________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 REPWT14 0333-0344 Jackknife Replicate Weight 14

 _____________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 REPWT15 0345-0356 Jackknife Replicate Weight 15

 _____________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 REPWT16 0357-0368 Jackknife Replicate Weight 16

 _____________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 [9]
 Question Column

 Name Number(s)

 ________ _________

 REPWT17 0369-0380 Jackknife Replicate Weight 17

 _____________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 REPWT18 0381-0392 Jackknife Replicate Weight 18

 _____________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 REPWT19 0393-0404 Jackknife Replicate Weight 19

 _____________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 REPWT20 0405-0416 Jackknife Replicate Weight 20

 _____________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 REPWT21 0417-0428 Jackknife Replicate Weight 21

 _____________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 [10]
 Question Column

 Name Number(s)

 ________ _________

 REPWT22 0429-0440 Jackknife Replicate Weight 22

 _____________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 REPWT23 0441-0452 Jackknife Replicate Weight 23

 _____________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 REPWT24 0453-0464 Jackknife Replicate Weight 24

 _____________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 REPWT25 0465-0476 Jackknife Replicate Weight 25

 _____________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 REPWT26 0477-0488 Jackknife Replicate Weight 26

 _____________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 [11]
 Question Column

 Name Number(s)

 ________ _________

 REPWT27 0489-0500 Jackknife Replicate Weight 27

 _____________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 REPWT28 0501-0512 Jackknife Replicate Weight 28

 _____________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 REPWT29 0513-0524 Jackknife Replicate Weight 29

 _____________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 REPWT30 0525-0536 Jackknife Replicate Weight 30

 _____________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 REPWT31 0537-0548 Jackknife Replicate Weight 31

 _____________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 [12]
 Question Column

 Name Number(s)

 ________ _________

 REPWT32 0549-0560 Jackknife Replicate Weight 32

 _____________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 REPWT33 0561-0572 Jackknife Replicate Weight 33

 _____________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 REPWT34 0573-0584 Jackknife Replicate Weight 34

 _____________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 REPWT35 0585-0596 Jackknife Replicate Weight 35

 _____________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 REPWT36 0597-0608 Jackknife Replicate Weight 36

 _____________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 [13]
 Question Column

 Name Number(s)

 ________ _________

 REPWT37 0609-0620 Jackknife Replicate Weight 37

 _____________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 REPWT38 0621-0632 Jackknife Replicate Weight 38

 _____________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 REPWT39 0633-0644 Jackknife Replicate Weight 39

 _____________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 REPWT40 0645-0656 Jackknife Replicate Weight 40

 _____________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 REPWT41 0657-0668 Jackknife Replicate Weight 41

 _____________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 [14]
 Question Column

 Name Number(s)

 ________ _________

 REPWT42 0669-0680 Jackknife Replicate Weight 42

 _____________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 REPWT43 0681-0692 Jackknife Replicate Weight 43

 _____________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 REPWT44 0693-0704 Jackknife Replicate Weight 44

 _____________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 REPWT45 0705-0716 Jackknife Replicate Weight 45

 _____________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 REPWT46 0717-0728 Jackknife Replicate Weight 46

 _____________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 [15]
 Question Column

 Name Number(s)

 ________ _________

 REPWT47 0729-0740 Jackknife Replicate Weight 47

 _____________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 REPWT48 0741-0752 Jackknife Replicate Weight 48

 _____________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 REPWT49 0753-0764 Jackknife Replicate Weight 49

 _____________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 REPWT50 0765-0776 Jackknife Replicate Weight 50

 _____________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 REPWT51 0777-0788 Jackknife Replicate Weight 51

 _____________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 [16]
 Question Column

 Name Number(s)

 ________ _________

 REPWT52 0789-0800 Jackknife Replicate Weight 52

 _____________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 REPWT53 0801-0812 Jackknife Replicate Weight 53

 _____________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 REPWT54 0813-0824 Jackknife Replicate Weight 54

 _____________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 REPWT55 0825-0836 Jackknife Replicate Weight 55

 _____________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 REPWT56 0837-0848 Jackknife Replicate Weight 56

 _____________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 [17]
 Question Column

 Name Number(s)

 ________ _________

 REPWT57 0849-0860 Jackknife Replicate Weight 57

 _____________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 REPWT58 0861-0872 Jackknife Replicate Weight 58

 _____________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 REPWT59 0873-0884 Jackknife Replicate Weight 59

 _____________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 REPWT60 0885-0896 Jackknife Replicate Weight 60

 _____________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 REPWT61 0897-0908 Jackknife Replicate Weight 61

 _____________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 [18]
 Question Column

 Name Number(s)

 ________ _________

 REPWT62 0909-0920 Jackknife Replicate Weight 62

 _____________________________

 000000000000-

 999999999999 = Weight

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 6 and 7.

 REPGRP1 0921-0922 Jackknife Variance Stratum

 __________________________

 01-62 = Jackknife Variance Stratum

 Number

 DROPGRP 0923 Jackknife Variance Unit

 _______________________

 1-3 = Jackknife Variance Unit

 Number

 SUBJECT 0924 NAEP Assessment Completed by Student

 ____________________________________

 9 = Not linked to NAEP

 1 = 50 - minute writing

 2 = Reading

 3 = Civics

 4 = 25 - minute writing

 TYPEPGM 0925 Type of High-school Program

 ___________________________

 1 = Standard

 2 = Vocational Education

 3 = Other

 9 = Not Reported

 ENTRMO 0926-0927 Date Entered The School

 _______________________

 01-12 = Month

 99 = Missing

 ENTRYR 0928-0929 Date Entered The School

 _______________________

 92-98 = Year

 99 = Missing

 GRADMO 0930-0931 Graduation Date

 _______________

 01-12 = Month

 99 = Missing

 [19]
 Question Column

 Name Number(s)

 ________ _________

 GRADYR 0932-0933 Graduation Date

 _______________

 98 = Year (1998)

 99 = Missing

 ABS09 0934-0936 Number of days absent in grade 9

 ________________________________

 000-998 = Days Absent

 999 = Missing

 ABS10 0937-0939 Number of days absent in grade 10

 _________________________________

 000-998 = Days Absent

 999 = Missing

 ABS11 0940-0942 Number of days absent in grade 11

 _________________________________

 000-998 = Days Absent

 999 = Missing

 ABS12 0943-0945 Number of days absent in grade 12

 _________________________________

 000-998 = Days Absent

 999 = Missing

 GPA_C 0946-0950 Calculated Grade Point Average

 ______________________________

 0001-9998 = Grade Point Average

 99999 = Missing

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 3 and 4.

 NOTE : The grade point average was calculated

 from the values in the Transcript File by

 assigning a value of 4 to an A (STDGRAD = 01,

 02, or 03), a value of 3 to a B (STDGRAD = 04,

 05, or 06), a value of 2 to a C (STDGRAD = 07,

 08, or 09), a value of 1 to a D (STDGRAD = 10,

 11, or 12), and a value of 0 to an F (STDGRAD

 = 13). Courses for which a student received

 other grades (STDGRAD = 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, or

 19) were not included in the GPA_C

 calculation. These other grades represent

 courses for which a student received grades

 such as "Pass," "Unsatisfactory," or withdrew.

 See the Transcript File codebook for a full

 list of valid STDGRAD values.

 [20]
 Question Column

 Name Number(s)

 ________ _________

 GPA_T 0951-0955 Grade Point Average as Reported on Transcript

 _____________________________________________

 00001-99998 = Grade Point Average

 99999 = Missing

 NOTE : There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 3 and 4.

 NOTE : The grade point average represented by

 the GPA_T variable is the last GPA value

 reported on the student's transcript. It is

 reported exactly as it appears on the

 transcript without conversion to a common

 scale.

 CLRANK 0956-0959 Class Rank

 __________

 001-999 = Class Rank

 9998 = Greater than 999

 9999 = Missing

 CLSIZE 0960-0963 Class Size

 __________

 0001-9998 = Class Size

 9999 = Missing

 ACAD_TRK 0964 Academic Track

 ______________

 1 = Academic

 2 = Vocational

 3 = Both

 4 = Neither

 9 = No Transcript

 TYPLOC_R 0965 Community Type

 ______________

 1 = Large city

 2 = Mid-size city

3 = Urban fringe of large city

4 = Urban fringe of mid-size city

5 = Large town

6 = Small town

7 = Other rural

 CENSREGN 0966 Census Region

 _____________

 1 = Northeast

 2 = Midwest

 3 = South

 4 = West

 [21]
 Question Column

 Name Number(s)

 ________ _________

 NAEPREGN 0967 NAEP Region

 ___________

 1 = Northeast

 2 = Southeast

 3 = Central

 4 = West

 PUBPRIV 0968 Public/Nonpublic School

 _______________________

 1 = Public

 2 = Private

 GRREQFLG 0969 Graduation Requirements Level Flag

 __________________________________

 1 = Carnegie Units >= school

 requirements

 2 = Carnegie Units > 75% of

 school requirements

 3 = Carnegie Units = 75% of

 school requirements

 4 = Carnegie Units < 75% of

 school requirements

 NOTE : This flag provides an indication of

 how the total credits on a student's

 transcript compare to the school's graduation

 requirements. To construct this variable, all

 course Carnegie Units for a student were

 totaled except those coded as unspecified

 transfer credits (CSSC code of 600000). This

 total was compared to the school's Carnegie

 Units required for graduation.

 NOTE : Transcripts of graduates with GRREQFLG

 = 4 probably do not list a substantial number

 of course titles for which the student

 received credit. Such transcripts were

 treated as missing for purposes of determining

 the non-response adjustment factor. The final

 student weight (FINSTUWT) has been set to zero

 (0) for students with GRREQFLG = 4.

 STUB0100 0970-0974 STUB0100. Mathematics

 ______________________

 00000-99998 = Carnegie Units

 99999 = No Transcript

 NOTE: There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 2 and 3.

 STUB0110 0975-0979 STUB0110. Basic Math

 _____________________

 00000-99999 = Carnegie Units

 99999 = No Transcript

 NOTE: There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 2 and 3.

 [22]
 Question Column

 Name Number(s)

 ________ _________

 STUB0120 0980-0984 STUB0120. General Math

 _______________________

 00000-99999 = Carnegie Units

 99999 = No Transcript

 NOTE: There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 2 and 3.

 STUB0130 0985-0989 STUB0130. Applied Math

 _______________________

 00000-99999 = Carnegie Units

 99999 = No Transcript

 NOTE: There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 2 and 3.

 STUB0141 0990-0994 STUB0141. Pre -Algebra

 _______________________

 00000-99999 = Carnegie Units

 99999 = No Transcript

 NOTE: There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 2 and 3.

 STUB0142 0995-0999 STUB0142. Algebra 1

 ____________________

 00000-99999 = Carnegie Units

 99999 = No Transcript

 NOTE: There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 2 and 3.

 STUB0143 1000-1004 STUB0143. Algebra 2

 ____________________

 00000-99999 = Carnegie Units

 99999 = No Transcript

 NOTE: There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 2 and 3.

 STUB0150 1005-1009 STUB0150. Geometry

 ___________________

 00000-99999 = Carnegie Units

 99999 = No Transcript

 NOTE: There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 2 and 3.

 [23]
 Question Column

 Name Number(s)

 ________ _________

 STUB0160 1010-1014 STUB0160. Calculus

 ___________________

 00000-99999 = Carnegie Units

 99999 = No Transcript

 NOTE: There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 2 and 3.

STUB0161 1015-1019 STUB0161. AP Calculus

 ______________________

 00000-99999 = Carnegie Units

 99999 = No Transcript

 NOTE: There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 2 and 3.

 STUB0170 1020-1024 STUB0170. Advanced Math - Other

 ________________________________

 00000-99999 = Carnegie Units

 99999 = No Transcript

 NOTE: There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 2 and 3.

 STUB0171 1025-1029 STUB0171. Trigonometry

 _______________________

 00000-99999 = Carnegie Units

 99999 = No Transcript

 NOTE: There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 2 and 3.

 STUB0172 1030-1034 STUB0172. Analysis/Precalculus

 _______________________________

 00000-99999 = Carnegie Units

 99999 = No Transcript

 NOTE: There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 2 and 3.

 [24]
 Question Column

 Name Number(s)

 ________ _________

 STUB0173 1035-1039 STUB0173. Statistics/Probability

 _________________________________

 00000-99999 = Carnegie Units

 99999 = No Transcript

 NOTE: There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 2 and 3.

 STUB0200 1040-1044 STUB0200. Science

 __________________

 00000-99999 = Carnegie Units

 99999 = No Transcript

 NOTE: There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 2 and 3.

 STUB0210 1045-1049 STUB0210. Survey

 _________________

 00000-99999 = Carnegie Units

 99999 = No Transcript

 NOTE: There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 2 and 3.

 STUB0220 1050-1054 STUB0220. Biology

 __________________

 00000-99999 = Carnegie Units

 99999 = No Transcript

 NOTE: There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 2 and 3.

 STUB0221 1055-1059 STUB0221. AP/Honors Biology

 ____________________________

 00000-99999 = Carnegie Units

 99999 = No Transcript

 NOTE: There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 2 and 3.

 STUB0230 1060-1064 STUB0230. Chemistry

 ____________________

 00000-99999 = Carnegie Units

 99999 = No Transcript

 NOTE: There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 2 and 3.

 [25]
 Question Column

 Name Number(s)

 ________ _________

 STUB0231 1065-1069 STUB0231. AP Chemistry

 _______________________

 00000-99999 = Carnegie Units

 99999 = No Transcript

 NOTE: There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 2 and 3.

 STUB0240 1070-1074 STUB0240. Physics

 __________________

 00000-99999 = Carnegie Units

 99999 = No Transcript

 NOTE: There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 2 and 3.

 STUB0241 1075-1079 STUB0241. AP Physics

 _____________________

 00000-99999 = Carnegie Units

 99999 = No Transcript

 NOTE: There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 2 and 3.

 STUB0250 1080-1084 STUB0250. Engineering

 ______________________

 00000-99999 = Carnegie Units

 99999 = No Transcript

 NOTE: There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 2 and 3.

STUB0260 1085-1089 STUB0260. Astronomy

 ____________________

 00000-99999 = Carnegie Units

 99999 = No Transcript

 NOTE: There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 2 and 3.

 STUB0270 1090-1094 STUB0270. Geology/Earth Science

 ________________________________

 00000-99999 = Carnegie Units

 99999 = No Transcript

 NOTE: There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 2 and 3.

 [26]
Question Column

 Name Number(s)

 ________ _________

 STUB0281 1095 STUB0281. Biology + Chemistry

 ______________________________

 0 = Failed threshold

 1 = Met threshold

 9 = No transcript

 STUB0282 1096 STUB0282. Biology + Chemistry + Physics

 ________________________________________

 0 = Failed threshold

 1 = Met threshold

 9 = No transcript

 STUB0300 1097-1101 STUB0300. English

 __________________

 00000-99999 = Carnegie Units

 99999 = No Transcript

 NOTE: There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 2 and 3.

 STUB0310 1102-1106 STUB0310. Survey English

 _________________________

 00000-99999 = Carnegie Units

 99999 = No Transcript

 NOTE: There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 2 and 3.

STUB0320 1107-1111 STUB0320. Literature

 _____________________

 00000-99999 = Carnegie Units

 99999 = No Transcript

 NOTE: There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 2 and 3.

 STUB0330 1112-1116 STUB0330. Composition

 ______________________

 00000-99999 = Carnegie Units

 99999 = No Transcript

 NOTE: There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 2 and 3.

 [27]
Question Column

 Name Number(s)

 ________ _________

 STUB0340 1117-1121 STUB0340. Speech

 _________________

 00000-99999 = Carnegie Units

 99999 = No Transcript

 NOTE: There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 2 and 3.

 STUB0350 1122-1126 STUB0350. AP/Honors English

 ____________________________

 00000-99999 = Carnegie Units

 99999 = No Transcript

 NOTE: There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 2 and 3.

 STUB0360 1127-1131 STUB0360. Remedial/Below Grade English

 _______________________________________

 00000-99999 = Carnegie Units

 99999 = No Transcript

 NOTE: There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 2 and 3.

 STUB0370 1132-1136 STUB0370. English as a Second Language

 _______________________________________

 00000-99999 = Carnegie Units

 99999 = No Transcript

 NOTE: There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 2 and 3.

 STUB0400 1137-1141 STUB0400. Social Studies

 _________________________

 00000-99999 = Carnegie Units

 99999 = No Transcript

 NOTE: There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 2 and 3.

STUB0410 1142-1146 STUB0410. American History

 ___________________________

 00000-99999 = Carnegie Units

 99999 = No Transcript

 NOTE: There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 2 and 3.

 [28]
 Question Column

 Name Number(s)

 ________ _________

 STUB0411 1147-1151 STUB0411. AP American History

 ______________________________

 00000-99999 = Carnegie Units

 99999 = No Transcript

 NOTE: There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 2 and 3.

 STUB0420 1152-1156 STUB0420. World History

 ________________________

 00000-99999 = Carnegie Units

 99999 = No Transcript

 NOTE: There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 2 and 3.

 STUB0421 1157-1161 STUB0421. AP Western Civ/European History

 __________________________________________

 00000-99999 = Carnegie Units

 99999 = No Transcript

 NOTE: There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 2 and 3.

 STUB0430 1162-1166 STUB0430. American Government & Politics

 _________________________________________

 00000-99999 = Carnegie Units

 99999 = No Transcript

 NOTE: There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 2 and 3.

 STUB0440 1167-1171 STUB0440. Humanities Other

 ____________________________

 00000-99999 = Carnegie Units

 99999 = No Transcript

 NOTE: There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 2 and 3.

 STUB0441 1172-1176 STUB0441. Non -western History

 _______________________________

 00000-99999 = Carnegie Units

 99999 = No Transcript

 NOTE: There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 2 and 3.

 [29]
 Question Column

 Name Number(s)

 ________ _________

 STUB0442 1177-1181 STUB0442. Western History/Civilization

 _______________________________________

 00000-99999 = Carnegie Units

 99999 = No Transcript

 NOTE: There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 2 and 3.

 STUB0443 1182-1186 STUB0443. Economics

 ____________________

 00000-99999 = Carnegie Units

 99999 = No Transcript

 NOTE: There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 2 and 3.

 STUB0444 1187-1191 STUB0444. Geography

 ____________________

 00000-99999 = Carnegie Units

 99999 = No Transcript

 NOTE: There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 2 and 3.

 STUB0445 1192-1196 STUB0445. Sociology/Psychology

 _______________________________

 00000-99999 = Carnegie Units

 99999 = No Transcript

 NOTE: There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 2 and 3.

 STUB0446 1197-1201 STUB0446. International Politics

 _________________________________

 00000-99999 = Carnegie Units

 99999 = No Transcript

 NOTE: There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 2 and 3.

 STUB0447 1202-1206 STUB0447. Remedial/Below Grade Soc Stud

 ________________________________________

 00000-99999 = Carnegie Units

 99999 = No Transcript

 NOTE: There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 2 and 3.

 [30]
Question Column

 Name Number(s)

 ________ _________

 STUB0450 1207-1211 STUB0450. AP/Honors Social Studies

 ___________________________________

 00000-99999 = Carnegie Units

 99999 = No Transcript

 NOTE: There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 2 and 3.

STUB0500 1212-1216 STUB0500. Fine Arts

 ____________________

 00000-99999 = Carnegie Units

 99999 = No Transcript

 NOTE: There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 2 and 3.

 STUB0510 1217-1221 STUB0510. Fine Arts & Crafts

 _____________________________

 00000-99999 = Carnegie Units

 99999 = No Transcript

 NOTE: There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 2 and 3.

 STUB0520 1222-1226 STUB0520. Music

 ________________

 00000-99999 = Carnegie Units

 99999 = No Transcript

 NOTE: There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 2 and 3.

 STUB0530 1227-1231 STUB0530. Drama

 ________________

 00000-99999 = Carnegie Units

 99999 = No Transcript

 NOTE: There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 2 and 3.

 [31]
Question Column

 Name Number(s)

 ________ _________

STUB0540 1232-1236 STUB0540. Dance

 ________________

 00000-99999 = Carnegie Units

 99999 = No Transcript

 NOTE: There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 2 and 3.

 STUB0550 1237-1241 STUB0550. Art/Music Appreciation/History

 _________________________________________

 00000-99999 = Carnegie Units

 99999 = No Transcript

 NOTE: There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 2 and 3.

 STUB0600 1242-1246 STUB0600. Foreign Languages

 ____________________________

 00000-99999 = Carnegie Units

 99999 = No Transcript

 NOTE: There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 2 and 3.

STUB0601 1247-1251 STUB0601. AP Foreign Language

 ______________________________

 00000-99999 = Carnegie Units

 99999 = No Transcript

 NOTE: There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 2 and 3.

 STUB0610 1252-1256 STUB0610. Survey

 _________________

 00000-99999 = Carnegie Units

 99999 = No Transcript

 NOTE: There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 2 and 3.

 STUB0620 1257-1261 STUB0620. French

 _________________

 00000-99999 = Carnegie Units

 99999 = No Transcript

 NOTE: There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 2 and 3.

 [32]
Question Column

 Name Number(s)

 ________ _________

 STUB0630 1262-1266 STUB0630. Spanish

 __________________

 00000-99999 = Carnegie Units

 NOTE: There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 2 and 3.

 STUB0640 1267-1271 STUB0640. German

 _________________

 00000-99999 = Carnegie Units

 99999 = No Transcript

 NOTE: There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 2 and 3.

 STUB0650 1272-1276 STUB0650. Latin

 ________________

 00000-99999 = Carnegie Units

 99999 = No Transcript

 NOTE: There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 2 and 3.

 STUB0660 1277-1281 STUB0660. Japanese

 ___________________

 00000-99999 = Carnegie Units

 99999 = No Transcript

 NOTE: There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 2 and 3.

STUB0670 1282-1286 STUB0670. Mandarin/Cantonese

 _____________________________

 00000-99999 = Carnegie Units

 99999 = No Transcript

 NOTE: There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 2 and 3.

 STUB0680 1287-1291 STUB0680. Russian

 __________________

 00000-99999 = Carnegie Units

 99999 = No Transcript

 NOTE: There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 2 and 3.

 [33]
Question Column

 Name Number(s)

 ________ _________

 STUB0690 1292-1296 STUB0690. Foreign Language - Other

 ___________________________________

 00000-99999 = Carnegie Units

 99999 = No Transcript

 NOTE: There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 2 and 3.

 STUB0700 1297-1301 STUB0700. Computer -related Studies

 ____________________________________

 00000-99999 = Carnegie Units

 99999 = No Transcript

 NOTE: There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 2 and 3.

 STUB0710 1302-1306 STUB0710. Clerical & Data Entry

 ________________________________

 00000-99999 = Carnegie Units

 99999 = No Transcript

 NOTE: There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 2 and 3.

 STUB0720 1307-1311 STUB0720. Computer Applications

 ________________________________

 00000-99999 = Carnegie Units

 99999 = No Transcript

 NOTE: There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 2 and 3.

 STUB0730 1312-1316 STUB0730. Computer Science

 ___________________________

 00000-99999 = Carnegie Units

 99999 = No Transcript

 NOTE: There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 2 and 3.

STUB0800 1317-1321 STUB0800. Consumer & Homemaking Education

 __________________________________________

 00000-99999 = Carnegie Units

 99999 = No Transcript

 NOTE: There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 2 and 3.

 [34]
Question Column

 Name Number(s)

 ________ _________

 STUB0900 1322-1326 STUB0900. General Labor Market Preparation

 ___________________________________________

 00000-99999 = Carnegie Units

 99999 = No Transcript

 NOTE: There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 2 and 3.

 STUB0910 1327-1331 STUB0910. Typewriting 1

 ________________________

 00000-99999 = Carnegie Units

 99999 = No Transcript

 NOTE: There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 2 and 3.

 STUB0920 1332-1336 STUB0920. Introductory Industrial

 __________________________________

 00000-99999 = Carnegie Units

 99999 = No Transcript

 NOTE: There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 2 and 3.

 STUB0930 1337-1341 STUB0930. Work Experience/Career Exploration

 _____________________________________________

 00000-99999 = Carnegie Units

 99999 = No Transcript

 NOTE: There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 2 and 3.

 STUB0940 1342-1346 STUB0940. General Labor Market Skills

 ______________________________________

 00000-99999 = Carnegie Units

 99999 = No Transcript

 NOTE: There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 2 and 3.

 STUB1000 1347-1351 STUB1000. Specific Labor Market Preparation

 ____________________________________________

 00000-99999 = Carnegie Units

 99999 = No Transcript

 NOTE: There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 2 and 3.

 [35]
Question Column

 Name Number(s)

 ________ _________

 STUB1010 1352-1356 STUB1010. Agriculture/Renewable Resources

 __________________________________________

 00000-99999 = Carnegie Units

 99999 = No Transcript

 NOTE: There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 2 and 3.

 STUB1020 1357-1361 STUB1020. Business

 ___________________

 0000-99999 = Carnegie Units

 NOTE: There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 2 and 3.

 STUB1030 1362-1366 STUB1030. Marketing & Distribution

 ___________________________________

 00000-99999 = Carnegie Units

 99999 = No Transcript

 NOTE: There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 2 and 3.

 STUB1040 1367-1371 STUB1040. Health

 _________________

 00000-99999 = Carnegie Units

 99999 = No Transcript

 NOTE: There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 2 and 3.

 STUB1050 1372-1376 STUB1050. Occupational Home Economics

 ______________________________________

 00000-99999 = Carnegie Units

 99999 = No Transcript

 NOTE: There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 2 and 3.

 STUB1060 1377-1381 STUB1060. Trade & Industry

 ___________________________

 00000-99999 = Carnegie Units

 99999 = No Transcript

 NOTE: There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 2 and 3.

 [36]
Question Column

 Name Number(s)

 ________ _________

 STUB1070 1382-1386 STUB1070. Technical & Communications

 _____________________________________

 00000-99999 = Carnegie Units

 99999 = No Transcript

 NOTE: There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 2 and 3.

STUB1080 1387-1391 STUB1080. Unidentified Subject

 _______________________________

 00000-99999 = Carnegie Units

 99999 = No Transcript

 NOTE: There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 2 and 3.

 STUB1100 1392-1396 STUB1100. General Skills

 _________________________

 00000-99999 = Carnegie Units

 99999 = No Transcript

 NOTE: There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 2 and 3.

 STUB1200 1397-1401 STUB1200. Personal Health & Physical

 Education

 _________

 00000-99999 = Carnegie Units

 99999 = No Transcript

 NOTE: There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 2 and 3.

 STUB1210 1402-1406 STUB1210. Physical Education

 _____________________________

 00000-99999 = Carnegie Units

 99999 = No Transcript

 NOTE: There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 2 and 3.

 STUB1220 1407-1411 STUB1220. Health

 _________________

 00000-99999 = Carnegie Units

 99999 = No Transcript

 NOTE: There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 2 and 3.

 [37]
Question Column

 Name Number(s)

 ________ _________

 STUB1230 1412 STUB1230. 3 Yrs Physical Education + Health (3.50)

 ___________________________________________________

 0 = Failed threshold

1 = Met threshold

9 = No Transcript

 STUB1240 1413-1417 STUB1240. Driver Education

 ___________________________

 00000-99999 = Carnegie Units

 99999 = No Transcript

 NOTE: There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 2 and 3.

STUB1300 1418-1422 STUB1300. Religion

 ___________________

 00000-99999 = Carnegie Units

 99999 = No Transcript

 NOTE: There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 2 and 3.

 STUB1400 1423-1427 STUB1400. Military Science

 ___________________________

 00000-99999 = Carnegie Units

 99999 = No Transcript

 NOTE: There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 2 and 3.

 STUB1500 1428-1432 STUB1500. Special Education

 ____________________________

 00000-99999 = Carnegie Units

 99999 = No Transcript

 NOTE: There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 2 and 3.

 STUB1600 1433-1437 STUB1600. All Courses Other Than Above

 _______________________________________

 00000-99999 = Carnegie Units

 99999 = No Transcript

 NOTE: There is an implied decimal point

 between positions 2 and 3.

 [38]
Question Column

 Name Number(s)

 ________ _________

 STUB2001 1438 4E+3SS+3SCI+3MATH+1/2COMP+2FL

 _____________________________

 0 = Student did not meet the

 following minimum

 requirements:

 1 = Student earned the following

 minimum number of credits in

 each of the New Basics

 core subject areas:

 4.0 credits in English

 3.0 credits in History/Social Studies

 3.0 credits in Science

 3.0 credits in Mathematics

 0.5 credits in Computer Science

 2.0 credits in Foreign Language

 9 = No Transcript

STUB2002 1439 4E+3SS+3SCI+3MATH+1/2COMP

 _________________________

 0 = Student did not meet the

 following minimum

 requirements:

 1 = Student earned the following

 minimum number of credits in

 each of the New Basics

 core subject areas:

 4.0 credits in English

 3.0 credits in History/Social Studies

 3.0 credits in Science

 3.0 credits in Mathematics

 0.5 credits in Computer Science

 9 = No Transcript

 [39]
Question Column

 Name Number(s)

 ________ _________

 STUB2003 1440 4E+3SS+3SCI+3MATH+2FL

 _____________________

 0 = Student did not meet the

 following minimum

 requirements:

 1 = Student earned the following

 minimum number of credits in

 each of the New Basics core

 subject areas:

 4.0 credits in English

 3.0 credits in History/Social Studies

 3.0 credits in Science

 3.0 credits in Mathematics

 2.0 credits in Foreign Language

 9 = No Transcript

STUB2004 1441 4E+3SS+3SCI+3MATH

 _________________

 0 = Student did not meet the

 following minimum

 requirements:

 1 = Student earned the following

 minimum number of credits in

 each of the New Basics core

 subject areas:

 4.0 credits in English

 3.0 credits in History/Social Studies

 3.0 credits in Science

 3.0 credits in Mathematics

 9 = No Transcript

 [40]
Question Column

 Name Number(s)

 ________ _________

 STUB2005 1442 4E+3SS+2SCI+2MATH

 _________________

 0 = Student did not meet the

 following minimum

 requirements:

 1 = Student earned the following

 minimum number of credits in

 each of the New Basics core

 subject areas:

 4.0 credits in English

 3.0 credits in History/Social Studies

 2.0 credits in Science

 2.0 credits in Mathematics

 9 = No Transcript

 [41]
1998 HIGH SCHOOL TRANSCRIPT STUDY

Student File

NAEP PSU Weight

 Cumulative Cumulative

PSU_WGT Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-----------------------------------------------------------------

1.00 - 38.61 25422 100.00 25422 100.00

PSS Weight

 Cumulative Cumulative

QSCHWT12 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-------------------------------------------------------------

1.00 25422 100.00 25422 100.00

NAEP School Wt, Conditional on PSU

 Cumulative Cumulative

SCH_WT12 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-----------------------------------------------------------------

1.00 - 62.36 25422 100.00 25422 100.00

PSU Weight, Conditional on PSU

 Cumulative Cumulative

TRPSUWT Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

----------------------------------------------------------------

1.00 - 2.00 25422 100.00 25422 100.00

School Weight, Cond on School, PSU

 Cumulative Cumulative

TRSCHWT Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

----------------------------------------------------------------

1.00 - 6.00 25422 100.00 25422 100.00
Student File

School Nonresponse Adjustment Factor

 Cumulative Cumulative

SCHNRADJ Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

----------------------------------------------------------------

1.00 - 1.76 25422 100.00 25422 100.00

Student Weight, Conditional on School

 Cumulative Cumulative

WTHNWT Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-----------------------------------------------------------------

1.00 - 15.44 25422 100.00 25422 100.00

Student Base Weight

 Cumulative Cumulative

STUBWT Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-------------------------------------------------------------------

19.87 - 711.40 25422 100.00 25422 100.00

Student Nonresponse Adjustment Factor

 Cumulative Cumulative

STUNRADJ Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

----------------------------------------------------------------

 0 518 2.04 518 2.04

1.00 - 1.47 24904 97.96 25422 100.00

Student Trimming Factor

 Cumulative Cumulative

TRIMFCTR Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

----------------------------------------------------------------

0.86 - 1.00 25422 100.00 25422 100.00
Student File

Poststratification Adjustment Factor

 Cumulative Cumulative

PS_ADJ Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

----------------------------------------------------------------

0.60 - 1.43 25422 100.00 25422 100.00

Final Usable Transcript Student Weight

 Cumulative Cumulative

FINSTUWT Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-------------------------------------------------------------------

 0 518 2.04 518 2.04

12.15 - 839.45 24904 97.96 25422 100.00

Jackknife Replicate Weight 1

 Cumulative Cumulative

 REPWT1 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-------------------------------------------------------------------

 0 662 2.60 662 2.60

12.16 - 839.06 24760 97.40 25422 100.00

Jackknife Replicate Weight 2

Cumulative Cumulative

REPWT2 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-------------------------------------------------------------------

0 725 2.85 725 2.85

12.16 - 828.66 24697 97.15 25422 100.00
Student File

Jackknife Replicate Weight 3

Cumulative Cumulative

REPWT3 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-------------------------------------------------------------------

0 1200 4.72 1200 4.72

12.16 - 842.43 24222 95.28 25422 100.00

Jackknife Replicate Weight 4

Cumulative Cumulative

REPWT4 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-------------------------------------------------------------------

0 1104 4.34 1104 4.34

12.22 - 925.99 24318 95.66 25422 100.00

Jackknife Replicate Weight 5

 Cumulative Cumulative

REPWT5 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-------------------------------------------------------------------

0 686 2.70 686 2.70

12.14 - 834.41 24736 97.30 25422 100.00

Jackknife Replicate Weight 6

 Cumulative Cumulative

REPWT6 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-------------------------------------------------------------------

0 1018 4.00 1018 4.00

12.12 - 831.29 24404 96.00 25422 100.00
Student File

Jackknife Replicate Weight 7

 Cumulative Cumulative

REPWT7 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-------------------------------------------------------------------

0 898 3.53 898 3.53

12.15 - 831.40 24524 96.47 25422 100.00

Jackknife Replicate Weight 8

 Cumulative Cumulative

REPWT8 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------------

0 684 2.69 684 2.69

12.15 - 1394.44 24738 97.31 25422 100.00

Jackknife Replicate Weight 9

 Cumulative Cumulative

REPWT9 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-------------------------------------------------------------------

0 1170 4.60 1170 4.60

12.03 - 862.46 24252 95.40 25422 100.00

Jackknife Replicate Weight 10

 Cumulative Cumulative

REPWT10 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-------------------------------------------------------------------

0 860 3.38 860 3.38

12.26 - 820.04 24562 96.62 25422 100.00
Jackknife Replicate Weight 11

 Cumulative Cumulative

REPWT11 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-------------------------------------------------------------------

0 6 84 2.69 684 2.69

12.14 - 838.77 24738 97.31 25422 100.00

Jackknife Replicate Weight 12

 Cumulative Cumulative

REPWT12 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-------------------------------------------------------------------

0 726 2.86 726 2.86

12.03 - 838.15 24696 97.14 25422 100.00

Jackknife Replicate Weight 13

 Cumulative Cumulative

REPWT13 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-------------------------------------------------------------------

0 518 2.04 518 2.04

12.18 - 840.39 24904 97.96 25422 100.00

Jackknife Replicate Weight 14

 Cumulative Cumulative

REPWT14 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-------------------------------------------------------------------

0 1133 4.46 1133 4.46

11.92 - 833.99 24289 95.54 25422 100.00

Jackknife Replicate Weight 15

 Cumulative Cumulative

REPWT15 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-------------------------------------------------------------------

0 1193 4.69 1193 4.69

9.44 - 1668.85 24229 95.31 25422 100.00
Jackknife Replicate Weight 16

 Cumulative Cumulative

REPWT16 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------------

0 874 3.44 874 3.44

12.63 - 1156.26 24548 96.56 25422 100.00

Jackknife Replicate Weight 17

 Cumulative Cumulative

REPWT17 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-------------------------------------------------------------------

0 843 3.32 843 3.32

12.18 - 841.72 24579 96.68 25422 100.00

Jackknife Replicate Weight 18

 Cumulative Cumulative

REPWT18 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-------------------------------------------------------------------

0 788 3.10 788 3.10

12.07 - 933.72 24634 96.90 25422 100.00

Jackknife Replicate Weight 19

 Cumulative Cumulative

REPWT19 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-------------------------------------------------------------------

0 617 2.43 617 2.43

12.14 - 829.89 24805 97.57 25422 100.00
Jackknife Replicate Weight 20

 Cumulative Cumulative

REPWT20 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-------------------------------------------------------------------

0 590 2.32 590 2.32

12.16 - 846.60 24832 97.68 25422 100.00

Jackknife Replicate Weight 21

 Cumulative Cumulative

REPWT21 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-------------------------------------------------------------------

0 717 2.82 717 2.82

12.12 - 831.84 24705 97.18 25422 100.00

Jackknife Replicate Weight 22

 Cumulative Cumulative

REPWT22 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------------

0 567 2.23 567 2.23

12.36 - 1205.91 24855 97.77 25422 100.00

Jackknife Replicate Weight 23

 Cumulative Cumulative

REPWT23 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-------------------------------------------------------------------

0 787 3.10 787 3.10

12.15 - 834.32 24635 96.90 25422 100.00

Jackknife Replicate Weight 24

 Cumulative Cumulative

REPWT24 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-------------------------------------------------------------------

0 766 3.01 766 3.01

12.14 - 845.84 24656 96.99 25422 100.00
Jackknife Replicate Weight 25

 Cumulative Cumulative

REPWT25 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-------------------------------------------------------------------

0 778 3.06 778 3.06

12.11 - 836.98 24644 96.94 25422 100.00

Jackknife Replicate Weight 26

 Cumulative Cumulative

REPWT26 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-------------------------------------------------------------------

0 785 3.09 785 3.09

12.11 - 844.75 24637 96.91 25422 100.00

Jackknife Replicate Weight 27

 Cumulative Cumulative

REPWT27 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-------------------------------------------------------------------

0 812 3.19 812 3.19

12.16 - 845.90 24610 96.81 25422 100.00

Jackknife Replicate Weight 28

 Cumulative Cumulative

REPWT28 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-------------------------------------------------------------------

0 755 2.97 755 2.97

12.12 - 851.53 24667 97.03 25422 100.00
Jackknife Replicate Weight 29

 Cumulative Cumulative

REPWT29 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-------------------------------------------------------------------

0 827 3.25 827 3.25

12.33 - 833.58 24595 96.75 25422 100.00

Jackknife Replicate Weight 30

 Cumulative Cumulative

REPWT30 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-------------------------------------------------------------------

0 791 3.11 791 3.11

12.24 - 836.49 24631 96.89 25422 100.00

Jackknife Replicate Weight 31

 Cumulative Cumulative

REPWT31 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-------------------------------------------------------------------

0 774 3.04 774 3.04

12.12 - 839.71 24648 96.96 25422 100.00

Jackknife Replicate Weight 32

 Cumulative Cumulative

REPWT32 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-------------------------------------------------------------------

0 651 2.56 651 2.56

11.91 - 846.95 24771 97.44 25422 100.00

Jackknife Replicate Weight 33

 Cumulative Cumulative

REPWT33 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-------------------------------------------------------------------

0 662 2.60 662 2.60

11.84 - 841.64 24760 97.40 25422 100.00
Jackknife Replicate Weight 34

 Cumulative Cumulative

REPWT34 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-------------------------------------------------------------------

0 750 2.95 750 2.95

13.50 - 839.71 24672 97.05 25422 100.00

Jackknife Replicate Weight 35

 Cumulative Cumulative

REPWT35 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-------------------------------------------------------------------

0 757 2.98 757 2.98

12.19 - 833.72 24665 97.02 25422 100.00

Jackknife Replicate Weight 36

 Cumulative Cumulative

REPWT36 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-------------------------------------------------------------------

0 666 2.62 666 2.62

12.39 - 838.19 24756 97.38 25422 100.00

Jackknife Replicate Weight 37

 Cumulative Cumulative

REPWT37 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-------------------------------------------------------------------

0 786 3.09 786 3.09

12.17 - 839.19 24636 96.91 25422 100.00
Jackknife Replicate Weight 38

 Cumulative Cumulative

REPWT38 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-------------------------------------------------------------------

0 791 3.11 791 3.11

12.44 - 837.88 24631 96.89 25422 100.00

Jackknife Replicate Weight 39

 Cumulative Cumulative

REPWT39 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-------------------------------------------------------------------

0 742 2.92 742 2.92

12.31 - 839.82 24680 97.08 25422 100.00

Jackknife Replicate Weight 40

 Cumulative Cumulative

REPWT40 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-------------------------------------------------------------------

0 843 3.32 843 3.32

11.96 - 842.90 24579 96.68 25422 100.00

Jackknife Replicate Weight 41

 Cumulative Cumulative

REPWT41 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-------------------------------------------------------------------

0 793 3.12 793 3.12

12.13 - 837.92 24629 96.88 25422 100.00
Jackknife Replicate Weight 42

 Cumulative Cumulative

REPWT42 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-------------------------------------------------------------------

0 546 2.15 546 2.15

12.12 - 836.91 24876 97.85 25422 100.00

Jackknife Replicate Weight 43

 Cumulative Cumulative

REPWT43 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-------------------------------------------------------------------

0 586 2.31 586 2.31

12.27 - 846.46 24836 97.69 25422 100.00

Jackknife Replicate Weight 44

 Cumulative Cumulative

REPWT44 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-------------------------------------------------------------------

0 518 2.04 518 2.04

12.13 - 837.42 24904 97.96 25422 100.00

Jackknife Replicate Weight 45

 Cumulative Cumulative

REPWT45 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-------------------------------------------------------------------

0 605 2.38 605 2.38

12.16 - 837.84 24817 97.62 25422 100.00

Jackknife Replicate Weight 46

 Cumulative Cumulative

REPWT46 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-------------------------------------------------------------------

0 518 2.04 518 2.04

12.14 - 819.05 24904 97.96 25422 100.00
Jackknife Replicate Weight 47

 Cumulative Cumulative

REPWT47 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-------------------------------------------------------------------

0 712 2.80 712 2.80

12.02 - 931.55 24710 97.20 25422 100.00

Jackknife Replicate Weight 48

 Cumulative Cumulative

REPWT48 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-------------------------------------------------------------------

0 518 2.04 518 2.04

12.15 - 839.45 24904 97.96 25422 100.00

Jackknife Replicate Weight 49

 Cumulative Cumulative

REPWT49 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-------------------------------------------------------------------

0 518 2.04 518 2.04

12.15 - 839.45 24904 97.96 25422 100.00

Jackknife Replicate Weight 50

 Cumulative Cumulative

REPWT50 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-------------------------------------------------------------------

0 518 2.04 518 2.04

12.15 - 839.45 24904 97.96 25422 100.00
Jackknife Replicate Weight 51

 Cumulative Cumulative

REPWT51 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-------------------------------------------------------------------

0 518 2.04 518 2.04

12.15 - 839.45 24904 97.96 25422 100.00

Jackknife Replicate Weight 52

 Cumulative Cumulative

REPWT52 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-------------------------------------------------------------------

0 518 2.04 518 2.04

12.15 - 839.45 24904 97.96 25422 100.00

Jackknife Replicate Weight 53

 Cumulative Cumulative

REPWT53 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-------------------------------------------------------------------

0 518 2.04 518 2.04

12.15 - 839.45 24904 97.96 25422 100.00

Jackknife Replicate Weight 54

 Cumulative Cumulative

REPWT54 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-------------------------------------------------------------------

0 518 2.04 518 2.04

12.15 - 839.45 24904 97.96 25422 100.00

Jackknife Replicate Weight 55

 Cumulative Cumulative

REPWT55 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-------------------------------------------------------------------

0 518 2.04 518 2.04

12.15 - 839.45 24904 97.96 25422 100.00
Jackknife Replicate Weight 56

 Cumulative Cumulative

REPWT56 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-------------------------------------------------------------------

0 518 2.04 518 2.04

12.15 - 839.45 24904 97.96 25422 100.00

Jackknife Replicate Weight 57

 Cumulative Cumulative

REPWT57 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-------------------------------------------------------------------

0 518 2.04 518 2.04

12.15 - 839.45 24904 97.96 25422 100.00

Jackknife Replicate Weight 58

 Cumulative Cumulative

REPWT58 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-------------------------------------------------------------------

0 518 2.04 518 2.04

12.15 - 839.45 24904 97.96 25422 100.00

Jackknife Replicate Weight 59

 Cumulative Cumulative

REPWT59 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-------------------------------------------------------------------

0 518 2.04 518 2.04

12.15 - 839.45 24904 97.96 25422 100.00
Jackknife Replicate Weight 60

 Cumulative Cumulative

REPWT60 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-------------------------------------------------------------------

0 518 2.04 518 2.04

12.15 - 839.45 24904 97.96 25422 100.00

Jackknife Replicate Weight 61

 Cumulative Cumulative

REPWT61 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-------------------------------------------------------------------

0 518 2.04 518 2.04

12.15 - 839.45 24904 97.96 25422 100.00

Jackknife Replicate Weight 62

 Cumulative Cumulative

REPWT62 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-------------------------------------------------------------------

0 518 2.04 518 2.04

12.15 - 839.45 24904 97.96 25422 100.00

Mathematics

 Cumulative Cumulative

STUB0100 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------

 0 90 0.35 90 0.35

>0 thru 1 206 0.81 296 1.16

>1 thru 2 2199 8.65 2495 9.81

>2 thru 3 8732 34.35 11227 44.16

>3 thru 4 10056 39.56 21283 83.72

>4 thru 5 3123 12.28 24406 96.00

>5 thru 6 509 2.00 24915 98.01

Over 6.00 78 0.31 24993 98.31

No transcript 429 1.69 25422 100.00
Basic Math

 Cumulative Cumulative

STUB0110 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------

 0 22927 90.19 22927 90.19

>0 thru 1 1666 6.55 24593 96.74

>1 thru 2 283 1.11 24876 97.85

>2 thru 3 83 0.33 24959 98.18

>3 thru 4 25 0.10 24984 98.28

>4 thru 5 5 0.02 24989 98.30

>5 thru 6 4 0.02 24993 98.31

No transcript 429 1.69 25422 100.00

General Math

 Cumulative Cumulative

STUB0120 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------

 0 20812 81.87 20812 81.87

>0 thru 1 2548 10.02 23360 91.89

>1 thru 2 1187 4.67 24547 96.56

>2 thru 3 299 1.18 24846 97.73

>3 thru 4 126 0.50 24972 98.23

>4 thru 5 13 0.05 24985 98.28

>5 thru 6 5 0.02 24990 98.30

Over 6.00 3 0.01 24993 98.31

No transcript 429 1.69 25422 100.00

Applied Math

 Cumulative Cumulative

STUB0130 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------

 0 18691 73.52 18691 73.52

>0 thru 1 5542 21.80 24233 95.32

>1 thru 2 680 2.67 24913 98.00

>2 thru 3 65 0.26 24978 98.25

>3 thru 4 10 0.04 24988 98.29

>4 thru 5 3 0.01 24991 98.30

>5 thru 6 2 0.01 24993 98.31

No transcript 429 1.69 25422 100.00
Pre-Algebra

 Cumulative Cumulative

STUB0141 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------

 0 18468 72.65 18468 72.65

>0 thru 1 4888 19.23 23356 91.87

>1 thru 2 1442 5.67 24798 97.55

>2 thru 3 184 0.72 24982 98.27

>3 thru 4 10 0.04 24992 98.31

Over 6.00 1 0.00 24993 98.31

No transcript 429 1.69 25422 100.00

Algebra 1

 Cumulative Cumulative

STUB0142 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------

 0 8567 33.70 8567 33.70

>0 thru 1 14765 58.08 23332 91.78

>1 thru 2 1546 6.08 24878 97.86

>2 thru 3 112 0.44 24990 98.30

>3 thru 4 3 0.01 24993 98.31

No transcript 429 1.69 25422 100.00

Algebra 2

 Cumulative Cumulative

STUB0143 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------

 0 10170 40.00 10170 40.00

>0 thru 1 12227 48.10 22397 88.10

>1 thru 2 2530 9.95 24927 98.05

>2 thru 3 63 0.25 24990 98.30

>3 thru 4 1 0.00 24991 98.30

Over 6.00 2 0.01 24993 98.31

No transcript 429 1.69 25422 100.00
Geometry

 Cumulative Cumulative

STUB0150 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------

 0 5941 23.37 5941 23.37

>0 thru 1 18141 71.36 24082 94.73

>1 thru 2 895 3.52 24977 98.25

>2 thru 3 16 0.06 24993 98.31

No transcript 429 1.69 25422 100.00

Calculus

 Cumulative Cumulative

STUB0160 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------

 0 22296 87.70 22296 87.70

>0 thru 1 2393 9.41 24689 97.12

>1 thru 2 291 1.14 24980 98.26

>2 thru 3 10 0.04 24990 98.30

>3 thru 4 2 0.01 24992 98.31

>4 thru 5 1 0.00 24993 98.31

No transcript 429 1.69 25422 100.00

AP Calculus

 Cumulative Cumulative

STUB0161 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------

 0 23196 91.24 23196 91.24

>0 thru 1 1587 6.24 24783 97.49

>1 thru 2 203 0.80 24986 98.28

>2 thru 3 6 0.02 24992 98.31

>3 thru 4 1 0.00 24993 98.31

No transcript 429 1.69 25422 100.00
Advanced Math - Other

 Cumulative Cumulative

STUB0170 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------

 0 16247 63.91 16247 63.91

>0 thru 1 7036 27.68 23283 91.59

>1 thru 2 1542 6.07 24825 97.65

>2 thru 3 157 0.62 24982 98.27

>3 thru 4 11 0.04 24993 98.31

No transcript 429 1.69 25422 100.00

Trigonometry

 Cumulative Cumulative

STUB0171 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------

 0 22982 90.40 22982 90.40

>0 thru 1 2007 7.89 24989 98.30

>1 thru 2 4 0.02 24993 98.31

No transcript 429 1.69 25422 100.00

Analysis/Precalculus

 Cumulative Cumulative

STUB0172 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------

 0 19630 77.22 19630 77.22

>0 thru 1 5158 20.29 24788 97.51

>1 thru 2 201 0.79 24989 98.30

>2 thru 3 4 0.02 24993 98.31

No transcript 429 1.69 25422 100.00

Statistics/Probability

 Cumulative Cumulative

STUB0173 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------

 0 24191 95.16 24191 95.16

>0 thru 1 797 3.14 24988 98.29

>1 thru 2 5 0.02 24993 98.31

No transcript 429 1.69 25422 100.00
Science

 Cumulative Cumulative

STUB0200 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------

 0 170 0.67 170 0.67

>0 thru 1 605 2.38 775 3.05

>1 thru 2 5688 22.37 6463 25.42

>2 thru 3 10073 39.62 16536 65.05

>3 thru 4 6297 24.77 22833 89.82

>4 thru 5 1646 6.47 24479 96.29

>5 thru 6 381 1.50 24860 97.79

Over 6.00 133 0.52 24993 98.31

No transcript 429 1.69 25422 100.00

Survey Science

Cumulative Cumulative

STUB0210 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------

 0 7332 28.84 7332 28.84

>0 thru 1 14549 57.23 21881 86.07

>1 thru 2 2814 11.07 24695 97.14

>2 thru 3 258 1.01 24953 98.16

>3 thru 4 37 0.15 24990 98.30

>4 thru 5 3 0.01 24993 98.31

No transcript 429 1.69 25422 100.00

Biology

 Cumulative Cumulative

STUB0220 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------

 0 1592 6.26 1592 6.26

>0 thru 1 15542 61.14 17134 67.40

>1 thru 2 6730 26.47 23864 93.87

>2 thru 3 1013 3.98 24877 97.86

>3 thru 4 99 0.39 24976 98.25

>4 thru 5 12 0.05 24988 98.29

>5 thru 6 3 0.01 24991 98.30

Over 6.00 2 0.01 24993 98.31

No transcript 429 1.69 25422 100.00
AP/Honors Biology

 Cumulative Cumulative

STUB0221 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------

 0 20345 80.03 20345 80.03

>0 thru 1 3802 14.96 24147 94.98

>1 thru 2 763 3.00 24910 97.99

>2 thru 3 82 0.32 24992 98.31

>5 thru 6 1 0.00 24993 98.31

No transcript 429 1.69 25422 100.00

Chemistry

 Cumulative Cumulative

STUB0230 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------

 0 10008 39.37 10008 39.37

>0 thru 1 13166 51.79 23174 91.16

>1 thru 2 1641 6.46 24815 97.61

>2 thru 3 164 0.65 24979 98.26

>3 thru 4 10 0.04 24989 98.30

>4 thru 5 4 0.02 24993 98.31

No transcript 429 1.69 25422 100.00

AP Chemistry

 Cumulative Cumulative

STUB0231 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------

 0 23537 92.59 23537 92.59

>0 thru 1 1273 5.01 24810 97.59

>1 thru 2 162 0.64 24972 98.23

>2 thru 3 21 0.08 24993 98.31

No transcript 429 1.69 25422 100.00
Physics

 Cumulative Cumulative

STUB0240 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------

 0 17651 69.43 17651 69.43

>0 thru 1 6484 25.51 24135 94.94

>1 thru 2 805 3.17 24940 98.10

>2 thru 3 42 0.17 24982 98.27

>3 thru 4 8 0.03 24990 98.30

>5 thru 6 3 0.01 24993 98.31

No transcript 429 1.69 25422 100.00

AP Physics

 Cumulative Cumulative

STUB0241 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------

 0 24116 94.86 24116 94.86

>0 thru 1 786 3.09 24902 97.95

>1 thru 2 82 0.32 24984 98.28

>2 thru 3 8 0.03 24992 98.31

>3 thru 4 1 0.00 24993 98.31

No transcript 429 1.69 25422 100.00

Engineering

 Cumulative Cumulative

STUB0250 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------

 0 23160 91.10 23160 91.10

>0 thru 1 1654 6.51 24814 97.61

>1 thru 2 179 0.70 24993 98.31

No transcript 429 1.69 25422 100.00

Astronomy

 Cumulative Cumulative

STUB0260 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------

 0 24562 96.62 24562 96.62

>0 thru 1 429 1.69 24991 98.30

>1 thru 2 2 0.01 24993 98.31

No transcript 429 1.69 25422 100.00
Geology/Earth Science

 Cumulative Cumulative

STUB0270 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------

 0 19704 77.51 19704 77.51

>0 thru 1 5050 19.86 24754 97.37

>1 thru 2 237 0.93 24991 98.30

>2 thru 3 2 0.01 24993 98.31

No transcript 429 1.69 25422 100.00

English

 Cumulative Cumulative

STUB0300 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------

0 137 0.54 137 0.54

>0 thru 1 223 0.88 360 1.42

>1 thru 2 543 2.14 903 3.55

>2 thru 3 2009 7.90 2912 11.45

>3 thru 4 14351 56.45 17263 67.91

>4 thru 5 5822 22.90 23085 90.81

>5 thru 6 1341 5.27 24426 96.08

Over 6.00 567 2.23 24993 98.31

No transcript 429 1.69 25422 100.00

Survey English

 Cumulative Cumulative

STUB0310 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------

0 883 3.47 883 3.47

>0 thru 1 1870 7.36 2753 10.83

>1 thru 2 4457 17.53 7210 28.36

>2 thru 3 5665 22.28 12875 50.65

>3 thru 4 11459 45.08 24334 95.72

>4 thru 5 594 2.34 24928 98.06

>5 thru 6 45 0.18 24973 98.23

Over 6.00 20 0.08 24993 98.31

No transcript 429 1.69 25422 100.00
Literature

Cumulative Cumulative

STUB0320 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------

0 15748 61.95 15748 61.95

>0 thru 1 5768 22.69 21516 84.64

>1 thru 2 2856 11.23 24372 95.87

>2 thru 3 570 2.24 24942 98.11

>3 thru 4 50 0.20 24992 98.31

>4 thru 5 1 0.00 24993 98.31

No transcript 429 1.69 25422 100.00

Composition

Cumulative Cumulative

STUB0330 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------

0 16447 64.70 16447 64.70

>0 thru 1 6671 26.24 23118 90.94

>1 thru 2 1424 5.60 24542 96.54

>2 thru 3 328 1.29 24870 97.83

>3 thru 4 85 0.33 24955 98.16

>4 thru 5 33 0.13 24988 98.29

>5 thru 6 3 0.01 24991 98.30

Over 6.00 2 0.01 24993 98.31

No transcript 429 1.69 25422 100.00

Speech

Cumulative Cumulative

STUB0340 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------

0 19953 78.49 19953 78.49

>0 thru 1 4734 18.62 24687 97.11

>1 thru 2 244 0.96 24931 98.07

>2 thru 3 48 0.19 24979 98.26

>3 thru 4 11 0.04 24990 98.30

>4 thru 5 2 0.01 24992 98.31

>5 thru 6 1 0.00 24993 98.31

No transcript 429 1.69 25422 100.00

AP/Honors English
Cumulative Cumulative

STUB0350 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------

0 20177 79.37 20177 79.37

>0 thru 1 3822 15.03 23999 94.40

>1 thru 2 792 3.12 24791 97.52

>2 thru 3 88 0.35 24879 97.86

>3 thru 4 113 0.44 24992 98.31

>4 thru 5 1 0.00 24993 98.31

No transcript 429 1.69 25422 100.00

Any Remedial/Below Grade English

Cumulative Cumulative

STUB0360 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------

0 20609 81.07 20609 81.07

>0 thru 1 2277 8.96 22886 90.02

>1 thru 2 961 3.78 23847 93.80

>2 thru 3 481 1.89 24328 95.70

>3 thru 4 410 1.61 24738 97.31

>4 thru 5 145 0.57 24883 97.88

>5 thru 6 63 0.25 24946 98.13

Over 6.00 47 0.18 24993 98.31

No transcript 429 1.69 25422 100.00

English as a Second Language

Cumulative Cumulative

STUB0370 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------

0 24049 94.60 24049 94.60

>0 thru 1 213 0.84 24262 95.44

>1 thru 2 191 0.75 24453 96.19

>2 thru 3 152 0.60 24605 96.79

>3 thru 4 122 0.48 24727 97.27

>4 thru 5 107 0.42 24834 97.69

>5 thru 6 79 0.31 24913 98.00

Over 6.00 80 0.31 24993 98.31

No transcript 429 1.69 25422 100.00
Social Studies

Cumulative Cumulative

STUB0400 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------

0 94 0.37 94 0.37

>0 thru 1 98 0.39 192 0.76

>1 thru 2 641 2.52 833 3.28

>2 thru 3 8679 34.14 9512 37.42

>3 thru 4 10171 40.01 19683 77.43

>4 thru 5 3877 15.25 23560 92.68

>5 thru 6 1044 4.11 24604 96.78

Over 6.00 389 1.53 24993 98.31

No transcript 429 1.69 25422 100.00

American History

Cumulative Cumulative

STUB0410 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------

0 1604 6.31 1604 6.31

>0 thru 1 20784 81.76 22388 88.07

>1 thru 2 2474 9.73 24862 97.80

>2 thru 3 119 0.47 24981 98.27

>3 thru 4 9 0.04 24990 98.30

>4 thru 5 2 0.01 24992 98.31

>5 thru 6 1 0.00 24993 98.31

No transcript 429 1.69 25422 100.00

AP American History

Cumulative Cumulative

STUB0411 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------

0 21082 82.93 21082 82.93

>0 thru 1 3675 14.46 24757 97.38

>1 thru 2 221 0.87 24978 98.25

>2 thru 3 15 0.06 24993 98.31

No transcript 429 1.69 25422 100.00
World History

Cumulative Cumulative

STUB0420 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------

0 8066 31.73 8066 31.73

>0 thru 1 15451 60.78 23517 92.51

>1 thru 2 1299 5.11 24816 97.62

>2 thru 3 100 0.39 24916 98.01

>3 thru 4 76 0.30 24992 98.31

>5 thru 6 1 0.00 24993 98.31

No transcript 429 1.69 25422 100.00

AP Western Civ/European History

Cumulative Cumulative

STUB0421 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------

0 23197 91.25 23197 91.25

>0 thru 1 1609 6.33 24806 97.58

>1 thru 2 116 0.46 24922 98.03

>2 thru 3 69 0.27 24991 98.30

>3 thru 4 2 0.01 24993 98.31

No transcript 429 1.69 25422 100.00

American Government & Politics

Cumulative Cumulative

STUB0430 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------

0 4252 16.73 4252 16.73

>0 thru 1 18609 73.20 22861 89.93

>1 thru 2 1935 7.61 24796 97.54

>2 thru 3 161 0.63 24957 98.17

>3 thru 4 32 0.13 24989 98.30

>4 thru 5 4 0.02 24993 98.31

No transcript 429 1.69 25422 100.00
Humanities Other

Cumulative Cumulative

STUB0440 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------

0 2608 10.26 2608 10.26

>0 thru 1 9390 36.94 11998 47.20

>1 thru 2 8092 31.83 20090 79.03

>2 thru 3 3262 12.83 23352 91.86

>3 thru 4 1160 4.56 24512 96.42

>4 thru 5 331 1.30 24843 97.72

>5 thru 6 105 0.41 24948 98.14

Over 6.00 45 0.18 24993 98.31

No transcript 429 1.69 25422 100.00

Non-western History

Cumulative Cumulative

STUB0441 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------

0 23629 92.95 23629 92.95

>0 thru 1 1327 5.22 24956 98.17

>1 thru 2 36 0.14 24992 98.31

>2 thru 3 1 0.00 24993 98.31

No transcript 429 1.69 25422 100.00

Western History/Civilization

Cumulative Cumulative

STUB0442 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------

0 22949 90.27 22949 90.27

>0 thru 1 1866 7.34 24815 97.61

>1 thru 2 172 0.68 24987 98.29

>2 thru 3 6 0.02 24993 98.31

No transcript 429 1.69 25422 100.00
Economics

Cumulative Cumulative

STUB0443 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------

0 12546 49.35 12546 49.35

>0 thru 1 12359 48.62 24905 97.97

>1 thru 2 82 0.32 24987 98.29

>2 thru 3 4 0.02 24991 98.30

>3 thru 4 2 0.01 24993 98.31

No transcript 429 1.69 25422 100.00

Geography

Cumulative Cumulative

STUB0444 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------

0 17703 69.64 17703 69.64

>0 thru 1 7191 28.29 24894 97.92

>1 thru 2 93 0.37 24987 98.29

>2 thru 3 5 0.02 24992 98.31

>3 thru 4 1 0.00 24993 98.31

No transcript 429 1.69 25422 100.00

Sociology/Psychology

Cumulative Cumulative

STUB0445 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------

0 17957 70.64 17957 70.64

>0 thru 1 6577 25.87 24534 96.51

>1 thru 2 420 1.65 24954 98.16

>2 thru 3 28 0.11 24982 98.27

>3 thru 4 5 0.02 24987 98.29

>4 thru 5 2 0.01 24989 98.30

>5 thru 6 2 0.01 24991 98.30

Over 6.00 2 0.01 24993 98.31

No transcript 429 1.69 25422 100.00
International Politics

Cumulative Cumulative

STUB0446 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------

0 23629 92.95 23629 92.95

>0 thru 1 1344 5.29 24973 98.23

>1 thru 2 16 0.06 24989 98.30

>2 thru 3 4 0.02 24993 98.31

No transcript 429 1.69 25422 100.00

Remedial/Below Grade Social Studies

Cumulative Cumulative

STUB0447 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------

0 24288 95.54 24288 95.54

>0 thru 1 668 2.63 24956 98.17

>1 thru 2 28 0.11 24984 98.28

>2 thru 3 5 0.02 24989 98.30

>3 thru 4 4 0.02 24993 98.31

No transcript 429 1.69 25422 100.00

AP/Honors Social Studies

Cumulative Cumulative

STUB0450 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------

0 19072 75.02 19072 75.02

>0 thru 1 3619 14.24 22691 89.26

>1 thru 2 1594 6.27 24285 95.53

>2 thru 3 515 2.03 24800 97.55

>3 thru 4 121 0.48 24921 98.03

>4 thru 5 46 0.18 24967 98.21

>5 thru 6 14 0.06 24981 98.27

Over 6.00 12 0.05 24993 98.31

No transcript 429 1.69 25422 100.00
Fine Arts

Cumulative Cumulative

STUB0500 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------

0 5275 20.75 5275 20.75

>0 thru 1 7780 30.60 13055 51.35

>1 thru 2 4948 19.46 18003 70.82

>2 thru 3 2556 10.05 20559 80.87

>3 thru 4 1877 7.38 22436 88.25

>4 thru 5 1073 4.22 23509 92.48

>5 thru 6 544 2.14 24053 94.61

Over 6.00 940 3.70 24993 98.31

No transcript 429 1.69 25422 100.00

Fine Arts & Crafts

Cumulative Cumulative

STUB0510 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------

0 11382 44.77 11382 44.77

>0 thru 1 8713 34.27 20095 79.05

>1 thru 2 3045 11.98 23140 91.02

>2 thru 3 1043 4.10 24183 95.13

>3 thru 4 488 1.92 24671 97.05

>4 thru 5 164 0.65 24835 97.69

>5 thru 6 61 0.24 24896 97.93

Over 6.00 97 0.38 24993 98.31

No transcript 429 1.69 25422 100.00

Music

Cumulative Cumulative

STUB0520 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------

0 16575 65.20 16575 65.20

>0 thru 1 3619 14.24 20194 79.44

>1 thru 2 1463 5.75 21657 85.19

>2 thru 3 924 3.63 22581 88.82

>3 thru 4 1189 4.68 23770 93.50

>4 thru 5 497 1.95 24267 95.46

>5 thru 6 273 1.07 24540 96.53

Over 6.00 453 1.78 24993 98.31

No transcript 429 1.69 25422 100.00
Drama

Cumulative Cumulative

STUB0530 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------

0 21679 85.28 21679 85.28

>0 thru 1 2392 9.41 24071 94.69

>1 thru 2 512 2.01 24583 96.70

>2 thru 3 220 0.87 24803 97.57

>3 thru 4 97 0.38 24900 97.95

>4 thru 5 28 0.11 24928 98.06

>5 thru 6 15 0.06 24943 98.12

Over 6.00 50 0.20 24993 98.31

No transcript 429 1.69 25422 100.00

Dance

Cumulative Cumulative

STUB0540 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------

0 23116 90.93 23116 90.93

>0 thru 1 1496 5.88 24612 96.81

>1 thru 2 211 0.83 24823 97.64

>2 thru 3 70 0.28 24893 97.92

>3 thru 4 40 0.16 24933 98.08

>4 thru 5 11 0.04 24944 98.12

>5 thru 6 11 0.04 24955 98.16

Over 6.00 38 0.15 24993 98.31

No transcript 429 1.69 25422 100.00

Art/Music Appreciation History

Cumulative Cumulative

STUB0550 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------

0 23027 90.58 23027 90.58

>0 thru 1 1868 7.35 24895 97.93

>1 thru 2 87 0.34 24982 98.27

>2 thru 3 5 0.02 24987 98.29

>3 thru 4 3 0.01 24990 98.30

>4 thru 5 3 0.01 24993 98.31

No transcript 429 1.69 25422 100.00
Foreign Languages

Cumulative Cumulative

STUB0600 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------

0 4841 19.04 4841 19.04

>0 thru 1 3631 14.28 8472 33.33

>1 thru 2 8456 33.26 16928 66.59

>2 thru 3 4718 18.56 21646 85.15

>3 thru 4 2377 9.35 24023 94.50

>4 thru 5 499 1.96 24522 96.46

>5 thru 6 187 0.74 24709 97.20

Over 6.00 284 1.12 24993 98.31

No transcript 429 1.69 25422 100.00

Any AP Foreign Language

Cumulative Cumulative

STUB0601 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------

0 23652 93.04 23652 93.04

>0 thru 1 1110 4.37 24762 97.40

>1 thru 2 217 0.85 24979 98.26

>2 thru 3 13 0.05 24992 98.31

>3 thru 4 1 0.00 24993 98.31

No transcript 429 1.69 25422 100.00

Survey Foreign Language

Cumulative Cumulative

STUB0610 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------

0 24052 94.61 24052 94.61

>0 thru 1 229 0.90 24281 95.51

>1 thru 2 182 0.72 24463 96.23

>2 thru 3 152 0.60 24615 96.83

>3 thru 4 135 0.53 24750 97.36

>4 thru 5 104 0.41 24854 97.77

>5 thru 6 69 0.27 24923 98.04

Over 6.00 70 0.28 24993 98.31

No transcript 429 1.69 25422 100.00
French

Cumulative Cumulative

STUB0620 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------

0 21013 82.66 21013 82.66

>0 thru 1 1111 4.37 22124 87.03

>1 thru 2 1554 6.11 23678 93.14

>2 thru 3 825 3.25 24503 96.39

>3 thru 4 461 1.81 24964 98.20

>4 thru 5 29 0.11 24993 98.31

No transcript 429 1.69 25422 100.00

Spanish

Cumulative Cumulative

STUB0630 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------

0 10684 42.03 10684 42.03

>0 thru 1 3458 13.60 14142 55.63

>1 thru 2 6580 25.88 20722 81.51

>2 thru 3 2986 11.75 23708 93.26

>3 thru 4 1163 4.57 24871 97.83

>4 thru 5 118 0.46 24989 98.30

>5 thru 6 4 0.02 24993 98.31

No transcript 429 1.69 25422 100.00

German

Cumulative Cumulative

STUB0640 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------

0 23921 94.10 23921 94.10

>0 thru 1 276 1.09 24197 95.18

>1 thru 2 410 1.61 24607 96.79

>2 thru 3 203 0.80 24810 97.59

>3 thru 4 169 0.66 24979 98.26

>4 thru 5 14 0.06 24993 98.31

No transcript 429 1.69 25422 100.00
Latin

Cumulative Cumulative

STUB0650 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------

0 24241 95.35 24241 95.35

>0 thru 1 262 1.03 24503 96.39

>1 thru 2 273 1.07 24776 97.46

>2 thru 3 127 0.50 24903 97.96

>3 thru 4 74 0.29 24977 98.25

>4 thru 5 16 0.06 24993 98.31

No transcript 429 1.69 25422 100.00

Japanese

Cumulative Cumulative

STUB0660 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------

0 24661 97.01 24661 97.01

>0 thru 1 91 0.36 24752 97.36

>1 thru 2 120 0.47 24872 97.84

>2 thru 3 72 0.28 24944 98.12

>3 thru 4 43 0.17 24987 98.29

>4 thru 5 5 0.02 24992 98.31

Over 6.00 1 0.00 24993 98.31

No transcript 429 1.69 25422 100.00

Mandarin/Cantonese

Cumulative Cumulative

STUB0670 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------

0 24904 97.96 24904 97.96

>0 thru 1 36 0.14 24940 98.10

>1 thru 2 20 0.08 24960 98.18

>2 thru 3 25 0.10 24985 98.28

>3 thru 4 7 0.03 24992 98.31

>4 thru 5 1 0.00 24993 98.31

No transcript 429 1.69 25422 100.00
Russian

Cumulative Cumulative

STUB0680 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------

0 24966 98.21 24966 98.21

>0 thru 1 10 0.04 24976 98.25

>1 thru 2 9 0.04 24985 98.28

>2 thru 3 3 0.01 24988 98.29

>3 thru 4 4 0.02 24992 98.31

>4 thru 5 1 0.00 24993 98.31

No transcript 429 1.69 25422 100.00

Foreign Language - Other

Cumulative Cumulative

STUB0690 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------

0 23539 92.59 23539 92.59

>0 thru 1 611 2.40 24150 95.00

>1 thru 2 518 2.04 24668 97.03

>2 thru 3 240 0.94 24908 97.98

>3 thru 4 61 0.24 24969 98.22

>4 thru 5 15 0.06 24984 98.28

>5 thru 6 4 0.02 24988 98.29

Over 6.00 5 0.02 24993 98.31

No transcript 429 1.69 25422 100.00

Computer-related Studies

Cumulative Cumulative

STUB0700 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------

0 9146 35.98 9146 35.98

>0 thru 1 11055 43.49 20201 79.46

>1 thru 2 3472 13.66 23673 93.12

>2 thru 3 925 3.64 24598 96.76

>3 thru 4 266 1.05 24864 97.81

>4 thru 5 73 0.29 24937 98.09

>5 thru 6 27 0.11 24964 98.20

Over 6.00 29 0.11 24993 98.31

No transcript 429 1.69 25422 100.00
Clerical & Data Entry

Cumulative Cumulative

STUB0710 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------

0 16952 66.68 16952 66.68

>0 thru 1 6591 25.93 23543 92.61

>1 thru 2 1170 4.60 24713 97.21

>2 thru 3 226 0.89 24939 98.10

>3 thru 4 30 0.12 24969 98.22

>4 thru 5 5 0.02 24974 98.24

>5 thru 6 6 0.02 24980 98.26

Over 6.00 13 0.05 24993 98.31

No transcript 429 1.69 25422 100.00

Computer Applications

Cumulative Cumulative

STUB0720 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------

0 20975 82.51 20975 82.51

>0 thru 1 3309 13.02 24284 95.52

>1 thru 2 516 2.03 24800 97.55

>2 thru 3 107 0.42 24907 97.97

>3 thru 4 62 0.24 24969 98.22

>4 thru 5 7 0.03 24976 98.25

>5 thru 6 12 0.05 24988 98.29

Over 6.00 5 0.02 24993 98.31

No transcript 429 1.69 25422 100.00

Computer Science

Cumulative Cumulative

STUB0730 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------

0 17085 67.21 17085 67.21

>0 thru 1 7031 27.66 24116 94.86

>1 thru 2 753 2.96 24869 97.82

>2 thru 3 104 0.41 24973 98.23

>3 thru 4 8 0.03 24981 98.27

>4 thru 5 7 0.03 24988 98.29

>5 thru 6 4 0.02 24992 98.31

Over 6.00 1 0.00 24993 98.31

No transcript 429 1.69 25422 100.00
Consumer & Homemaking Education

Cumulative Cumulative

STUB0800 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------

0 14436 56.79 14436 56.79

>0 thru 1 7396 29.09 21832 85.88

>1 thru 2 2211 8.70 24043 94.58

>2 thru 3 687 2.70 24730 97.28

>3 thru 4 199 0.78 24929 98.06

>4 thru 5 46 0.18 24975 98.24

>5 thru 6 7 0.03 24982 98.27

Over 6.00 11 0.04 24993 98.31

No transcript 429 1.69 25422 100.00

General Labor Market

Cumulative Cumulative

STUB0900 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------

0 10169 40.00 10169 40.00

>0 thru 1 11396 44.83 21565 84.83

>1 thru 2 2419 9.52 23984 94.34

>2 thru 3 569 2.24 24553 96.58

>3 thru 4 213 0.84 24766 97.42

>4 thru 5 83 0.33 24849 97.75

>5 thru 6 54 0.21 24903 97.96

Over 6.00 90 0.35 24993 98.31

No transcript 429 1.69 25422 100.00

Typewriting 1

Cumulative Cumulative

STUB0910 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------

0 14742 57.99 14742 57.99

>0 thru 1 10054 39.55 24796 97.54

>1 thru 2 191 0.75 24987 98.29

>2 thru 3 4 0.02 24991 98.30

>3 thru 4 1 0.00 24992 98.31

>5 thru 6 1 0.00 24993 98.31

No transcript 429 1.69 25422 100.00
Introductory Industrial

Cumulative Cumulative

STUB0920 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------

0 23803 93.63 23803 93.63

>0 thru 1 993 3.91 24796 97.54

>1 thru 2 127 0.50 24923 98.04

>2 thru 3 48 0.19 24971 98.23

>3 thru 4 18 0.07 24989 98.30

>4 thru 5 3 0.01 24992 98.31

Over 6.00 1 0.00 24993 98.31

No transcript 429 1.69 25422 100.00

Work Experience/Career

Cumulative Cumulative

STUB0930 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------

0 19556 76.93 19556 76.93

>0 thru 1 4360 17.15 23916 94.08

>1 thru 2 654 2.57 24570 96.65

>2 thru 3 189 0.74 24759 97.39

>3 thru 4 89 0.35 24848 97.74

>4 thru 5 42 0.17 24890 97.91

>5 thru 6 34 0.13 24924 98.04

Over 6.00 69 0.27 24993 98.31

No transcript 429 1.69 25422 100.00

General Labor Market Skills

Cumulative Cumulative

STUB0940 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------

0 22987 90.42 22987 90.42

>0 thru 1 1787 7.03 24774 97.45

>1 thru 2 163 0.64 24937 98.09

>2 thru 3 46 0.18 24983 98.27

>3 thru 4 7 0.03 24990 98.30

>4 thru 5 1 0.00 24991 98.30

>5 thru 6 1 0.00 24992 98.31

Over 6.00 1 0.00 24993 98.31

No transcript 429 1.69 25422 100.00
Specific Labor Market

Cumulative Cumulative

STUB1000 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------

0 3564 14.02 3564 14.02

>0 thru 1 5667 22.29 9231 36.31

>1 thru 2 4449 17.50 13680 53.81

>2 thru 3 3407 13.40 17087 67.21

>3 thru 4 2691 10.59 19778 77.80

>4 thru 5 1852 7.29 21630 85.08

>5 thru 6 1289 5.07 22919 90.15

Over 6.00 2074 8.16 24993 98.31

No transcript 429 1.69 25422 100.00

Agriculture/Renewable Resources

Cumulative Cumulative

STUB1010 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------

0 22603 88.91 22603 88.91

>0 thru 1 1300 5.11 23903 94.02

>1 thru 2 444 1.75 24347 95.77

>2 thru 3 277 1.09 24624 96.86

>3 thru 4 184 0.72 24808 97.58

>4 thru 5 84 0.33 24892 97.92

>5 thru 6 42 0.17 24934 98.08

Over 6.00 59 0.23 24993 98.31

No transcript 429 1.69 25422 100.00

Business

Cumulative Cumulative

STUB1020 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------

0 13121 51.61 13121 51.61

>0 thru 1 7602 29.90 20723 81.52

>1 thru 2 2656 10.45 23379 91.96

>2 thru 3 975 3.84 24354 95.80

>3 thru 4 383 1.51 24737 97.31

>4 thru 5 147 0.58 24884 97.88

>5 thru 6 56 0.22 24940 98.10

Over 6.00 53 0.21 24993 98.31

No transcript 429 1.69 25422 100.00
Marketing & Distribution

Cumulative Cumulative

STUB1030 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------

0 22320 87.80 22320 87.80

>0 thru 1 1619 6.37 23939 94.17

>1 thru 2 479 1.88 24418 96.05

>2 thru 3 286 1.13 24704 97.18

>3 thru 4 181 0.71 24885 97.89

>4 thru 5 33 0.13 24918 98.02

>5 thru 6 46 0.18 24964 98.20

Over 6.00 29 0.11 24993 98.31

No transcript 429 1.69 25422 100.00

Health

Cumulative Cumulative

STUB1040 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------

0 23243 91.43 23243 91.43

>0 thru 1 892 3.51 24135 94.94

>1 thru 2 272 1.07 24407 96.01

>2 thru 3 220 0.87 24627 96.87

>3 thru 4 112 0.44 24739 97.31

>4 thru 5 43 0.17 24782 97.48

>5 thru 6 188 0.74 24970 98.22

Over 6.00 23 0.09 24993 98.31

No transcript 429 1.69 25422 100.00

Occupational Home Economics

Cumulative Cumulative

STUB1050 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------

0 21962 86.39 21962 86.39

>0 thru 1 1870 7.36 23832 93.75

>1 thru 2 581 2.29 24413 96.03

>2 thru 3 242 0.95 24655 96.98

>3 thru 4 135 0.53 24790 97.51

>4 thru 5 71 0.28 24861 97.79

>5 thru 6 62 0.24 24923 98.04

Over 6.00 70 0.28 24993 98.31

No transcript 429 1.69 25422 100.00
Trade & Industry

Cumulative Cumulative

STUB1060 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------

0 16385 64.45 16385 64.45

>0 thru 1 4405 17.33 20790 81.78

>1 thru 2 1646 6.47 22436 88.25

>2 thru 3 979 3.85 23415 92.11

>3 thru 4 642 2.53 24057 94.63

>4 thru 5 355 1.40 24412 96.03

>5 thru 6 272 1.07 24684 97.10

Over 6.00 309 1.22 24993 98.31

No transcript 429 1.69 25422 100.00

Technical & Communications

Cumulative Cumulative

STUB1070 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------

0 15923 62.63 15923 62.63

>0 thru 1 6958 27.37 22881 90.00

>1 thru 2 1600 6.29 24481 96.30

>2 thru 3 343 1.35 24824 97.65

>3 thru 4 108 0.42 24932 98.07

>4 thru 5 23 0.09 24955 98.16

>5 thru 6 23 0.09 24978 98.25

Over 6.00 15 0.06 24993 98.31

No transcript 429 1.69 25422 100.00

Unidentified Subject

Cumulative Cumulative

STUB1080 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------

0 22865 89.94 22865 89.94

>0 thru 1 1016 4.00 23881 93.94

>1 thru 2 552 2.17 24433 96.11

>2 thru 3 275 1.08 24708 97.19

>3 thru 4 142 0.56 24850 97.75

>4 thru 5 51 0.20 24901 97.95

>5 thru 6 55 0.22 24956 98.17

Over 6.00 37 0.15 24993 98.31

No transcript 429 1.69 25422 100.00
General Skills

Cumulative Cumulative

STUB1100 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------

0 15001 59.01 15001 59.01

>0 thru 1 6515 25.63 21516 84.64

>1 thru 2 2180 8.58 23696 93.21

>2 thru 3 760 2.99 24456 96.20

>3 thru 4 291 1.14 24747 97.34

>4 thru 5 125 0.49 24872 97.84

>5 thru 6 50 0.20 24922 98.03

Over 6.00 71 0.28 24993 98.31

No transcript 429 1.69 25422 100.00

Personal Health & Physical Education

Cumulative Cumulative

STUB1200 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------

0 235 0.92 235 0.92

>0 thru 1 4440 17.47 4675 18.39

>1 thru 2 7893 31.05 12568 49.44

>2 thru 3 7111 27.97 19679 77.41

>3 thru 4 3438 13.52 23117 90.93

>4 thru 5 1264 4.97 24381 95.91

>5 thru 6 359 1.41 24740 97.32

Over 6.00 253 1.00 24993 98.31

No transcript 429 1.69 25422 100.00

Physical Education

Cumulative Cumulative

STUB1210 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------

0 4583 18.03 4583 18.03

>0 thru 1 10795 42.46 15378 60.49

>1 thru 2 6971 27.42 22349 87.91

>2 thru 3 1717 6.75 24066 94.67

>3 thru 4 805 3.17 24871 97.83

>4 thru 5 96 0.38 24967 98.21

>5 thru 6 21 0.08 24988 98.29

Over 6.00 5 0.02 24993 98.31

No transcript 429 1.69 25422 100.00
Health

Cumulative Cumulative

STUB1220 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------

0 6807 26.78 6807 26.78

>0 thru 1 17700 69.62 24507 96.40

>1 thru 2 447 1.76 24954 98.16

>2 thru 3 34 0.13 24988 98.29

>3 thru 4 1 0.00 24989 98.30

Over 6.00 4 0.02 24993 98.31

No transcript 429 1.69 25422 100.00

Driver Education

Cumulative Cumulative

STUB1240 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------

0 18456 72.60 18456 72.60

>0 thru 1 6525 25.67 24981 98.27

>1 thru 2 7 0.03 24988 98.29

>3 thru 4 4 0.02 24992 98.31

>4 thru 5 1 0.00 24993 98.31

No transcript 429 1.69 25422 100.00

Religion

Cumulative Cumulative

STUB1300 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------

0 23533 92.57 23533 92.57

>0 thru 1 412 1.62 23945 94.19

>1 thru 2 229 0.90 24174 95.09

>2 thru 3 310 1.22 24484 96.31

>3 thru 4 490 1.93 24974 98.24

>4 thru 5 18 0.07 24992 98.31

>5 thru 6 1 0.00 24993 98.31

No transcript 429 1.69 25422 100.00
Military Science

Cumulative Cumulative

STUB1400 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------

0 23742 93.39 23742 93.39

>0 thru 1 532 2.09 24274 95.48

>1 thru 2 244 0.96 24518 96.44

>2 thru 3 228 0.90 24746 97.34

>3 thru 4 172 0.68 24918 98.02

>4 thru 5 34 0.13 24952 98.15

>5 thru 6 22 0.09 24974 98.24

Over 6.00 19 0.07 24993 98.31

No transcript 429 1.69 25422 100.00

Special Education

Cumulative Cumulative

STUB1500 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------

0 23224 91.35 23224 91.35

>0 thru 1 619 2.43 23843 93.79

>1 thru 2 184 0.72 24027 94.51

>2 thru 3 152 0.60 24179 95.11

>3 thru 4 151 0.59 24330 95.70

>4 thru 5 96 0.38 24426 96.08

>5 thru 6 60 0.24 24486 96.32

Over 6.00 507 1.99 24993 98.31

No transcript 429 1.69 25422 100.00

All Courses Other Than Above

Cumulative Cumulative

STUB1600 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------

0 24530 96.49 24530 96.49

>0 thru 1 346 1.36 24876 97.85

>1 thru 2 70 0.28 24946 98.13

>2 thru 3 11 0.04 24957 98.17

>3 thru 4 13 0.05 24970 98.22

>4 thru 5 3 0.01 24973 98.23

>5 thru 6 5 0.02 24978 98.25

Over 6.00 15 0.06 24993 98.31

No transcript 429 1.69 25422 100.00
Primary Sampling Unit

Cumulative Cumulative

PSU Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------

103-494 25422 100.00 25422 100.00

School ID (within PSU)

 Cumulative Cumulative

SCHOOL Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------

3011-3574 25422 100.00 25422 100.00

Student ID (within School)

Cumulative Cumulative

STUDENT Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-------------------------------------------------------------

Linked 23900 94.01 23900 94.01

Unlinked 1522 5.99 25422 100.00

Student Exit Status

Cumulative Cumulative

EXSTAT Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

1-Standard Diploma 23290 91.61 23290 91.61

2-Honors Diploma 1356 5.33 24646 96.95

3-Spec Ed Diploma 267 1.05 24913 98.00

4-Cert of Attendance 193 0.76 25106 98.76

5-Cert of Completion 142 0.56 25248 99.32

Unknown 174 0.68 25422 100.00

Imputation Flag for Student Graduation

Cumulative Cumulative

GRAD_IMP Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-------------------------------------------------------------

No 25248 99.32 25248 99.32

Yes 174 0.68 25422 100.00
Student Race/Ethnicity

Cumulative Cumulative

DRVDRACE Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------------

1-White 15025 59.10 15025 59.10

2-Black 4772 18.77 19797 77.87

3-Hispanic 3645 14.34 23442 92.21

4-Asian/Pacific Isl 1712 6.73 25154 98.95

5-American Indian 223 0.88 25377 99.82

6-Other 45 0.18 25422 100.00

Imputation Flag for Student Race

Cumulative Cumulative

RACE_IMP Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-------------------------------------------------------------

No 24892 97.92 24892 97.92

Yes 530 2.08 25422 100.00

Student Grade Level In 1997-98

Cumulative Cumulative

GRADE Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------

Twelfth Grade 25422 100.00 25422 100.00

Student Gender

Cumulative Cumulative

SEX Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-----------------------------------------------------------------

1-Male 11941 46.97 11941 46.97

2-Female 13273 52.21 25214 99.18

Not reported 208 0.82 25422 100.00
Student Month Born

Cumulative Cumulative

BIRTHMO Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------

Jan 2025 7.97 2025 7.97

Feb 1956 7.69 3981 15.66

Mar 2056 8.09 6037 23.75

Apr 2084 8.20 8121 31.94

May 2055 8.08 10176 40.03

Jun 2060 8.10 12236 48.13

Jul 2182 8.58 14418 56.71

Aug 2332 9.17 16750 65.89

Sep 2305 9.07 19055 74.95

Oct 2256 8.87 21311 83.83

Nov 1962 7.72 23273 91.55

Dec 2149 8.45 25422 100.00

Student Year Born

Cumulative Cumulative

BIRTHYR Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-----------------------------------------------------------------

1976 38 0.15 38 0.15

1977 145 0.57 183 0.72

1978 877 3.45 1060 4.17

1979 8334 32.78 9394 36.95

1980 15758 61.99 25152 98.94

1981 258 1.01 25410 99.95

1982 9 0.04 25419 99.99

1983 3 0.01 25422 100.00

Imputation Flag for Student Birthdate

Cumulative Cumulative

BIRT_IMP Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-------------------------------------------------------------

No 25254 99.34 25254 99.34

Yes 168 0.66 25422 100.00
Student Disability Status

Cumulative Cumulative

HCFLAG Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-------------------------------------------------------------------

0-Not Disabled 461 1.81 461 1.81

1-Disabled 776 3.05 1237 4.87

9-Not reported 17612 69.28 18849 74.14

Unknown 6573 25.86 25422 100.00

Disabling Condition

Cumulative Cumulative

HCTYPE Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

00-Not Disabled 461 1.81 461 1.81

01-Multidisabled 74 0.29 535 2.10

02-Learning disabled 502 1.97 1037 4.08

03-Hearing impaired 9 0.04 1046 4.11

04-Visual impaired 6 0.02 1052 4.14

05-Speech impaired 4 0.02 1056 4.15

06-Mental impaired 119 0.47 1175 4.62

07-Emotional disturbed 23 0.09 1198 4.71

08-Orthopedic impaired 8 0.03 1206 4.74

09-Traumatic Brain Injury 4 0.02 1210 4.76

10-Other 27 0.11 1237 4.87

99-Missing 24185 95.13 25422 100.00

Jackknife Variance Stratum

Cumulative Cumulative

REPGRP1 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------

1-47 25422 100.00 25422 100.00

Jackknife Variance Unit

Cumulative Cumulative

DROPGRP Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------

1-2 25422 100.00 25422 100.00
NAEP Assessment Completed by Student

 Cumulative Cumulative

SUBJECT Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

---------------------------------------------------------------------

1-50-min Writing 2846 11.20 2846 11.20

2-Reading 6529 25.68 9375 36.88

3-Civics 3890 15.30 13265 52.18

4-25-min Writing 9658 37.99 22923 90.17

Missing 2499 9.83 25422 100.00

Type of High School Program

Cumulative Cumulative

TYPE_PGM Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-----------------------------------------------------------------

1-Standard 23380 91.97 23380 91.97

2-Vocational 299 1.18 23679 93.14

3-Other 1318 5.18 24997 98.33

Not Reported 425 1.67 25422 100.00

Date Entered School - Month

Cumulative Cumulative

ENTRMO Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-----------------------------------------------------------------

Jan 162 0.64 162 0.64

Feb 73 0.29 235 0.92

Mar 54 0.21 289 1.14

Apr 34 0.13 323 1.27

May 135 0.53 458 1.80

Jun 140 0.55 598 2.35

Jul 50 0.20 648 2.55

Aug 6219 24.46 6867 27.01

Sep 2974 11.70 9841 38.71

Oct 100 0.39 9941 39.10

Nov 84 0.33 10025 39.43

Dec 39 0.15 10064 39.59

Not reported 15358 60.41 25422 100.00
Date Entered School - Year

Cumulative Cumulative

ENTRYR Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------

1992-1998 24908 97.98 24908 97.98

Not Reported 514 2.02 25422 100.00

Graduation Date - Month

Cumulative Cumulative

GRADMO Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-----------------------------------------------------------------

Jan 51 0.20 51 0.20

Feb 7 0.03 58 0.23

Mar 6 0.02 64 0.25

Apr 6 0.02 70 0.28

May 7171 28.21 7241 28.48

Jun 16874 66.38 24115 94.86

Jul 81 0.32 24196 95.18

Aug 65 0.26 24261 95.43

Sep 2 0.01 24263 95.44

Oct 2 0.01 24265 95.45

Nov 2 0.01 24267 95.46

Dec 3 0.01 24270 95.47

Not reported 1152 4.53 25422 100.00

Graduation Date - Year

Cumulative Cumulative

GRADYR Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-------------------------------------------------------------

1998 24991 98.30 24991 98.30

Missing 431 1.70 25422 100.00
Number days absent in Grade 9

Cumulative Cumulative

ABS09 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-----------------------------------------------------------------

 0 1239 4.87 1239 4.87

1 - 10 7527 29.61 8766 34.48

11 - 20 2052 8.07 10818 42.55

21 - 30 442 1.74 11260 44.29

31 - 40 133 0.52 11393 44.82

41 - 50 60 0.24 11453 45.05

Over 50 65 0.26 11518 45.31

Not reported 13904 54.69 25422 100.00

Number days absent in Grade 10

Cumulative Cumulative

ABS10 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-----------------------------------------------------------------

0 1203 4.73 1203 4.73

 1 - 10 7236 28.46 8439 33.20

11 - 20 2177 8.56 10616 41.76

21 - 30 582 2.29 11198 44.05

31 - 40 170 0.67 11368 44.72

41 - 50 90 0.35 11458 45.07

Over 50 79 0.31 11537 45.38

Not reported 13885 54.62 25422 100.00

Number days absent in Grade 11

Cumulative Cumulative

ABS11 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-----------------------------------------------------------------

 0 851 3.35 851 3.35

 1 - 10 7044 27.71 7895 31.06

11 - 20 2646 10.41 10541 41.46

21 - 30 799 3.14 11340 44.61

31 - 40 270 1.06 11610 45.67

41 - 50 121 0.48 11731 46.15

Over 50 102 0.40 11833 46.55

Not reported 13589 53.45 25422 100.00
Number days absent in Grade 12

Cumulative Cumulative

ABS12 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-----------------------------------------------------------------

 0 758 2.98 758 2.98

 1 - 10 6170 24.27 6928 27.25

11 - 20 3007 11.83 9935 39.08

21 - 30 954 3.75 10889 42.83

31 - 40 364 1.43 11253 44.26

41 - 50 161 0.63 11414 44.90

Over 50 150 0.59 11564 45.49

Not reported 13858 54.51 25422 100.00

Grade Point Avg (Computed)

Cumulative Cumulative

GPA_C Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-----------------------------------------------------------------

1.00 - 1.49 123 0.48 123 0.48

1.50 - 1.99 1579 6.21 1702 6.69

2.00 - 2.49 5492 21.60 7194 28.30

2.50 - 2.99 7458 29.34 14652 57.64

3.00 - 3.49 6120 24.07 20772 81.71

3.50 - 3.99 3873 15.23 24645 96.94

4.00 and up 325 1.28 24970 98.22

Not Reported 452 1.78 25422 100.00

Grade Point Avg (Transcript)

Cumulative Cumulative

GPA_T Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-----------------------------------------------------------------

Numeric 23007 90.50 23007 90.50

Not Reported 2415 9.50 25422 100.00

Class Rank

 Cumulative Cumulative

CLRANK Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

---------------------------------------------------------------------

Numeric 19878 78.19 19878 78.19

Missing 5544 21.81 25422 100.00
Class Size

Cumulative Cumulative

CLSIZE Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-----------------------------------------------------------------

 1 - 100 2584 10.16 2584 10.16

101 - 200 4975 19.57 7559 29.73

201 - 300 4548 17.89 12107 47.62

301 - 400 4583 18.03 16690 65.65

401 - 500 1998 7.86 18688 73.51

Over 500 2522 9.92 21210 83.43

 Not Reported 4212 16.57 25422 100.00

Academic Track

Cumulative Cumulative

ACAD_TRK Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------

1-Academic 17243 67.83 17243 67.83

2-Vocational 1032 4.06 18275 71.89

3-Both 5010 19.71 23285 91.59

4-Neither 1708 6.72 24993 98.31

No transcript 429 1.69 25422 100.00

Urbanicity

Cumulative Cumulative

TYPLOC_R Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

1-Large city 4169 16.40 4169 16.40

2-Mid-size city 5063 19.92 9232 36.32

3-Urban fringe of large 7041 27.70 16273 64.01

4-Urban fringe of small 2946 11.59 19219 75.60

5-Large town 120 0.47 19339 76.07

6-Small town 3253 12.80 22592 88.87

7-Other rural 2830 11.13 25422 100.00
Census Region

Cumulative Cumulative

CENSREGN Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

----------------------------------------------------------------

1-Northeast 3303 12.99 3303 12.99

2-Midwest 5122 20.15 8425 33.14

3-South 9869 38.82 18294 71.96

4-West 7128 28.04 25422 100.00

NAEP Region

Cumulative Cumulative

NAEPREGN Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

----------------------------------------------------------------

1-Northeast 4624 18.19 4624 18.19

2-Southeast 6746 26.54 11370 44.73

3-Central 5122 20.15 16492 64.87

4-West 8930 35.13 25422 100.00

Public/Nonpublic School

 Cumulative Cumulative

PUBPRIV Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------

1-Public 24297 95.57 24297 95.57

2-Private 1125 4.43 25422 100.00

Graduation Requirements Level Flag

Cumulative Cumulative

GRREQFLG Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

1-CarnegieUnit > Req 23625 92.93 23625 92.93

2-CarnegieUnit > 75% 1227 4.83 24852 97.76

3-CarnegieUnit = 75% 6 0.02 24858 97.78

4-CarnegieUnit < 75% 564 2.22 25422 100.00
Biology + Chemistry (2.00)

Cumulative Cumulative

STUB0281 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

0-Failed threshold 24993 98.31 24993 98.31

No transcript 429 1.69 25422 100.00

Biology + Chemistry + Physics (3.00)

Cumulative Cumulative

STUB0282 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

0-Failed threshold 24993 98.31 24993 98.31

No transcript 429 1.69 25422 100.00

3 Yrs Physical Education + Health (3.50)

Cumulative Cumulative

STUB1230 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

0-Failed threshold 23404 92.06 23404 92.06

1-Met threshold 1589 6.25 24993 98.31

No transcript 429 1.69 25422 100.00

4E+3SS+3SCI+3MATH+1/2COMP+2FL

Cumulative Cumulative

STUB2001 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

0-Failed threshold 21470 84.45 21470 84.45

1-Met threshold 3523 13.86 24993 98.31

No transcript 429 1.69 25422 100.00
4E+3SS+3SCI+3MATH+1/2COMP

Cumulative Cumulative

STUB2002 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

0-Failed threshold 20574 80.93 20574 80.93

1-Met threshold 4419 17.38 24993 98.31

No transcript 429 1.69 25422 100.00

4E+3SS+3SCI+3MATH+2FL

Cumulative Cumulative

STUB2003 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

0-Failed threshold 14633 57.56 14633 57.56

1-Met threshold 10360 40.75 24993 98.31

No transcript 429 1.69 25422 100.00

4E+3SS+3SCI+3MATH

Cumulative Cumulative

STUB2004 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

0-Failed threshold 11590 45.59 11590 45.59

1-Met threshold 13403 52.72 24993 98.31

No transcript 429 1.69 25422 100.00

4E+3SS+2SCI+2MATH

Cumulative Cumulative

STUB2005 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

0-Failed threshold 6326 24.88 6326 24.88

1-Met threshold 18667 73.43 24993 98.31

No transcript 429 1.69 25422 100.00
Appendix J

Codebook for Course Offerings File
 1998 HIGH SCHOOL TRANSCRIPT STUDY

 CODEBOOK FOR COURSE OFFERINGS FILE

 January 1, 2000

 Question Column

 Name Number(s)

 ________ _________

 PSU 0001-0003 Primary Sampling Unit

 _____________________

 103-494 = PSU

 SCHOOL 0004-0007 School ID (within PSU)

 ______________________

 3011-3574 = School

 NOTE : Both PSU and school ID must be

 combined to uniquely identify a school within

 the data file.

 CATSRCE 0008 Source of Catalog Titles

 ________________________

 0 = Course list generated from

 transcripts

 1 = Course list provided by

 schools

 NOTE : Course lists provided by schools came

 in different formats. See variable CATTYPE.

 CATTYPE 0009 Type of Catalog Provided by School

 __________________________________

 0 = No materials available

 1 = District level course catalog

 2 = School course list

3 = School course catalog

9 = Unknown catalog type

 NOTE : A course list does not include

 descriptive information regarding course

 content. A course catalog contains

 descriptive information regarding course

 content that was used in assigning CSSC codes.

 CRSENAME 0010-0101 Course Title

 ____________

 Alphanumerics = Title of course, as it

 appeared in the school's

 course listing.

 NOTE : Left justified

 [1]
 Question Column

 Name Number(s)

 ________ _________

 OFFCAMP 0102 Taught off Campus (Flag)

 ________________________

 0 = No

 1 = Yes, at Area Vo Tech

 2 = Yes, at Special Ed Center

 3 = Yes, Other

 4 = Yes, at Multiple Locations

 OTHLANG 0103 Taught in Language Other Than English/ESL

 (Flag)

 ______

 0 = No

 1 = Yes

 REMED 0104 Remedial or Below Grade Level (Flag)

 ____________________________________

 0 = No

 1 = Yes

 HONORS 0105 Honors or Gifted/Talented Course (Flag)

 _______________________________________

 0 = No

 1 = Yes

 COMBO 0106 Combination Course (Flag)

 _________________________

 1 = Not a Combination Course

 (i.e., Course Not Split)

 2 = Course Split Into 2 Parts

 3 = Course Split Into 3 Parts

 4 = Course Split Into 4 Parts

 5 = Course Split Into 5 Parts

 NOTE: This flag indicates that the course was

 part of a combination course that has been

 split into its component parts. Credits were

 allocated equally among the parts.

 CSSC 0107-0112 Course CSSC Code

 ________________

 010111-569401 = CSSC Code

 [2]
 Question Column

 Name Number(s)

 ________ _________

 SPEDFLAG 0113 Special Education Flag

 ______________________

 0 = Functional SPED

 1 = Regular Course

2 = Resource SPED

9 = Unknown

 SEQ 0114 Sequence Flag

 _____________

 0 = Not Part of a Course Sequence

 1 = Introductory Course in a

 Course Sequence

 2 = Advanced Course in a Course

 Sequence

9 = Unknown

 [3]
1998 HIGH SCHOOL TRANSCRIPT STUDY

Course Offerings File

Primary Sampling Unit

 Cumulative Cumulative

PSU Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------

103 - 494 38359 100.00 38359 100.00

School ID (within PSU)

 Cumulative Cumulative

SCHOOL Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

----------------------------------------------------------------

3011 - 3574 38359 100.00 38359 100.00

Source of Catalog Titles

Cumulative Cumulative

CATSRCE Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

----------------------------------------------------------------------

0-Transcript 1762 4.59 1762 4.59

1-School Provided 36597 95.41 38359 100.00

Type of Catalog Provided by School

 Cumulative Cumulative

CATTYPE Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

---------------------------------------------------------------------

0-No Materials 1762 4.59 1762 4.59

1-District Level 2549 6.65 4311 11.24

2-School List 1891 4.93 6202 16.17

3-School Catalog 30102 78.47 36304 94.64

Unknown 2055 5.36 38359 100.00
Course Offerings File

Course Title

 Cumulative Cumulative

CRSENAME Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------

Alphanumerics 38359 100.00 38359 100.00

Taught Off Campus (Flag)

 Cumulative Cumulative

OFFCAMP Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

----------------------------------------------------------------------

0-On Campus 37105 96.73 37105 96.73

1-Vocational Ed 410 1.07 37515 97.80

2-Spec Ed Center 2 0.01 37517 97.80

3-Other 365 0.95 37882 98.76

4-Mult Location 477 1.24 38359 100.00

Taught in Other Than English/ESL (Flag)

 Cumulative Cumulative

OTHLANG Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

---------------------------------------------------------------

0-No 37531 97.84 37531 97.84

1-Yes 828 2.16 38359 100.00

Remedial or Below Grade Level (Flag)

 Cumulative Cumulative

REMED Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

---------------------------------------------------------------

0-No 37878 98.75 37878 98.75

1-Yes 481 1.25 38359 100.00
Course Offerings File

Honors or Gifted/Talented Course (Flag)

 Cumulative Cumulative

HONORS Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

---------------------------------------------------------------

0-No 34159 89.05 34159 89.05

1-Yes 4200 10.95 38359 100.00

Combination Course (Flag)

Cumulative Cumulative

COMBO Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

1-Not Combination 37939 98.91 37939 98.91

2-Split 2 Parts 402 1.05 38341 99.95

3-Split 3 Parts 7 0.02 38348 99.97

5-Split 5 Parts 11 0.03 38359 100.00

Course CSSC Code

 Cumulative Cumulative

CSSC Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------

010000-099999 4120 10.74 4120 10.74

100000-199999 5124 13.36 9244 24.10

200000-299999 11919 31.07 21163 55.17

300000-399999 3742 9.76 24905 64.93

400000-499999 7405 19.30 32310 84.23

500000-599999 6049 15.77 38359 100.00

Special Education Flag

Cumulative Cumulative

SPEDFLAG Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

0-Functional SpEd 948 2.47 948 2.47

1-Regular Course 35580 92.76 36528 95.23

2-Resource SpEd 1829 4.77 38357 99.99

Unknown 2 0.01 38359 100.00
Course Offerings File

Sequence Flag

Cumulative Cumulative

SEQ Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

0-Not Sequence 21395 55.78 21395 55.78

1-Intro Course 9342 24.35 30737 80.13

2-Advanced Course 7576 19.75 38313 99.88

Unknown 46 0.12 38359 100.00
Appendix K

NAEP Writing Data File
 1998 HIGH SCHOOL TRANSCRIPT STUDY

CODEBOOK FOR NAEP WRITING DATA

 JANUARY 1, 2000

 Question Column

 Name Number(s)

 ________ _________

 PSU 0001-0003 Primary Sampling Unit

 _____________________

 103-494 = PSU

 SCHOOL 0004-0007 School ID (Within PSU)

 ______________________

 3011-3574 = School ID

 NOTE: Both PSU and School ID must be combined

 to uniquely identify a school within the data

 file.

 STUDENT 0008-0017 Unique Student ID

 _________________

 0000000001-

 9899999999 = Student ID (NAEP booklet

 number)

 9900000000-

 9909999999 = Student ID (Student not

 linked to NAEP)

 PROF_1 0018-0024 PROF_1. Writing Proficiency - est 1

 ____________________________________

 11-265 = Estimate 1

 PROF_2 0025-0031 PROF_2. Writing Proficiency - est 2

 ____________________________________

 26-276 = Estimate 2

 PROF_3 0032-0038 PROF_3. Writing Proficiency - est 3

 ____________________________________

 21-273 = Estimate 3

 PROF_4 0039-0045 PROF_4. Writing Proficiency - est 4

 ____________________________________

 19-269 = Estimate 4

 PROF_5 0046-0052 PROF_5. Writing Proficiency - est 5

 ____________________________________

 16-259 = Estimate 5
1998 HIGH SCHOOL TRANSCRIPT STUDY

NAEP Writing File

Primary Sampling Unit

 Cumulative Cumulative

PSU Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------

103-494 7558 100.00 7558 100.00

School ID (within PSU)

 Cumulative Cumulative

SCHOOL Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------

3011-3574 7558 100.00 7558 100.00

Student ID (within School)

 Cumulative Cumulative

STUDENT Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-------------------------------------------------------------

Linked 7558 100.00 7558 100.00

Writing Proficiency - est 1

Cumulative Cumulative

PROF_1 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-------------------------------------------------------------

11 - 265 7558 100.00 7558 100.00

Writing Proficiency - est 2

Cumulative Cumulative

PROF_2 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-------------------------------------------------------------

26 - 276 7558 100.00 7558 100.00
NAEP Writing File

Writing Proficiency - est 3

Cumulative Cumulative

PROF_3 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-------------------------------------------------------------

21 - 273 7558 100.00 7558 100.00

Writing Proficiency - est 4

Cumulative Cumulative

PROF_4 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-------------------------------------------------------------

19 - 269 7558 100.00 7558 100.00

Writing Proficiency - est 5

Cumulative Cumulative

PROF_5 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-------------------------------------------------------------

16 - 259 7558 100.00 7558 100.00
Appendix L

NAEP Civics Data File
 1998 HIGH SCHOOL TRANSCRIPT STUDY

 CODEBOOK FOR NAEP CIVICS DATA

 JANUARY 1, 2000

 Question Column

 Name Number(s)

 ________ _________

 PSU 0001-0003 Primary Sampling Unit

 _____________________

 103-494 = PSU

 SCHOOL 0004-0007 School ID (Within PSU)

 ______________________

 3011-3574 = School ID

 NOTE: Both PSU and School ID must be combined

 to uniquely identify a school within the data

 file.

 STUDENT 0008-0017 Unique Student ID

 _________________

 0000000001-

 9899999999 = Student ID (NAEP booklet

 number)

 9900000000-

 9909999999 = Student ID (Student not

 linked to NAEP)

 PROF_1 0018-0024 PROF_1. Civics Proficiency - est 1

 ___________________________________

 0-245 = Estimate 1

 PROF_2 0025-0031 PROF_2. Civics Proficiency - est 2

 ___________________________________

 0-240 = Estimate 2

 PROF_3 0032-0038 PROF_3. Civics Proficiency - est 3

 ___________________________________

 15-240 = Estimate 3

 PROF_4 0039-0045 PROF_4. Civics Proficiency - est 4

 ___________________________________

 27-239 = Estimate 4

 PROF_5 0046-0052 PROF_5. Civics Proficiency - est 5

 ___________________________________

 22-241 = Estimate 5

 [1]
1998 HIGH SCHOOL TRANSCRIPT STUDY

NAEP Civics File

Primary Sampling Unit

 Cumulative Cumulative

PSU Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------

103-494 3032 100.00 3032 100.00

School ID (within PSU)

 Cumulative Cumulative

SCHOOL Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------

3011-3574 3032 100.00 3032 100.00

Student ID (within School)

 Cumulative Cumulative

STUDENT Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-------------------------------------------------------------

Linked 3032 100.00 3032 100.00

Civics Proficiency - est 1

Cumulative Cumulative

PROF_1 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-------------------------------------------------------------

0 - 244 3032 100.00 3032 100.00

Civics Proficiency - est 2

Cumulative Cumulative

PROF_2 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-------------------------------------------------------------

0 - 240 3032 100.00 3032 100.00
NAEP Civics File

Civics Proficiency - est 3

Cumulative Cumulative

PROF_3 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-------------------------------------------------------------

15 - 239 3032 100.00 3032 100.00

Civics Proficiency - est 4

Cumulative Cumulative

PROF_4 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-------------------------------------------------------------

27 - 239 3032 100.00 3032 100.00

Civics Proficiency - est 5

Cumulative Cumulative

PROF_5 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-------------------------------------------------------------

22 - 241 3032 100.00 3032 100.00
Appendix M

NAEP Reading Data File
 1998 HIGH SCHOOL TRANSCRIPT STUDY

 CODEBOOK FOR NAEP READING DATA

 JANUARY 1, 2000

 Question Column

 Name Number(s)

 ________ _________

 PSU 0001-0003 Primary Sampling Unit

 _____________________

 103-494 = PSU

 SCHOOL 0004-0007 School ID (Within PSU)

 ______________________

 3011-3574 = School ID

 NOTE: Both PSU and School ID must be combined

 to uniquely identify a school within the data

 file.

 STUDENT 0008-0017 Unique Student ID

 _________________

 0000000001-

 9899999999 = Student ID (NAEP booklet

 number)

 9900000000-

 9909999999 = Student ID (Student not

 linked to NAEP)

 RD_LE_1 0018-0024 RD_LE_1. Literary Proficiency - est 1

 ______________________________________

 38-416 = Estimate 1

 RD_LE_2 0025-0031 RD_LE_2. Literary Proficiency - est 2

 ______________________________________

 49-464 = Estimate 2

 RD_LE_3 0032-0038 RD_LE_3. Literary Proficiency - est 3

 ______________________________________

 65-429 = Estimate 3

 RD_LE_4 0039-0045 RD_LE_4. Literary Proficiency - est 4

 ______________________________________

 67-441 = Estimate 4

 RD_LE_5 0046-0052 RD_LE_5. Literary Proficiency - est 5

 ______________________________________

 60-447 = Estimate 5

 RD_IN_1 0053-0059 RD_IN_1. Information Proficiency - est 1

 _________________________________________

 139-400 = Estimate 1

 [1]
 Question Column

 Name Number(s)

 ________ _________

 RD_IN_2 0060-0066 RD_IN_2. Information Proficiency - est 2

 _________________________________________

 158-399 = Estimate 2

 RD_IN_3 0067-0073 RD_IN_3. Information Proficiency - est 3

 _________________________________________

 143-392 = Estimate 3

 RD_IN_4 0074-0080 RD_IN_4. Information Proficiency - est 4

 _________________________________________

 139-397 = Estimate 4

 RD_IN_5 0081-0087 RD_IN_5. Information Proficiency - est 5

 _________________________________________

 153-397 = Estimate 5

 RD_PT_1 0088-0094 RD_PT_1. Perform a Task Proficiency - est 1

 ____________________________________________

 82-435 = Estimate 1

 RD_PT_2 0095-0101 RD_PT_2. Perform a Task Proficiency - est 2

 ____________________________________________

 123-428 = Estimate 2

 RD_PT_3 0102-0108 RD_PT_3. Perform a Task Proficiency - est 3

 ____________________________________________

 104-416 = Estimate 3

 RD_PT_4 0109-0115 RD_PT_4. Perform a Task Proficiency - est 4

 ____________________________________________

 107-416 = Estimate 4

 RD_PT_5 0116-0122 RD_PT_5. Perform a Task Proficiency - est

 __________________________________________

 120-403 = Estimate 5

 READING1 0123-0129 READING1. Reading Composite Score 1 -

 Composite proficiency estimate 1

 ________________________________

 125-393 = Composite estimate 1

 NOTE: READING1 = 0.35 * RD_LE_1 + 0.45 *

 RD_IN_1 + 0.20 * RD_PT_1

 [2]
 Question Column

 Name Number(s)

 ________ _________

 READING2 0130-0136 READING2. Reading Composite Score 2 -

 Composite proficiency estimate 2

 ________________________________

 139-425 = Composite estimate 2

 NOTE: READING2 = 0.35 * RD_LE_2 + 0.45 *

 RD_IN_2 + 0.20 * RD_PT_2

 READING3 0137-0143 READING3. Reading Composite Score 3 -

 Composite proficiency estimate 3

 ________________________________

 115-399 = Composite estimate 3

 NOTE: READING3 = 0.35 * RD_LE_3 + 0.45 *

 RD_IN_3 + 0.20 * RD_PT_3

 READING4 0144-0150 READING4. Reading Composite Score 4 -

 Composite proficiency estimate 4

 ________________________________

 130-404 = Composite estimate 4

 NOTE: READING4 = 0.35 * RD_LE_4 + 0.45 *

 RD_IN_4 + 0.20 * RD_PT_4

 READING5 0151-0157 READING5. Reading Composite Score 5 -

 Composite proficiency estimate 5

 ________________________________

 139-410 = Composite estimate 5

 NOTE: READING5 = 0.35 * RD_LE_5 + 0.45 *

 RD_IN_5 + 0.20 * RD_PT_5

 [3]
1998 HIGH SCHOOL TRANSCRIPT STUDY

NAEP Reading File

Primary Sampling Unit

 Cumulative Cumulative

PSU Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------

103-494 4826 100.00 4826 100.00

School ID (within PSU)

 Cumulative Cumulative

SCHOOL Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------

3011-3574 4826 100.00 4826 100.00

Student ID (within School)

 Cumulative Cumulative

STUDENT Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-------------------------------------------------------------

Linked 4826 100.00 4826 100.00

Literary Proficiency - est 1

 Cumulative Cumulative

RD_LE_1 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-------------------------------------------------------------

38 - 416 4826 100.00 4826 100.00

Literary Proficiency - est 2

 Cumulative Cumulative

RD_LE_2 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-------------------------------------------------------------

49 - 464 4826 100.00 4826 100.00
NAEP Reading File

Literary Proficiency - est 3

 Cumulative Cumulative

RD_LE_3 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-------------------------------------------------------------

65 - 429 4826 100.00 4826 100.00

Literary Proficiency - est 4

 Cumulative Cumulative

RD_LE_4 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-------------------------------------------------------------

67 - 441 4826 100.00 4826 100.00

Literary Proficiency - est 5

 Cumulative Cumulative

RD_LE_5 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-------------------------------------------------------------

60 - 447 4826 100.00 4826 100.00

Information Proficiency - est 1

 Cumulative Cumulative

RD_IN_1 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------

139 - 400 4826 100.00 4826 100.00

Information Proficiency - est 2

 Cumulative Cumulative

RD_IN_2 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------

158 - 399 4826 100.00 4826 100.00
NAEP Reading File

Information Proficiency - est 3

 Cumulative Cumulative

RD_IN_3 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------

143 - 392 4826 100.00 4826 100.00

Information Proficiency - est 4

 Cumulative Cumulative

RD_IN_4 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------

139 - 397 4826 100.00 4826 100.00

Information Proficiency - est 5

 Cumulative Cumulative

RD_IN_5 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------

153 - 397 4826 100.00 4826 100.00

Perform a Task Proficiency - est 1

 Cumulative Cumulative

RD_PT_1 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-------------------------------------------------------------

82 - 435 4826 100.00 4826 100.00

Perform a Task Proficiency - est 2

 Cumulative Cumulative

RD_PT_2 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------

123 - 428 4826 100.00 4826 100.00
NAEP Reading File

Perform a Task Proficiency - est 3

 Cumulative Cumulative

RD_PT_3 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------

104 - 416 4826 100.00 4826 100.00

Perform a Task Proficiency - est 4

 Cumulative Cumulative

RD_PT_4 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------

107 - 416 4826 100.00 4826 100.00

Perform a Task Proficiency - est 5

 Cumulative Cumulative

RD_PT_5 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------

120 - 403 4826 100.00 4826 100.00

Reading Composite Score 1 - est 1

 Cumulative Cumulative

READING1 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------

125 - 393 4826 100.00 4826 100.00

Reading Composite Score 1 - est 2

 Cumulative Cumulative

READING2 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------

139 - 425 4826 100.00 4826 100.00
NAEP Reading File

Reading Composite Score 1 - est 3

 Cumulative Cumulative

READING3 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------

115 - 399 4826 100.00 4826 100.00

Reading Composite Score 1 - est 4

 Cumulative Cumulative

READING4 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------

130 - 404 4826 100.00 4826 100.00

Reading Composite Score 1 - est 5

 Cumulative Cumulative

READING5 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------

139 - 410 4826 100.00 4826 100.00
Appendix N

Codebook for NAEP 50-Minute Writing File
 1998 HIGH SCHOOL TRANSCRIPT STUDY

 NAEP 50 MINUTE WRITING DATA CODEBOOK

 JANUARY 1, 2000

 Question Column

 Name Number(s)

 ________ _________

 PSU 0001-0003 Primary Sampling Unit

 _____________________

 103-494 = PSU

 SCHOOL 0004-0007 School ID (Within PSU)

 ______________________

 3011-3574 = School ID

 NOTE: Both PSU and School ID must be combined

 to uniquely identify a school within the data

 file.

 STUDENT 0008-0017 Unique Student ID

 _________________

 2410900397-

 2430954204 = Student ID (NAEP booklet

 number)

 TST_TYP 0018 Writing Test Type

 _________________

1 = Ancient Tree

 (Narrative Writing)

2 = Vandalism

 (Informative Writing)

3 = Campaign Speech

 (Persuasive Writing)

 TST_SCR 0019 Writing Test Score

 __________________

 1 = Inappropriate

 2 = Insufficient

 3 = Uneven

 4 = Sufficient

 5 = Skillful

 6 = Excellent

 8 = Not Scored

 9 = Omitted / Not Reached

 [1]
1998 HIGH SCHOOL TRANSCRIPT STUDY

50 Minutes Writing Assessment File

Primary Sampling Unit

 Cumulative Cumulative

PSU Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------------------------------

103 - 494 2266 100.00 2266 100.00

School ID

Cumulative Cumulative

SCHOOL Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

----------------------------------------------------------------

3011 - 3574 2266 100.00 2266 100.00

Student ID

Cumulative

Cumulative

STUDENT Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

2410900397 - 2430954204 2266 100.00 2266 100.00

Writing Test Type

 Cumulative

Cumulative

TST_TYP Frequency Percent Frequency

Percent

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

---1-Ancient Tree (Narrative Writing) 759 33.50 759

33.50

2-Vandalism (Informative Writing) 767 33.85 1526

67.34

3-Campaign Speech (Persuasive Writing) 740 32.66 2266

100.00
50 Minutes Writing Assessment File

Writing Test Score

 Cumulative

Cumulative

TST_SCR Frequency Percent Frequency

Percent

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

-

1 - Inappropriate 92 4.06 92 4.06

2 - Insufficient 200 8.83 292 12.89

3 - Uneven 542 23.92 834 36.80

4 - Sufficient 834 36.80 1668 73.61

5 - Skillful 413 18.23 2081 91.84

6 - Excellent 133 5.87 2214 97.71

8 - Not Scored 22 0.97 2236 98.68

9 - Omitted / Not Reached 30 1.32 2266 100.00
Appendix O

Codebook for Master CSSC File
HIGH SCHOOL TRANSCRIPT STUDY

CODEBOOK FOR MASTER CSSC FILE

January 1, 2000

Question Column

Name Number(s)

________ _________

CSSC 0001-0006 CSSC Course Code

________________

010100-600000 = CSSC CODE

NOTE : There is an implied period between

positions 2 and 3.

NOTE : CSSC codes are defined in a separate

document, Classification of Secondary School

Courses, developed by Evaluation Technologies

Incorporated in 1982 and revised by Westat and

Policy Studies Associates in 1987.

A given CSSC course code may have more than

one course title listed in the CSSC

definitions. In that case, the CSSC course

code is repeated for each relevant course

title.

SPEDFLAG 0007 Special Education Flag

______________________

0 = Functional Special Education Course

1 = Regular Course

2 = Resource Special Education Course

TITLE 0008-0132 Course Title

____________

Alphanumerics = Title of Course

[1]
Question Column

Name Number(s)

________ _________

SEQ 0133 Sequence Flag

_____________

0 = Not part of a course sequence

1 = Introductory course in a course sequence

2 = Advanced course in a course sequence

[2]
1998 HIGH SCHOOL TRANSCRIPT STUDY

Master CSSC File

CSSC Course Code

 Cumulative Cumulative

CSSC Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------

010000-099999 335 14.75 335 14.75

100000-199999 439 19.33 774 34.08

200000-299999 416 18.32 1190 52.40

300000-399999 148 6.52 1338 58.92

400000-499999 466 20.52 1804 79.44

500000-599999 466 20.52 2270 99.96

600000 1 0.04 2271 100.00

Special Education Flag

Cumulative

Cumulative

SPEDFLAG Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

0-Functional SpEd 302 13.30 302 13.30

1-Regular Course 1928 84.90 2230 98.19

2-Resource SpEd 41 1.81 2271 100.00

Course Title

 Cumulative Cumulative

TITLE Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

------------------------------------------------------------------

Alphanumerics 2271 100.00 2271 100.00

Sequence Flag

Cumulative

Cumulative

SEQ Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

0-Not Sequence 1687 74.28 1687 74.28

1-Intro Course 211 9.29 1898 83.58

2-Advanced Course 373 16.42 2271 100.00