Academic Pathways,

Preparation, and

Performance

A Descriptive Overview of the 

Transcripts from the High

School Graduating Class of

2003–04

E.D. TAB

U.S. Department of Education

Institute of Education Sciences

NCES 2007–316

Academic Pathways, 

Preparation, and 

Performance 

A Descriptive Overview of the 

Transcripts from the High 

School Graduating Class of 

2003–04 

E.D. TAB 

November 2006 

U.S. Department of Education 

Institute of Education Sciences 

NCES 2007–316 

Michael Planty 

Robert Bozick 

Steven J. Ingels 

RTI International

John Wirt 

Project Officer 

National Center for Education Statistics 
U.S. Department of Education

Margaret Spellings 

Secretary

Institute of Education Sciences 

Grover J. Whitehurst 

Director

National Center for Education Statistics

Mark Schneider 

Commissioner

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

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

to collect, collate, analyze, and report full and complete statistics on the condition of education in the United 

States; conduct and publish reports and specialized analyses of the meaning and significance of such 

statistics; assist state and local education agencies in improving their statistical systems; and review and report 

on education activities in foreign countries. 

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

complete, and accurate indicators of education status and trends; and report timely, useful, and high-quality 

data to the U.S. Department of Education, the Congress, the states, other education policymakers, 

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

in the public domain. 

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

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

effectively. If you have any comments or suggestions about this or any other NCES product or report, we would 

like to hear from you. Please direct your comments to 

National Center for Education Statistics 

Institute of Education Sciences 

U.S. Department of Education 

1990 K Street NW 

Washington, DC 20006-5651 

November 2006 

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

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

Suggested Citation 

Planty, M., Bozick, R., and Ingels, S.J. (2006). Academic Pathways, Preparation, and Performance—A 

Descriptive Overview of the Transcripts from the High School Graduating Class of 2003–04 (NCES 2007–316). 

U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. Washington, DC: U.S. Government 

Printing Office. 

For ordering information on this report, write to 

U.S. Department of Education 

ED Pubs 

P.O. Box 1398 

Jessup, MD 20794-1398 

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

Content Contact

John Wirt 

(202) 502–7478 

John.Wirt@ed.gov
iii

Foreword 

The Education Longitudinal Study of 2002 (ELS:2002) provides a wealth of information 

from multiple sources about the factors and circumstances related to the performance and social 

development of the American high school student over time. This E.D. TAB profiles the 

academic preparation of the graduating high school class of 2003–04. The report supplies a brief 

examination of the coursetaking patterns of 2003–04 graduates, with a focus on their 

participation in mathematics, science, and Advanced Placement/International Baccalaureate 

courses. Additionally, the report links these coursetaking patterns with test achievement in 

mathematics, grade point average, and expectations for future educational attainment. The 

appendix provides a comprehensive description of the ELS:2002 design for data users, in 

addition to outlining its research capabilities for addressing key research questions. 

We hope that the information provided in this report will be useful to a wide range of 

interested readers, including policymakers and educators. We further hope that the results 

reported here will encourage other researchers to use the ELS:2002 data. 

Jeffrey A. Owings, Associate Commissioner

Elementary/Secondary & Libraries Studies 

v

Acknowledgments 

A number of people contributed to the production of this E.D. TAB, and many more to 

the development of the Education Longitudinal Study of 2002 (ELS:2002) more generally. In 

particular, we wish to thank Janis Brown, Jack Buckley, Drew Malizio, Val Plisko, Renee 

Rowland, and Marilyn Seastrom from NCES for the quality of their input into this document. 

We also would like to acknowledge the role of the ELS:2002 Technical Review Panel, 

whose members reviewed plans for the ELS:2002 data collection, helped refine them, and 

provided important suggestions to help guide development of the instrumentation. The following 

individuals serve as members of the Technical Review Panel: Frank Balz, Marco Clark, Richard 

Duran, Jeremy Finn, Jim Griffith, Lisa Hudson, Thomas B. Hoffer, Sally Kilgore, Jaci King, 

Richard Lawrence, Samuel R. Lucas, Drew Malizio, Edie McArthur, David Miller, Catherine 

Millett, Aaron Pallas, Kent Phillippe, and Andy Rogers. 

Special thanks go to John G. Wirt, ELS:2002 Project Officer, and Jeffrey A. Owings, 

NCES Associate Commissioner of Elementary/Secondary & Libraries Studies, for their 

contributions to and support of this effort. Other NCES staff who have provided help, support, 

and assistance include Kathryn Chandler, Wilma Greene, Lisa Hudson, Paula Knepper, Mariann 

Lemke, Edith McArthur, and Peggy Quinn. Staff elsewhere in the U.S. Department of Education 

whose help we gratefully acknowledge are Clifford Adelman, Sharon Belli, Jeffery Rodamar, 

and Marsha Silverberg. Other individuals who have provided major assistance include Leslie A. 

Scott of the Education Statistics Services Institute (ESSI) and Denise Davis, formerly of the 

National Commission on Libraries and Information Science. 

Daniel J. Pratt of RTI served as the ELS:2002 project director. Steven J. Ingels of RTI 

was principal investigator. Key RTI task leaders were Tiffany Lytle (transcript data collection 

and processing), Ellen Stutts (associate project director), Debbie Herget (first follow-up inschool and field data collection), Doug Currivan (first follow-up out-of-school computer-assisted 

telephone interview [CATI] data collection), James Rogers (data processing), and Peter Siegel 

(sampling and statistics). Other RTI staff who played major roles in ELS:2002 were Christopher 

Alexander, Kimberly Ault, Stephen Black, Laura J. Burns, Debbie Capps, James Chromy, 

Elizabeth Copello, Marianne Daye, D. Wesley Dukes, Brian Evans, Catherine Forstner, Sherry 

Hubbard-Bednasz, Ruby Johnson, Erich Lauff, Mani Medarametla, Melanie Pressley, Denise 

Rhatigan, Helen Smith, Milorad Stojanovic, David Wilson, and Donghui Wang. Test 

development, scaling, and equating were conducted by Judith M. Pollack, Donald A. Rock, and 

Michelle Najarian, under a subcontract with Educational Testing Service. 

We would like to acknowledge the help of several additional RTI staff members in the 

preparation of this report: Wallace Campbell, Craig Hollingsworth, and Michelle Myers, who 

edited the document, and Lawanda King, Sharon Powell, and Daliah Rainone, who provided 

assistance in document production. 

vii

Contents 

Foreword........................................................................................................................................ iii

Acknowledgments............................................................................................................................v

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

Introduction......................................................................................................................................1

Selected Findings.............................................................................................................................7

References......................................................................................................................................11

Tables.............................................................................................................................................13 

Appendix A Technical Notes and Glossary................................................................................ A-1 

Appendix B Standard Error Tables..............................................................................................B-1 

ix

List of Tables 

Table Page

1. Mean total course credits earned by high school graduates, by selected student 

characteristics: Academic year 2003–04 ...........................................................................13 

2a. Mean total course credits earned in academic courses by high school graduates, by 

selected student characteristics: Academic year 2003–04.................................................15 

2b. Mean total course credits earned in academic courses by high school graduates, by 

selected student characteristics: Academic year 2003–04.................................................17 

3. Percentage of high school graduates earning any credit for Advanced Placement 

(AP) and International Baccalaureate (IB) courses, by selected student 

characteristics: Academic year 2003–04 ...........................................................................19 

4. Percentage distribution of high school graduates in academic and occupational 

programs, by selected student characteristics: Academic year 2003–04...........................21 

5. Percentage distribution of high school graduates completing various mathematics 

course levels since 9th grade, by selected student characteristics: Academic year 

2003–04..............................................................................................................................23 

6. Percentage distribution of high school graduates completing various science course 

levels since 9th grade, by selected student characteristics: Academic year 2003–04 .......25 

7. Percentage distribution of high school graduates demonstrating mastery of specific 

mathematics knowledge and skills, by credit earned in selected courses: Academic 

year 2003–04......................................................................................................................28 

8. Percentage of high school graduates demonstrating mastery of specific 

mathematics knowledge and skills, by academic program: Academic year 2003-04 .......29 

9. Percentage of high school graduates demonstrating mastery of specific 

mathematics knowledge and skills, by highest mathematics course level taken: 

Academic year 2003-04 .....................................................................................................29 

10. Grade point average (GPA) for high school graduates, by credits earned in selected 

courses: Academic year 2003-04.......................................................................................30 

11. Grade point average (GPA) for high school graduates, by academic and 

occupational program: Academic year 2003-04................................................................31 

12. Grade point average (GPA) for high school graduates, by highest mathematics 

course level taken: Academic year 2003-04 ......................................................................31 

13. Mean credits earned in selected courses for high school graduates, by educational 

expectations: Academic year 2003-04...............................................................................32 

14. Percentage distribution of high school graduates completing various mathematics 

course levels since 9th grade, by educational expectations: Academic year 2003-04.......32 
List of Tables

x

List of Tables in Appendix A

Table Page

A-1a. ELS:2002 base year imputation variables: 2002 .................................................... A-13 

A-1b. ELS:2002 first follow-up imputation variables: 2004 ............................................ A-13 

A-2. Unweighted school sampling and eligibility, and unweighted and weighted 

participation, by sampling stratum: 2002................................................................ A-14 

A-3. Summary of ELS:2002 base-year completion and coverage rates: 2002 ............... A-15 

A-4. Summary of ELS:2002 first follow-up completion and coverage rates: 

2004......................................................................................................................... A-15 

A-5. Questionnaire completion rate for ELS:2002 senior cohort: 2004 ......................... A-16 

A-6. ELS:2002 item response theory (IRT) NELS:88-equated estimated numberright score and proficiency probability scores: 2004.............................................. A-26 

List of Tables in Appendix B 

Table Page 

B-1. Standard errors for table 1 estimates (mean total course credits earned by high 

school graduates, by selected student characteristics): Academic year 2003–04......B-3 

B-2a. Standard errors for table 2a estimates (mean total course credits earned in 

academic courses by high school graduates, by selected student 

characteristics): Academic year 2003–04 ..................................................................B-5 

B-2b. Standard errors for table 2b estimates (mean total course credits earned in 

academic courses by high school graduates, by selected student 

characteristics): Academic year 2003–04 ..................................................................B-7 

B-3. Standard errors for table 3 estimates (percentage of high school graduates 

earning any credit for Advanced Placement [AP] and International 

Baccalaureate [IB] courses, by selected student characteristics): Academic 

year 2003–04..............................................................................................................B-9 

B-4. Standard errors for table 4 estimates (percentage distribution of high school 

graduates in academic and occupational programs, by selected student 

characteristics): Academic year 2003–04 ................................................................B-11 

B-5. Standard errors for table 5 estimates (percentage distribution of high school 

graduates completing various mathematics course levels since 9th grade, by 

selected student characteristics): Academic year 2003–04......................................B-13 

B-6. Standard errors for table 6 estimates (percentage distribution of high school 

graduates completing various science course levels since 9th grade, by 

selected student characteristics): Academic year 2003–04......................................B-15 
List of Tables

xi 

Table Page 

B-7. Standard errors for table 7 estimates (percentage distribution of high school 

graduates demonstrating mastery of specific mathematics knowledge and 

skills, by credit earned in selected courses): Academic year 2003–04....................B-17 

B-8. Standard errors for table 8 estimates (percentage of high school graduates 

demonstrating mastery of specific mathematics knowledge and skills, by 

academic program): Academic year 2003–04 .........................................................B-18 

B-9. Standard errors for table 9 estimates (percentage of high school graduates 

demonstrating mastery of specific mathematics knowledge and skills, by 

highest mathematics course level taken): Academic year 2003–04 ........................B-18 

B-10. Standard errors for table 10 estimates (grade point average [GPA] for 

high school graduates, by credits earned in selected courses): Academic 

year 2003–04............................................................................................................B-19 

B-11. Standard errors for table 11 estimates (grade point average [GPA] for high 

school graduates, by academic and occupational program): Academic year 

2003–04....................................................................................................................B-20

B-12. Standard errors for table 12 estimates (grade point average [GPA] for high 

school graduates, by highest mathematics course level taken): Academic 

year 2003–04............................................................................................................B-20 

B-13. Standard errors for table 13 estimates (mean credits earned in selected courses 

for high school graduates, by educational expectations): Academic year 2003–

04..............................................................................................................................B-21 

B-14. Standard errors for table 14 estimates (percentage distribution of high school 

graduates completing various mathematics course levels since 9th grade, by 

educational expectations): Academic year 2003–04................................................B-21 

1

Introduction 

This report uses transcript data from the Education Longitudinal Study of 2002 

(ELS:2002) to provide nationally representative information about the level of academic 

preparation the high school graduating class of 2003–04 had when leaving high school. 

ELS:2002 is the most recent secondary school longitudinal study conducted by the National 

Center for Education Statistics (NCES). It began with a nationally representative sample of 10thgraders in public and private schools in the United States in 2002. The 2002 sophomore cohort 

was surveyed again in the spring of 2004 when most of the sample members were high school 

seniors. This sample was “freshened” with a sample of spring 2004 seniors who were not high 

school sophomores in the spring of 2002 or were not in the United States at that time. In the 

spring of 2005, transcripts were collected from all these students’ high schools. Transcripts 

provide enrollment histories, graduation dates, and coursetaking records—key pieces of 

information for researchers and policymakers interested in the current state of the American high 

school curriculum. This report uses information from the transcripts to identify students who 

graduated with a diploma between September 1, 2003, and August 31, 2004 (i.e., the high school 

graduating class of 2003–04). The analysis profiles their coursetaking histories from the 9th 

through the 12th grades and explores the relationships between their coursework, their 

proficiency in math, their grade point average, and their expectations for their future education. 

Focus of This Report 

The patterns of courses taken by high school students are a major policy concern in 

education. Courses are the building blocks of the high school curriculum. Although a variety of 

courses—including general skills, occupation-specific, and advanced college preparatory 

courses—are typically available to most students, not all students take courses that adequately 

prepare them for life after high school. A large body of literature within the sociology of 

education demonstrates that coursetaking patterns are both related to student background and 

linked with later attainment. In general terms, racial/ethnic minorities, students from less affluent 

backgrounds, and public school students tend to take less rigorous courses while in high school 

than do their peers (Alexander and Cook 1982; Finn, Gerber, and Wang 2002; Hoffer, Greeley, 

and Coleman 1985). Further, research shows that students who take less rigorous courses are less 

likely to attain a college degree and do not do as well in the workforce as students who take more 

rigorous courses (Adelman 1999; Altonji 1995; Hotchkiss and Dorsten 1987).

This report focuses on two general areas. First, it presents the curricular landscape for 

contemporary American high school students. How many credits are today’s high school 

graduates earning? In what subject areas are they most/least focusing their energies? Do these 

patterns vary across characteristics of the student and the schools they attend? 

Second, this report describes the linkage between academic pathways, particularly in 

mathematics coursework, and high school performance and preparation for postsecondary life. 

What is the association between advanced coursetaking and grades? Is advanced mathematics 

coursetaking associated with greater mathematics proficiency? Are students who take more 

advanced courses more prepared than their peers who take lower-level courses? To what degree 

is there an association between educational expectations and coursetaking? This report updates 
Introduction

2

past research by providing nationally representative information on a recent cohort of youth by 

showing both the general patterns of coursetaking and their relationships with academic 

preparation and expectations for future education. 

This analysis focuses on 11,560 students who received a diploma between September 1, 

2003 and August 31, 2004 (i.e., the high school graduating class of 2003–04) and had at least 3 

years of transcript information. Those who graduated before or after this time frame, as well as 

those not enrolled during this time frame (e.g., dropouts and homeschoolers), were excluded 

from the analysis. Coursetaking patterns are examined by select student background 

characteristics, high school experiences, and measures of preparation. Student background 

characteristics and high school experiences include 

• sex; 

• race/ethnicity1

 (American Indian or Alaska Native; Asian [includes Native 

Hawaiian/Pacific Islander]; Black or African American; Hispanic or Latino; and 

White); 

• socioeconomic status (lowest quarter, middle two quarters, highest quarter); 

• native language (English, non-English); 

• parent’s highest education (high school or less, some college, 4-year college degree or 

higher); 

• family composition (mother and father, mother or father and guardian, single parent, 

other); 

• extracurricular participation during their senior year (no participation, less than 1 hour 

a week, 1 to 4 hours a week, more than 4 hours a week); 

• weekday hours employed during their senior year (no employment, 1 to 15 hours per 

week, more than 15 hours per week); 

• school control (public, Catholic, other private, mixed2

); 

• school location (urban, suburban, rural, mixed); and 

• school region (Northeast, Midwest, South, West, mixed). 

 

1

 All race categories exclude individuals of Hispanic or Latino origin. 

2

 Students’ school control, location, and region were categorized as mixed if they had transferred out of their baseyear school to another school whose control, location, or region differed from that of their base-year school. For 

example, a student who attended a public school in the South during the base-year interview, transferred, and then 

was interviewed at a public school in the Midwest before the first follow-up interview would be classified on school 

region as mixed. 
Introduction

3 

Indicators of performance and preparation include the following: 

• number of credits earned in specific courses;3 

• mastery of specific mathematics knowledge and skills; 

• overall grade point average (GPA); and 

• academic GPA. 

Lastly, this report shows educational expectations. These gauge how American youth on 

the cusp of high school graduation envision their future educational attainment. Information on 

the construction of these variables is provided in appendix A. 

About the Education Longitudinal Study of 2002 (ELS:2002) 

NCES is involved in research on the development and critical transitions experienced by 

students as they proceed through high school and into postsecondary education and the labor 

market. ELS:2002 is a longitudinal study, starting with a nationally representative sample of 

10th-graders in public and private schools in the United States in 2002. The 2002 sophomore 

cohort was surveyed again in the spring of 2004 when most of the sample members were high 

school seniors. In the spring of 2005, transcripts were collected from all sample members. The 

ELS:2002 base-year, first follow-up, and transcript studies are described briefly below. 

Base-Year Design 

The ELS:2002 base-year study was carried out in a nationally representative probability 

sample of about 750 public, Catholic, and other private schools in the spring term of the 2001–02 

school year. Of 17,590 eligible selected sophomores, 15,360 completed a base-year 

questionnaire. The weighted response rate for student questionnaire completion was 

87.3 percent. Of the 15,360 student questionnaire completers, 14,540 (95.1 percent, weighted) 

also completed cognitive assessments in mathematics and reading. A nonresponse bias analysis 

was performed to ensure that any identified biases were small and that the data could be used 

with confidence. Missing data for key questionnaire and test variables were imputed. Further 

details of the school-level response rate; base-year school, student, and item-level bias analyses; 

and base-year design are provided in reports by Ingels and colleagues (2004, 2005). 

First Follow-up Design 

The basis for the 2004 first follow-up sample was the sample of schools and students 

studied in the ELS:2002 base year. Base-year students were surveyed whether they were in the 

base-year school, in a new school, or out of school (early graduate or dropout). Two additional 

sets of students were included in the first follow-up survey: freshened and base-year 

nonrespondents. Freshened students are 2004 seniors who were not sophomores in 2002.4

 To 

 

3

 Schools participating in the transcript collection were asked how many credits a student would earn for taking a 

course that meets every day, one period a day, all school-year long. Because these schools varied widely in their 

assignment of credits to courses, credits were standardized to facilitate accurate comparison of course credits across 

schools within a transcript/student record and between transcripts/student records. 

4

 In spring term 2002, such students may have been out of the country, been enrolled in school in the United States 

in a grade other than 10th, had an extended illness or injury, been homeschooled, been institutionalized, or 

temporarily dropped out of school. These students comprised the first follow-up “freshening sample.” 
Introduction

4

ensure that a nationally representative sample of high school seniors was selected, these students 

were given a chance for selection in the first follow-up. Similar to the base-year design, the first 

follow-up included a student questionnaire and cognitive test in mathematics administered to 

each selected student.5

 High school seniors in the base-year schools were typically surveyed and 

tested in group sessions at their schools. Seniors who had transferred to another school were 

usually interviewed outside of the school setting, usually via telephone. Although seniors who 

remained in their base-year schools were administered the mathematics assessment, transfer 

students were not. However, a mathematics test score was imputed for the transfer students. The 

sample included about 14,250 seniors, of whom 13,420 participated, for a weighted response rate 

of 94.4 percent. Further details about the first follow-up response rates and data collection 

procedures are provided in appendix A of this report and reported in detail by Ingels and 

colleagues (2005). 

Transcript Study Design 

In the spring of 2005, approximately 1 year after most sample members had graduated 

from high school, transcripts were collected for all sample members who participated in at least 

one of the first two student interviews: the base-year interview or the first follow-up interview. 

Transcripts were also requested for students who could not participate in either of the interviews 

because of a physical or mental disability or language barrier. Unlike previous NCES transcript 

studies, which collected transcripts from the last school attended by the sample member, the 

ELS:2002 transcript study collected transcripts from all of the base-year schools and the last 

school attended by sample members who transferred out of their base-year school. The sample 

includes 16,350 students, of whom 14,920 participated, for a weighted response rate of 

90.7 percent. The present analysis focuses on 11,560 respondents who comprised the graduating 

high school class of 2003–04. Further details about the data collection procedures are provided in 

appendix A (see also Bozick et al. 2006). 

For this analysis, the sample is restricted to respondents who graduated between 

September 1, 2003, and August 31, 2004 who have at least 3 years of coursetaking information 

on their transcript. A high school graduate is defined as a sample member who received a 

regular, regents, or honors diploma (and not a General Educational Development [GED] or 

alternate certificate). Those who received a GED or alternate certificate are not considered high 

school graduates. The focus on high school graduates ensures that estimates are for those who 

had the opportunity to enroll over the course of approximately 3 to 4 academic years. The sample 

is selected using the following selection criteria: F1RTROUT = 1 (fall 2003–summer 2004 

graduate) and [F1RTRFLG = 3 or F1RTRFLG = 4] (transcript data available for 3 or 4 academic 

years). The analysis uses the transcript sample weight (F1TRSCWT) to ensure that the estimates 

can be generalized to the graduating high school class of 2003–04. 

Additional information about the ELS:2002 history, purpose, sample design, weighting, 

and variable definitions is provided in appendix A. Appendix B presents the standard errors for 

the estimates. It is important to note that many of the variables examined in this report are related 

to one another, and complex interactions and relationships have not been explored here. 

 

5

 The assessment was administered only to those first follow-up students who remained in their base-year school. 

However, test scores were imputed for transfer students. 
Introduction

5 

The purpose of an E.D. TAB is to introduce new NCES surveys and data through the 

presentation of selected descriptive information in tabular format. More in-depth studies of the 

transcript data, using more sophisticated methodologies and focusing on a range of research 

questions and policy issues, will follow in the near future and by other researchers whose 

curiosity to dig deeper has been piqued by the associations reported in this report.6

 

6

 In addition to the ELS:2002 high school transcript study, NCES has collected transcripts to augment two other 

longitudinal studies: the High School and Beyond Longitudinal Study of 1980 Sophomores (HS&B) and the National 

Education Longitudinal Study of 1988 (NELS:88). NCES has also collected transcripts to link with assessment 

information in the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) in 1987, 1990, 1994, 1998, 2000, and 2005. 

7 

Selected Findings 

This E.D. TAB presents national data on the transcripts of the high school graduating 

class of 2003–04. In particular, the report examines high school graduates’ coursetaking patterns, 

academic performance, and preparation for postsecondary education and the labor market. Using 

data from their high school transcripts, this report describes the number and types of courses 

public and private high school seniors took between 9th and 12th grades, credits earned in 

Advanced Placement (AP) and International Baccalaureate (IB) courses, type of academic 

program, and mathematics and science coursetaking patterns, by a select number of student 

characteristics. A course credit is equivalent to a course that meets every day, one period a day, 

all school-year long. These coursetaking patterns are then examined in relation to mathematics 

proficiency levels and grade point average (GPA). Finally, the relationship between educational 

expectations and coursetaking is examined. 

Coursetaking Patterns of the High School Graduating Class of 

2003–04 

High school coursetaking patterns are based on the Secondary School Taxonomy (Bradby 

and Hoachlander 1999), which divides high school coursework into four distinct curricula: 

academic, vocational, enrichment/other, and special education. Table 1 highlights both total 

credits earned as well as credits earned in academic subjects, which include mathematics, 

science, English, social studies, fine arts, and non-English language, by selected characteristics 

of the high school graduating class of 2003–04. 

• Table 1 shows mean course credits earned by the high school graduating class of 

2003-04 by selected characteristics. These high school graduates earned an average of 

25.8 course credits, 19.0 in academic subjects (table 1). 

• The high school graduating class of 2003–04 earned an average of 3.6 mathematics 

course credits, 3.3 science credits, 4.3 English credits, 3.9 social studies credits, 2.0 

fine arts credits, and another 2.0 credits in non-English language courses (tables 2a 

and 2b). 

Advanced Placement and International Baccalaureate Courses 

• Overall, about 30 percent of the high school graduating class of 2003–04 earned 

credit in AP or IB courses. Around 12 percent earned credit in a mathematics AP/IB 

course (table 3). 

• Among the high school graduating class of 2003–04, 33 percent of females and 

27 percent of males earned any credit in AP/IB courses (table 3). 

• Among the high school graduating class of 2003–04, 53 percent of Asians, 33 percent 

of Whites, 25 percent of Hispanics, and 16 percent of Blacks earned any credit in 

AP/IB courses (table 3). 
Selected Findings

8

• Among the high school graduating class of 2003–04, 38 percent of Catholic school 

students, 42 percent of other private school students, and 29 percent of public school 

students earned any credit in AP/IB courses (table 3). 

Curriculum Concentration 

Four categories indicate overall coursetaking patterns in high school: academic 

concentration, occupational concentration, academic and occupational concentration, and 

general. An academic curriculum concentration includes a minimum of four credits of English; 

one credit of mathematics higher than algebra II and any two other credits in math; one science 

credit higher than general biology and any two other credits in science; one credit of social 

studies in U.S. or world history and any two other credits in social studies; and two credits in a 

single foreign language.An occupational curriculum concentration includes at least three credits 

in one specific labor market preparation area, such as agriculture, business, marketing, health 

care, protective services, trade and industrial, technology, food service, child care, and personal 

and other services programs. Those meeting both the criteria of an academic and occupational 

curriculum concentration are classified as academic and occupational concentration. Those 

following a general curriculum meet the criteria of neither an academic nor an occupational 

concentration. 

• Among the high school graduating class of 2003–04, 26 percent followed an 

academic curriculum concentration, 15 percent followed an occupational curriculum 

concentration, 3 percent followed both an academic and occupational curriculum 

concentration, and another 56 percent followed a general curriculum (table 4). 

Mathematics Coursetaking Patterns 

Coursetaking patterns in mathematics are measured using the pipeline measure originally 

developed by Burkam and Lee (see appendix A and Burkam and Lee 2003 for more detailed 

information). This measure indicates the highest level of mathematics for which the student 

received non-zero credit while in high school. Course levels include: level 1—no math; level 2—

basic math/pre-algebra; level 3—core secondary through algebra II; level 4—trigonometry, 

statistics, pre-calculus; and level 5—calculus. 

• Among the 2003–04 high school graduates, 5 percent took level 2 math; 45 percent 

took level 3 math; 36 percent took level 4 math; and 14 percent took level 5 

mathematics as their highest mathematics course in high school (table 5). 

• Among the high school graduating class of 2003–04, 33 percent of Asians, 16 percent 

of Whites, 7 percent of Hispanics, 5 percent of Blacks, and 6 percent of American 

Indians took level 5 math as their highest mathematics course in high school (table 5).

Science Coursetaking Patterns 

Science coursetaking patterns are based on the science coursetaking pipeline developed 

by Burkam and Lee (2003), which indicates the highest level of science for which the student 

received non-zero credit while in high school. Course levels include: level 1—no science; 
Selected Findings

9 

level 2—primary physical science; level 3—secondary physical science and basic biology; 

level 4—general biology; level 5—chemistry I or physics I; level 6—chemistry I and physics I; 

level 7—chemistry II or physics II or advanced biology; level 8—both levels 6 and 7. 

• Among the high school graduating class of 2003–04, 2 percent took level 2 science , 

3 percent took level 3 science, 25 percent took level 4 science, 33 percent took level 5 

science, 17 percent took level 6 science, 10 percent took level 7 science, and 

9 percent took level 8 science (table 6). 

Mathematics Achievement 

The ELS:2002 first follow-up included an assessment of students’ performance in 

mathematics. The test was designed to measure the achievement status of 12th-graders at both 

the individual and group levels. This E.D. TAB employs a score that allows achievement to be 

understood in terms of specific levels of skill mastery. The mathematics levels are (1) simple 

arithmetical operations with whole numbers; (2) simple operations with decimals, fractions, 

powers, and roots; (3) simple problem solving, requiring the understanding of low-level 

mathematical concepts; (4) understanding of intermediate-level mathematical concepts and/or 

multistep solutions to word problems; and (5) complex multistep word problems and/or 

advanced mathematics material. Tables 7 through 9 summarize mathematics performance for the 

high school graduating class of 2003–04, by course credits earned. Course credits were classified 

as low if the student’s percentile rank on the distribution of course credits was below 25th. 

Course credits were classified as high if the student’s rank on the distribution of course credits 

was at least 75th. 

• Seventy-two percent of graduates who earned a high number of total course credits 

and 56 percent of graduates who earned a low number of course credits exhibited a 

mastery of level 3 (simple problem solving, requiring the understanding of low-level 

mathematical concepts) (table 7). 

• Ninety-one percent of graduates with an academic curriculum and 46 percent of 

students in an occupational curriculum demonstrated a mastery of level 3 (simple 

problem solving, requiring the understanding of low-level mathematical concepts) 

(table 8). 

• Ninety-nine percent of graduates whose highest mathematics course was calculus and 

81 percent of graduates whose highest mathematics course was trigonometry, 

statistics, or pre-calculus demonstrated a mastery of level 3 (simple problem solving, 

requiring the understanding of low-level mathematical concepts) (table 9). 

Grade Point Average 

Grade point average is measured two ways: overall academic grade point average and 

overall grade point average. Academic grade point average is based on grades received in 

academic courses (math, science, English, social studies, fine arts, and non-English language), 

while overall grade point average is based on grades received in all courses.7

 

7

 Details regarding the formulae used in the calculation of grade point average appear in Bozick et al. 2006. 
Selected Findings

10

• The high school graduating class of 2003–04 had a mean GPA of 2.9 overall and 2.7 

in academic courses (table 10).

• About 47 percent of the high school graduating class of 2003-04 earned at least a B 

average (3.0 GPA) in their courses (table 10). 

• Among the high school graduating class of 2003–04, academic concentrators had a 

3.3 overall GPA, and occupational concentrators had a 2.6 overall GPA (table 11). 

• Among the high school graduating class of 2003–04, seniors who took calculus had 

an average overall GPA of 3.5, and seniors who took basic mathematics or prealgebra as their highest mathematics course had an average GPA of 2.3 (table 12).

Educational Expectations 

• Among the high school graduating class of 2003–04, those expecting to earn a 

graduate or professional degree earned 21 academic credits in high school, and those 

expecting to have some college experience but not a degree earned 17 credits 

(table 13).

• Among the high school graduating class of 2003–04, 45 percent of graduates 

expecting to earn a graduate or professional degree and 19 percent of graduates 

expecting to have some college experience but not a degree took level 4 mathematics 

(trigonometry, statistics, pre-calculus) (table 14). 
11 

References 

Adelman, C. (1999). Answers in the Tool Box: Academic Intensity, Attendance Patterns, and 

Bachelor’s Degree Attainment (PLLI 1999-8021). U.S. Department of Education. 

Washington, DC: Office of Educational Research and Improvement. 

Alexander, K.L., and Cook, M.A. (1982). Curricula and Coursework: A Surprise Ending to a 

Familiar Story. American Sociological Review, 47: 626–640. 

Altonji, J.G. (1995). The Effects of High School Curriculum on Education and Labor Market 

Outcomes. Journal of Human Resources, 30:409–438. 

Bozick, R., Lyttle, T., Siegel, P.H., Ingels, S.J., Rogers, J.E., Lauff, E., and Planty, M. (2006). 

Education Longitudinal Study of 2002: First Follow-up Transcript Component Data File 

Documentation (NCES 2006–338). U.S. Department of Education. Washington, DC: 

National Center for Education Statistics. 

Bradby, D., and Hoachlander, G. (1999). 1998 Revision of the Secondary School Taxonomy

(NCES 1999-06). U.S. Department of Education. Washington, DC: National Center for 

Education Statistics Working Paper. 

Burkam, D.T., and Lee, V.E. (2003). Mathematics, Foreign Language, and Science 

Coursetaking and the NELS:88 Transcript Data (NCES 2003–01). U.S. Department of 

Education. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics Working Paper. 

Finn, J.D., Gerber, S.B., and Wang, M.C. (2002). Course Offerings, Course Requirements, and 

Course Taking in Mathematics. Journal of Curriculum and Supervision, 17: 336–366. 

Hoffer, T., Greeley, A.M., and Coleman, J.S. (1985). Achievement Growth in Public and 

Catholic Schools. Sociology of Education, 58: 74–97. 

Hotchkiss, L., and Dorsten, L.E. (1987). Curriculum Effects on Early Post-High School 

Outcomes. Research in Sociology of Education and Socialization, 7: 191–219. 

Ingels, S.J., Pratt, D.J., Rogers, J.E., Siegel, P.H., and Stutts, E.S. (2004). Education 

Longitudinal Study of 2002: Base Year Data File User’s Manual (NCES 2004-405). U.S. 

Department of Education. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics. 

Ingels, S.J., Pratt, D.J., Rogers, J.E., Siegel, P.H., and Stutts, E.S. (2005). Education 

Longitudinal Study of 2002: Base-Year to First Follow-up Data File Documentation

(NCES 2006–344). U.S. Department of Education. Washington, DC: National Center for 

Education Statistics. 

13 

Tables 

Table 1. Mean total course credits earned by high school graduates, by selected student 

characteristics: Academic year 2003–04 

Characteristic 

Mean course credits 

earned 

Mean course credits 

earned in academic 

subjects 

Mean course credits 

earned in 

occupational subjects 

Total 25.8 19.0 3.5 

 

Sex 

Male 25.8 18.4 3.8 

Female 25.9 19.6 3.2 

Race/ethnicity1

 

American Indian or Alaska Native 25.5 17.5 4.4 

Asian or Pacific Islander 25.8 19.9 2.5 

Black or African American 25.7 18.4 3.7 

Hispanic or Latino 25.2 18.3 3.3 

White 26.0 19.3 3.5 

 

Socioeconomic status 

Lowest quarter 25.5 17.8 4.2 

Middle two quarters 25.9 18.8 3.7 

Highest quarter 26.1 20.3 2.5 

 

Native language2

 

English 25.9 19.1 3.5 

Non-English 25.3 18.7 3.1 

 

Parents' education 

High school or less 25.7 18.0 4.2 

Some college 25.8 18.6 3.8 

4-year college degree or more 26.0 19.9 2.8 

 

Family composition 

Mother and father 26.0 19.4 3.3 

Mother or father and guardian 25.9 18.6 3.9 

Single parent (mother or father) 25.6 18.5 3.7 

Other3

 25.0 17.8 3.6 

 

Extracurricular participation 

No participation 25.1 17.7 4.2 

< 1 hour a week 25.7 19.0 3.6 

1–4 hours a week 26.0 19.5 3.2 

> 4 hours a week 26.4 19.9 3.0 

See notes at end of table. 
Tables

14

Table 1. Mean total course credits earned by high school graduates, by selected student 

characteristics: Academic year 2003–04—Continued 

Characteristic 

Mean course 

credits earned 

Mean course credits 

earned in academic 

subjects 

Mean course credits 

earned in 

occupational subjects 

Employment 

No employment 25.8 19.3 3.0 

1–15 hours a week 26.1 19.7 3.1 

> 15 hours a week 25.8 18.6 3.9 

 

School control4

 

Public 25.8 18.9 3.7 

Catholic 27.3 20.2 1.5 

Other private 25.3 20.3 1.3 

Mixed 26.9 20.3 2.3 

 

School location4

 

Urban 25.5 19.2 2.9 

Suburban 25.8 18.9 3.5 

Rural 26.6 19.3 4.1 

Mixed 25.8 18.3 3.8 

 

School region4,5 

Northeast 26.6 20.0 3.3 

Midwest 25.4 18.5 3.8 

South 26.6 19.5 3.8 

West 24.5 18.1 2.8 

Mixed 26.1 19.4 3.2 

1

 All race categories exclude Hispanic or Latino origin. 

2

 The first language students learned to speak when they were children. 

3

 Other includes two guardians, female guardian only, male guardian only, and guardian who lives with the student 

less than half of the time. 

4

 Information about the students’ base-year (BY) school and, if applicable, their final transfer school, was used to 

construct the school control, location, and region variables. If students were enrolled in the same school in the BY 

interview and at the time of high school exit, information is given for only one school: the BY school. If students 

transferred out of their BY school and transcripts were provided by their final transfer school, information is from both 

schools: the BY school and the final transfer school. Transfer students were classified into groups in terms of school 

category consistency. Students who were in the same type of school for both schools were assigned to that group 

(e.g., a public school student who transferred to a public school was coded as public). If not, they were classified as 

“mixed” (e.g., a Catholic school student who transferred to a public school was coded as mixed). 

5

 Region is defined by the U.S. Census Bureau based on the state in which the school is located. 

NOTE: "Course credits" refer to standardized Carnegie units. A Carnegie unit is a standard of measurement used for 

secondary education that represents the completion of a course that meets one period per day for one year. Core 

courses represent all courses in mathematics, science, English, social studies, fine arts, and non-English language. 

Occupational courses represent all courses in family and consumer sciences, general labor market preparation, and 

specific labor market preparation. The academic year extended from September 1, 2003 to August 31, 2004. 

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

2002 (ELS:2002), “High School Transcript Study.” 
Tables

15 

Table 2a. Mean total course credits earned in academic courses by high school graduates, by 

selected student characteristics: Academic year 2003–04 

Characteristic 

Mean course 

credits earned 

in academic 

subjects 

Mean course 

credits earned in 

mathematics 

Mean course 

credits earned in 

science 

Mean course 

credits earned 

in English 

Total 19.0 3.6 3.3 4.3 

 

Sex 

Male 18.4 3.5 3.2 4.3 

Female 19.6 3.6 3.3 4.3 

Race/ethnicity1

 

American Indian or Alaska Native 17.5 3.2 3.0 4.3 

Asian or Pacific Islander 19.9 3.8 3.6 4.4 

Black or African American 18.4 3.7 3.2 4.4 

Hispanic or Latino 18.3 3.4 2.9 4.5 

White 19.3 3.6 3.3 4.2 

 

Socioeconomic status 

Lowest quarter 17.8 3.4 3.0 4.4 

Middle two quarters 18.8 3.5 3.2 4.3 

Highest quarter 20.3 3.7 3.6 4.3 

 

Native language2

 

English 19.1 3.6 3.3 4.3 

Non-English 18.7 3.5 3.1 4.6 

 

Parents' education 

High school or less 18.0 3.4 3.0 4.3 

Some college 18.6 3.5 3.2 4.3 

4-year college degree or more 19.9 3.7 3.5 4.3 

 

Family composition 

Mother and father 19.4 3.6 3.3 4.3 

Mother or father and guardian 18.6 3.5 3.1 4.3 

Single parent (mother or father) 18.5 3.5 3.1 4.3 

Other3

 17.8 3.4 3.0 4.4 

 

Extracurricular participation 

No participation 17.7 3.3 3.0 4.3 

< 1 hour a week 19.0 3.6 3.2 4.3 

1–4 hours a week 19.5 3.6 3.4 4.3 

> 4 hours a week 19.9 3.7 3.4 4.3 

 

Employment 

No employment 19.3 3.6 3.3 4.4 

1–15 hours a week 19.7 3.6 3.4 4.3 

> 15 hours a week 18.6 3.5 3.2 4.3 

See notes at end of table. 
Tables

16

Table 2a. Mean total course credits earned in academic courses by high school graduates, by 

selected student characteristics: Academic year 2003–04—Continued 

Characteristic 

Mean course 

credits earned 

in academic 

subjects 

Mean course 

credits earned in 

mathematics 

Mean course 

credits earned in 

science 

Mean course 

credits earned in 

English 

School control4 

Public 18.9 3.5 3.2 4.3 

Catholic 20.2 3.8 3.5 4.4 

Other private 20.3 3.8 3.6 4.3 

Mixed 20.3 3.8 3.5 4.6 

 

School location4

 

Urban 19.2 3.6 3.3 4.3 

Suburban 18.9 3.5 3.2 4.2 

Rural 19.3 3.6 3.3 4.4 

Mixed 18.3 3.5 3.0 4.5 

 

School region4,5 

Northeast 20.0 3.7 3.6 4.3 

Midwest 18.5 3.4 3.2 4.1 

South 19.5 3.8 3.4 4.5 

West 18.1 3.3 2.9 4.2 

Mixed 19.4 3.9 3.4 4.6 

1 All race categories exclude Hispanic or Latino origin. 

2 The first language students learned to speak when they were children. 

3 Other includes two guardians, female guardian only, male guardian only, and guardian who lives with the student 

less than half of the time. 

4 Information about the students’ base-year (BY) school and, if applicable, their final transfer school, was used to 

construct the school control, location, and region variables. If students were enrolled in the same school in the BY 

interview and at the time of high school exit, information is given for only one school: the BY school. If students 

transferred out of their BY school and transcripts were provided by their final transfer school, information is from both 

schools: the BY school and the final transfer school. Transfer students were classified into groups in terms of school 

category consistency. Students who were in the same type of school for both schools were assigned to that group 

(e.g., a public school student who transferred to a public school was coded as public). If not, they were classified as 

“mixed” (e.g., a Catholic school student who transferred to a public school was coded as mixed). 

5

 Region is defined by the U.S. Census Bureau based on the state in which the school is located. 

NOTE: "Course credits" refer to standardized Carnegie units. A Carnegie unit is a standard of measurement used for 

secondary education that represents the completion of a course that meets one period per day for one year. Core 

courses represent all courses in mathematics, science, English, social studies, fine arts, and non-English language. 

Occupational courses represent all courses in family and consumer sciences, general labor market preparation, and 

specific labor market preparation. The academic year extended from September 1, 2003 to August 31, 2004. 

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

2002 (ELS:2002), “High School Transcript Study.” 
Tables

17 

Table 2b. Mean total course credits earned in academic courses by high school graduates, by 

selected student characteristics: Academic year 2003–04 

Characteristic 

Mean course 

credits earned 

in academic 

subjects 

Mean course 

credits earned in 

social studies 

Mean course 

credits earned in 

fine arts 

Mean course 

credits earned 

in non-English 

language 

Total 19.0 3.9 2.0 2.0 

 

Sex 

Male 18.4 3.9 1.7 1.8 

Female 19.6 4.0 2.3 2.2 

Race/ethnicity1

 

American Indian or Alaska Native 17.5 4.2 1.5 1.3 

Asian or Pacific Islander 19.9 3.9 1.8 2.4 

Black or African American 18.4 3.9 1.6 1.7 

Hispanic or Latino 18.3 3.8 1.8 1.9 

White 19.3 4.0 2.1 2.1 

 

Socioeconomic status 

Lowest quarter 17.8 3.8 1.7 1.5 

Middle two quarters 18.8 3.9 2.0 1.9 

Highest quarter 20.3 4.1 2.2 2.5 

 

Native language2

 

English 19.1 4.0 2.0 2.0 

Non-English 18.7 3.8 1.7 2.0 

 

Parents' education 

High school or less 18.0 3.9 1.8 1.6 

Some college 18.6 3.9 2.0 1.9 

4-year college degree or more 19.9 4.0 2.2 2.3 

 

Family composition 

Mother and father 19.4 3.9 2.1 2.1 

Mother or father and guardian 18.6 4.0 1.9 1.8 

Single parent (mother or father) 18.5 3.9 1.9 1.8 

Other3

 17.8 3.8 1.6 1.5 

 

Extracurricular participation 

No participation 17.7 3.9 1.7 1.5 

< 1 hour a week 19.0 4.0 2.0 2.0 

1–4 hours a week 19.5 4.0 2.1 2.1 

> 4 hours a week 19.9 4.0 2.2 2.3 

 

Employment 

No employment 19.3 3.9 2.1 2.0 

1–15 hours a week 19.7 4.0 2.1 2.3 

> 15 hours a week 18.6 3.9 1.9 1.8 

See notes at end of table. 
Tables

18

Table 2b. Mean total course credits earned in academic courses by high school graduates, by 

selected student characteristics: Academic year 2003–04—Continued 

Characteristic 

Mean course 

credits earned 

in academic 

subjects 

Mean course 

credits earned in 

social studies 

Mean course 

credits earned in 

fine arts 

Mean course 

credits earned in 

non-English 

language 

School control4 

Public 18.9 3.9 2.0 1.9 

Catholic 20.2 4.1 1.6 2.8 

Other private 20.3 4.0 2.1 2.5 

Mixed 20.3 4.2 1.7 2.4 

 

School location4

 

Urban 19.2 3.9 1.9 2.1 

Suburban 18.9 3.9 2.0 2.0 

Rural 19.3 4.1 2.2 1.8 

Mixed 18.3 4.1 1.8 1.5 

 

School region4,5 

Northeast 20.0 4.2 1.8 2.4 

Midwest 18.5 3.8 2.2 1.9 

South 19.5 4.0 1.9 1.9 

West 18.1 3.8 2.0 1.8 

Mixed 19.4 4.1 1.7 1.8 

1 All race categories exclude Hispanic or Latino origin. 

2 The first language students learned to speak when they were children. 

3 Other includes two guardians, female guardian only, male guardian only, and guardian who lives with the student 

less than half of the time. 

4 Information about the students’ base-year (BY) school and, if applicable, their final transfer school, was used to 

construct the school control, location, and region variables. If students were enrolled in the same school in the BY 

interview and at the time of high school exit, information is given for only one school: the BY school. If students 

transferred out of their BY school and transcripts were provided by their final transfer school, information is from both 

schools: the BY school and the final transfer school. Transfer students were classified into groups in terms of school 

category consistency. Students who were in the same type of school for both schools were assigned to that group 

(e.g., a public school student who transferred to a public school was coded as public). If not, they were classified as 

“mixed” (e.g., a Catholic school student who transferred to a public school was coded as mixed). 

5 Region is defined by the U.S. Census Bureau based on the state in which the school is located. 

NOTE: "Course credits" refer to standardized Carnegie units. A Carnegie unit is a standard of measurement used for 

secondary education that represents the completion of a course that meets one period per day for one year. The 

academic year extended from September 1, 2003 to August 31, 2004. 

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

2002 (ELS:2002), “High School Transcript Study.” 
Tables

19 

Table 3. Percentage of high school graduates earning any credit for Advanced Placement (AP) 

and International Baccalaureate (IB) courses, by selected student characteristics: 

Academic year 2003–04 

Characteristic 

Percent earning any 

credits in AP/IB 

courses 

Percent earning any 

credits in AP/IB 

mathematics courses 

Percent earning any 

credits in AP/IB calculus 

courses 

Total 30.0 11.5 9.3 

 

Sex 

Male 27.2 12.3 9.9 

Female 32.8 10.8 8.7 

Race/ethnicity1

 

American Indian or Alaska Native 14.9 4.9 4.9 

Asian or Pacific Islander 52.8 33.0 26.7 

Black or African American 15.7 3.9 2.8 

Hispanic or Latino 25.3 6.3 4.9 

White 32.6 12.8 10.3 

 

Socioeconomic status 

Lowest quarter 16.3 4.4 3.6 

Middle two quarters 24.2 7.9 5.9 

Highest quarter 50.9 23.5 19.5 

 

Native language2

 

English 29.7 11.3 9.0 

Non-English 32.0 13.4 11.3 

 

Parents' education 

High school or less 17.6 5.4 4.3 

Some college 22.2 6.3 4.7 

4-year college degree or more 43.6 19.4 15.9 

 

Family composition 

Mother and father 35.0 14.1 11.6 

Mother or father and guardian 22.5 6.7 4.6 

Single parent (mother or father) 23.0 8.3 6.4 

Other3

 12.8 4.0 3.3 

 

Extracurricular participation 

No participation 14.7 3.7 2.7 

< 1 hour a week 27.5 8.8 6.6 

1–4 hours a week 34.3 13.0 10.4 

> 4 hours a week 40.4 17.5 14.4 

 

Employment 

No employment 35.8 14.8 12.7 

1–15 hours a week 38.8 16.2 12.9 

> 15 hours a week 22.3 7.2 5.5 

See notes at end of table. 
Tables

20

Table 3. Percentage of high school graduates earning any credit for Advanced Placement (AP) 

and International Baccalaureate (IB) courses, by selected student characteristics: 

Academic year 2003–04—Continued 

Characteristic 

Percent earning any 

credits in AP/IB 

courses 

Percent earning any 

credits in AP/IB 

mathematics courses 

Percent earning any 

credits in AP/IB calculus 

courses 

 

School control4 

Public 29.2 11.2 8.8 

Catholic 38.1 13.7 13.0 

Other private 42.2 19.1 16.7 

Mixed 25.5 5.7 4.8 

 

School location4

 

Urban 35.3 13.2 10.5 

Suburban 31.2 12.5 10.0 

Rural 21.9 7.9 6.5 

Mixed 13.6 2.6 2.6 

 

School region4,5 

Northeast 30.1 12.2 9.4 

Midwest 23.8 10.1 8.9 

South 32.8 12.0 9.5 

West 32.9 12.1 9.3 

Mixed 26.7 5.4 5.4 

1 All race categories exclude Hispanic or Latino origin. 

2 The first language students learned to speak when they were children. 

3 Other includes two guardians, female guardian only, male guardian only, and guardian who lives with the student 

less than half of the time. 

4 Information about the students’ base-year (BY) school and, if applicable, their final transfer school, was used to 

construct the school control, location, and region variables. If students were enrolled in the same school in the BY 

interview and at the time of high school exit, information is given for only one school: the BY school. If students 

transferred out of their BY school and transcripts were provided by their final transfer school, information is from both 

schools: the BY school and the final transfer school. Transfer students were classified into groups in terms of school 

category consistency. Students who were in the same type of school for both schools were assigned to that group 

(e.g., a public school student who transferred to a public school was coded as public). If not, they were classified as 

“mixed” (e.g., a Catholic school student who transferred to a public school was coded as mixed). 

5 Region is defined by the U.S. Census Bureau based on the state in which the school is located. 

NOTE: "Course credits" refer to standardized Carnegie units. A Carnegie unit is a standard of measurement used for 

secondary education that represents the completion of a course that meets one period per day for one year. The 

academic year extended from September 1, 2003 to August 31, 2004. 

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

2002 (ELS:2002), “High School Transcript Study.” 
Tables

21 

Table 4. Percentage distribution of high school graduates in academic and occupational 

programs, by selected student characteristics: Academic year 2003–04 

Characteristic 

Academic 

concentration 

Occupational 

concentration 

Academic and 

occupational 

concentration 

General 

curriculum 

Total 25.8 15.1 3.2 55.9 

 

Sex 

Male 24.6 19.1 3.6 52.8 

Female 27.0 11.4 2.9 58.8 

Race/ethnicity1

 

American Indian or Alaska Native 13.3 14.8 1.1 70.8 

Asian or Pacific Islander 39.5 6.8 2.4 51.3 

Black or African American 17.2 15.5 4.5 62.8 

Hispanic or Latino 15.8 13.1 2.1 69.1 

White 29.1 16.0 3.3 51.6 

 

Socioeconomic status 

Lowest quarter 12.7 20.5 2.5 64.3 

Middle two quarters 22.0 17.1 3.4 57.5 

Highest quarter 42.4 7.5 3.3 46.7 

 

Native language2

 

English 26.5 15.6 3.4 54.5 

Non-English 21.2 12.1 1.9 64.8 

 

Parents' education 

High school or less 15.6 20.5 2.9 61.0 

Some college 19.3 18.2 3.2 59.4 

4-year college degree or more 37.0 9.5 3.4 50.0 

 

Family composition 

Mother and father 29.9 13.5 3.2 53.4 

Mother or father and guardian 18.8 19.5 3.7 58.1 

Single parent (mother or father) 20.2 16.9 3.0 59.8 

Other3

 12.8 16.1 1.8 69.3 

 

Extracurricular participation 

No participation 12.5 20.8 2.3 64.4 

< 1 hour a week 24.3 15.9 3.4 56.3 

1–4 hours a week 30.7 13.6 3.3 52.4 

> 4 hours a week 34.1 11.2 3.8 50.9 

 

Employment 

No employment 28.5 11.0 2.7 57.8 

1–15 hours a week 33.4 11.4 2.9 52.3 

> 15 hours a week 20.5 19.6 3.9 56.0 

See notes at end of table. 
Tables

22

Table 4. Percentage distribution of high school graduates in academic and occupational 

programs, by selected student characteristics: Academic year 2003–04—Continued 

Characteristic 

Academic 

concentration 

Occupational 

concentration 

Academic and 

occupational 

concentration 

General 

curriculum 

School control4 

Public 23.5 16.4 3.4 56.7 

Catholic 54.0 2.8 0.9 42.3 

Other private 46.5 1.0 0.6 51.9 

Mixed 32.5 7.3 0.5 59.7 

 

School location4

 

Urban 28.5 11.6 3.4 56.5 

Suburban 26.2 14.5 3.3 56.0 

Rural 23.3 21.8 2.9 52.0 

Mixed 9.3 15.2 2.2 73.3 

 

School region4,5 

Northeast 35.1 13.8 3.6 47.5 

Midwest 23.4 17.7 2.1 56.8 

South 29.2 18.1 5.2 47.5 

West 15.6 8.9 1.2 74.3 

Mixed 19.6 9.5 1.0 69.9 

1 All race categories exclude Hispanic or Latino origin. 

2 The first language students learned to speak when they were children. 

3 Other includes two guardians, female guardian only, male guardian only, and guardian who lives with the student 

less than half of the time. 

4 Information about the students’ base-year (BY) school and, if applicable, their final transfer school, was used to 

construct the school control, location, and region variables. If students were enrolled in the same school in the BY 

interview and at the time of high school exit, information is given for only one school: the BY school. If students 

transferred out of their BY school and transcripts were provided by their final transfer school, information is from both 

schools: the BY school and the final transfer school. Transfer students were classified into groups in terms of school 

category consistency. Students who were in the same type of school for both schools were assigned to that group 

(e.g., a public school student who transferred to a public school was coded as public). If not, they were classified as 

“mixed” (e.g., a Catholic school student who transferred to a public school was coded as mixed). 

5 Region is defined by the U.S. Census Bureau based on the state in which the school is located. 

NOTE: An academic concentrator earned the following: four credits of English; one mathematics credit higher than 

middle academic II on the mathematics pipeline (F1RMAPIP) and any two other credits in math; one science credit 

higher than general biology on the science pipeline (F1RSCPIP) and any two other credits in science; one credit of 

social studies in U.S. or world history and any two other credits in social studies; and two credits in a single foreign 

language. An occupational concentrator earned at least three credits in one specific labor market preparation area. 

Those following a general curriculum met the criteria of neither an academic concentration nor an occupational 

concentration. Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. The academic year extended from September 1, 

2003 to August 31, 2004. 

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

2002 (ELS:2002), “High School Transcript Study.” 
Tables

23 

Table 5. Percentage distribution of high school graduates completing various mathematics 

course levels since 9th grade, by selected student characteristics: Academic year 

2003–04 

Highest mathematics coursetaking level taken since 9th grade1

Characteristic Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Level 5 

Total 0.6 4.8 44.6 36.1 13.9 

 

Sex 

Male 0.7 5.9 45.2 33.6 14.5 

Female 0.4 3.8 44.0 38.5 13.2 

Race/ethnicity2

 

American Indian or Alaska Native 2.4 12.9 62.9 16.1 5.6 

Asian or Pacific Islander 0.4 1.8 28.7 35.6 33.4 

Black or African American 1.3 5.6 51.3 37.0 4.7 

Hispanic or Latino 0.3 6.7 58.6 27.5 6.8 

White 0.5 4.2 41.0 38.3 16.0 

 

Socioeconomic status 

Lowest quarter 1.4 9.2 57.6 25.6 6.2 

Middle two quarters 0.5 4.7 49.1 35.6 10.0 

Highest quarter 0.2 1.6 26.9 44.9 26.4 

 

Native language3

 

English 0.6 4.5 43.7 37.4 13.8 

Non-English 0.5 6.5 50.6 27.9 14.5 

 

Parents' education 

High school or less 1.2 8.2 56.0 27.3 7.3 

Some college 0.6 5.2 51.0 34.7 8.6 

4-year college degree or more 0.2 2.5 32.8 42.5 22.0 

 

Family composition 

Mother and father 0.3 3.9 40.3 38.2 17.3 

Mother or father and guardian 1.0 4.9 52.1 34.6 7.4 

Single parent (mother or father) 0.9 6.8 50.4 32.7 9.3 

Other4

 1.7 10.4 57.8 24.8 5.4 

 

Extracurricular participation 

No participation 1.2 8.9 55.7 29.1 5.0 

< 1 hour a week 0.6 4.9 47.9 35.5 11.1 

1–4 hours a week 0.3 3.5 42.6 38.7 14.9 

> 4 hours a week 0.1 1.9 36.4 40.9 20.7 

 

Employment 

No employment 0.3 5.4 41.7 34.6 18.0 

1–15 hours a week 0.5 3.3 36.9 40.5 18.7 

> 15 hours a week 0.5 4.4 50.6 35.3 9.1 

See notes at end of table. 
Tables

24

Table 5. Percentage distribution of high school graduates completing various mathematics 

course levels since 9th grade, by selected student characteristics: Academic year 

2003–04—Continued 

Highest mathematics course level taken since 9th grade1

Characteristic Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Level 5 

School control5 

Public 0.6 5.2 46.4 34.9 12.8 

Catholic 0.1 0.3 24.8 52.4 22.4 

Other private 0.3 0.1 23.8 45.4 30.4 

Mixed † 0.3 46.0 43.3 10.4 

 

School location5

 

Urban 0.8 4.0 40.2 41.0 14.0 

Suburban 0.5 4.6 44.7 35.1 15.2 

Rural 0.5 6.2 48.3 33.6 11.4 

Mixed 0.4 7.7 62.1 23.6 6.3 

 

School region5,6 

Northeast 0.6 5.0 41.7 35.0 17.7 

Midwest 0.6 5.0 41.7 39.4 13.3 

South 0.8 4.2 43.0 38.8 13.3 

West 0.2 5.4 52.8 29.4 12.2 

Mixed † 4.5 50.2 37.3 7.9 

† Not applicable. 

1

 Course levels are: Level 1—no math; Level 2—basic math/pre-algebra; Level 3—core secondary through algebra II; 

Level 4—trigonometry, statistics, pre-calculus; and Level 5—calculus. 

2 All race categories exclude Hispanic or Latino origin. 

3 The first language students learned to speak when they were children. 

4 Other includes two guardians, female guardian only, male guardian only, and guardian who lives with the student 

less than half of the time. 

5 Information about the students’ base-year (BY) school and, if applicable, their final transfer school, was used to 

construct the school control, location, and region variables. If students were enrolled in the same school in the BY 

interview and at the time of high school exit, information is given for only one school: the BY school. If students 

transferred out of their BY school and transcripts were provided by their final transfer school, information is from both 

schools: the BY school and the final transfer school. Transfer students were classified into groups in terms of school 

category consistency. Students who were in the same type of school for both schools were assigned to that group 

(e.g., a public school student who transferred to a public school was coded as public). If not, they were classified as 

“mixed” (e.g., a Catholic school student who transferred to a public school was coded as mixed). 

6 Region is defined by the U.S. Census Bureau based on the state in which the school is located. 

NOTE: Highest mathematics course taken is based on a taxonomy of course types for which the student received a 

nonzero credit while in high school. Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. The academic year extended 

from September 1, 2003 to August 31, 2004. 

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

2002 (ELS:2002), “High School Transcript Study.” 
25

Table 6. Percentage distribution of high school graduates completing various science course levels since 9th gra

student characteristics: Academic year 2003–04 

Highest science course level taken since 9th grade1

Characteristic Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Level 5 Level 6 

Total 0.6 2.2 3.4 25.4 33.3 17.1 

Sex 

Male 0.8 2.8 3.9 27.0 29.8 17.9 Female 0.3 1.6 2.9 23.8 36.6 16.3 

Race/ethnicity2

American Indian or Alaska Native † 5.7 4.6 41.9 28.2 12.3 Asian or Pacific Islander 0.5 1.7 1.3 12.8 25.9 19.0 Black or African American 0.9 2.3 2.6 31.2 39.8 12.4 Hispanic or Latino 0.7 3.5 4.7 30.9 35.9 15.5 White 0.5 1.9 3.1 23.9 32.1 18.2 

Socioeconomic status 

Lowest quarter 1.2 3.9 5.1 35.9 33.1 9.2 Middle two quarters 0.5 2.2 3.8 27.7 34.4 15.9 Highest quarter 0.2 1.1 1.4 13.4 31.4 25.0 

Native language3

English 0.5 2.1 3.4 24.9 33.7 17.3 Non-English 0.7 3.0 3.5 28.8 30.2 15.2 

Parents' education 

High school or less 1.0 4.1 4.9 34.5 33.3 9.7 Some college 0.5 1.8 3.9 28.9 34.8 15.4 4-year college degree or more 0.4 1.4 2.1 17.2 32.0 22.7 

Family composition 

Mother and father 0.4 1.8 3.1 21.6 32.7 19.9 Mother or father and guardian 0.7 2.7 4.0 31.7 34.9 11.4 Single parent (mother or father) 0.9 2.9 3.7 30.3 34.3 13.3 Other4 2.0 4.5 4.4 38.4 30.2 11.5 

See notes at end of table. 
26

Table 6. Percentage distribution of high school graduates completing various science course levels since 9th gra

student characteristics: Academic year 2003–04—Continued 

Highest science course level taken since 9th grade1

Characteristic Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Level 5 Level 6 Extracurricular participation 

No participation 0.9 3.6 6.2 35.6 31.5 11.1 < 1 hour a week 0.5 2.8 2.3 28.2 33.7 14.8 1–4 hours a week 0.2 2.1 2.8 21.8 34.6 19.7 > 4 hours a week 0.2 1.1 2.0 18.2 34.0 21.3 

Employment 

No employment 0.4 2.2 3.2 22.4 32.1 18.8 1–15 hours a week 0.4 1.9 2.7 19.8 32.8 20.5 > 15 hours a week 0.3 2.2 3.9 29.4 34.7 14.5 

School control5

Public 0.6 2.4 3.6 26.5 33.3 16.0 Catholic 0.2 0.4 1.5 15.2 31.5 30.1 Other private † † 0.6 10.3 33.1 28.9 Mixed † † 0.6 17.1 46.5 15.0 

School location5

Urban 0.6 2.0 1.9 20.9 36.3 20.0 Suburban 0.5 2.3 3.9 24.9 31.6 17.1 Rural 0.6 2.1 4.0 31.1 33.6 13.8 Mixed 1.4 3.3 4.7 39.3 30.9 9.6 

See notes at end of table. 
27

Table 6. Percentage distribution of high school graduates completing various science course levels since 9th gra

student characteristics: Academic year 2003–04—Continued 

Highest science course level taken since 9th grade1

Characteristic Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Level 5 Level 6 School region5,6

Northeast 0.5 2.4 5.3 20.6 30.7 22.3 Midwest 0.5 1.8 3.5 25.3 30.4 17.5 South 0.7 1.1 2.3 25.8 37.7 15.6 West 0.6 4.3 3.3 28.9 32.1 14.3 Mixed † † 8.6 22.4 27.9 21.2 

† Not applicable. 1 Course levels are: Level 1—no science; Level 2—primary physical science; Level 3—secondary physical science and basic biology; Le

Level 5—chemistry I or physics I; Level 6—chemistry I and physics I; Level 7—chemistry II or physics II or advanced biology; Level 8—b

2 All race categories exclude Hispanic or Latino origin. 3 The first language students learned to speak when they were children. 4 Other includes two guardians, female guardian only, male guardian only, and guardian who lives with the student less than half of the ti5 Information about the students’ base-year (BY) school and, if applicable, their final transfer school, was used to construct the school co

variables. If students were enrolled in the same school in the BY interview and at the time of high school exit, information is given for onl

school. If students transferred out of their BY school and transcripts were provided by their final transfer school, information is from both and the final transfer school. Transfer students were classified into groups in terms of school category consistency. Students who were ifor both schools were assigned to that group (e.g., a public school student who transferred to a public school was coded as public). If no“mixed” (e.g., a Catholic school student who transferred to a public school was coded as mixed). 

6 Region is defined by the U.S. Census Bureau based on the state in which the school is located. 

NOTE: Highest mathematics course taken is based on a taxonomy of course types for which the student received a nonzero credit while 

not sum to totals because of rounding. The academic year extended from September 1, 2003 to August 31, 2004. SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Education Longitudinal Study of 2002 (ELS:2002), “H

Study.” 
Tables

28 

Table 7. Percentage distribution of high school graduates demonstrating mastery of specific 

mathematics knowledge and skills, by credit earned in selected courses: Academic year 

2003–04 

Mathematics proficiency levels1

Credits earned in selected courses Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Level 5 

Total 96.6 80.5 65.0 37.3 4.2 

Total course credits earned 

Low 95.2 74.1 56.3 30.0 3.2 

Middle 97.2 83.0 67.9 39.9 4.7 

High 97.6 84.9 71.6 42.5 4.9 

Total course credits earned in academic subjects 

Low 92.6 63.7 42.3 17.4 1.0 

Middle 98.0 85.5 70.6 40.3 4.1 

High 99.1 92.5 83.5 57.2 8.8 

Total course credits earned in occupational subjects 

Low 98.6 91.1 82.3 56.6 8.9 

Middle 97.2 81.8 66.1 37.5 4.0 

High 93.9 69.7 49.3 21.8 1.1 

Total course credits earned in mathematics 

Low 92.5 65.4 40.6 15.4 0.7 

Middle 95.2 72.7 52.8 24.2 1.1 

High 97.7 86.3 74.1 46.9 6.5 

Total course credits earned in science 

Low 89.0 55.2 31.8 11.3 0.3 

Middle 95.8 75.2 56.4 28.2 2.1 

High 98.6 90.0 79.5 51.6 7.3 

Total course credits earned in English 

Low 89.1 61.8 45.3 25.5 5.3 

Middle 96.1 78.5 60.4 33.9 3.8 

High 96.7 80.8 65.5 37.7 4.3 

Total course credits earned in social studies 

Low 81.9 46.3 29.0 11.4 0.5 

Middle 95.3 75.3 58.3 33.1 3.9 

High 97.4 82.9 68.0 39.2 4.4 

1 Mathematics proficiency levels are: Level 1—simple arithmetical operations on whole numbers, including single-step 

operations that rely on rote memory; Level 2—simple operations with decimals, fractions, powers, and roots; Level 3—

simple problem solving, requiring the understanding of low-level mathematical concepts; Level 4—understanding of 

intermediate-level mathematical concepts and/or having the ability to formulate multistep solutions to word problems; and 

Level 5—proficiency in solving complex multistep word problems and/or having the ability to demonstrate knowledge of 

material found in advanced mathematics courses. 

NOTE: "Course credits" refer to standardized Carnegie units. A Carnegie unit is a standard of measurement used for 

secondary education that represents the completion of a course that meets one period per day for one year. Core courses 

represent all courses in mathematics, science, English, and social studies. Noncore courses represent all other courses not 

defined as core courses. Level of mastery is reported at the group level by calculating the mean of the probability scores in 

the given area. Since the means are on a decimal scale between 0 and 1, they represent the proportions of members of a 

subgroup falling within a performance level. For course credits earned, “low” refers to students whose percentile rank on the 

distribution of course credits was below 25th, “medium” refers to students whose percentile rank on the distribution of course 

credits was at least 25th and below 75th, and “high” refers to students whose percentile rank on the distribution of course 

credits was at least 75th. The academic year extended from September 1, 2003 to August 31, 2004. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Education Longitudinal Study of 2002 

(ELS:2002), “High School Transcript Study.”
Tables

29

Table 8. Percentage of high school graduates demonstrating mastery of specific mathematics 

knowledge and skills, by academic program: Academic year 2003–04 

Mathematics proficiency levels1

Academic program Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Level 5 

Total 96.6 80.5 65.0 37.3 4.2 

 

Academic (only) 99.7 96.7 90.8 66.0 9.9 

Occupational (only) 94.4 68.5 46.0 18.9 1.0 

Both academic and occupational 99.3 95.1 85.1 53.9 6.3 

General 95.6 75.2 56.7 27.6 2.3 1 Mathematics proficiency levels are: Level 1—simple arithmetical operations on whole numbers, including single-step 

operations that rely on rote memory; Level 2—simple operations with decimals, fractions, powers, and roots; 

Level 3—simple problem solving, requiring the understanding of low-level mathematical concepts; Level 4—

understanding of intermediate-level mathematical concepts and/or having the ability to formulate multistep solutions 

to word problems; and Level 5—proficiency in solving complex multistep word problems and/or having the ability to 

demonstrate knowledge of material found in advanced mathematics courses. 

NOTE: "Course credits" refer to standardized Carnegie units. A Carnegie unit is a standard of measurement used for 

secondary education that represents the completion of a course that meets one period per day for one year. Level of 

mastery is reported at the group level by calculating the mean of the probability scores in the given area. Since the 

means are on a decimal scale between 0 and 1, they represent the proportions of members of a subgroup falling 

within a performance level. The academic year extended from September 1, 2003 to August 31, 2004. 

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

2002 (ELS:2002), “High School Transcript Study.” 

Table 9. Percentage of high school graduates demonstrating mastery of specific mathematics 

knowledge and skills, by highest mathematics course level taken: Academic year 

2003–04 

Mathematics proficiency levels1

Highest mathematics course level taken Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Level 5 

Total 96.6 80.5 65.0 37.3 4.2 

 

No math 65.4 19.1 9.1 1.9 † 

Basic math/pre-algebra 81.9 28.3 9.4 2.3 # 

Core secondary through algebra II 95.5 70.8 47.1 16.1 0.3 

Trigonometry, statistics, pre-calculus 99.0 92.2 81.4 48.4 2.3 

Calculus 99.9 99.7 98.7 87.3 23.2 

† Not applicable. 

# Rounds to zero. 

1 Mathematics proficiency levels are: Level 1—simple arithmetical operations on whole numbers, including single-step 

operations that rely on rote memory; Level 2—simple operations with decimals, fractions, powers, and roots; 

Level 3—simple problem solving, requiring the understanding of low-level mathematical concepts; Level 4—

understanding of intermediate-level mathematical concepts and/or having the ability to formulate multistep solutions 

to word problems; and Level 5—proficiency in solving complex multistep word problems and/or having the ability to 

demonstrate knowledge of material found in advanced mathematics courses. 

NOTE: "Course credits" refer to standardized Carnegie units. A Carnegie unit is a standard of measurement used for 

secondary education that represents the completion of a course that meets one period per day for one year. Core 

courses represent all courses in mathematics, science, English, and social studies. Noncore courses represent all 

other courses not defined as core courses. Level of mastery is reported at the group level by calculating the mean of 

the probability scores in the given area. Since the means are on a decimal scale between 0 and 1, they represent the 

proportions of members of a subgroup falling within a performance level. The academic year extended from 

September 1, 2003 to August 31, 2004. 

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

2002 (ELS:2002), “High School Transcript Study.” 
Tables

30

Table 10. Grade point average (GPA) for high school graduates, by credits earned in selected 

courses: Academic year 2003–04 

Credits earned in selected courses Mean GPA1

Percent with at 

least a 3.0 

GPA1

Mean 

academic 

GPA1

Percent with at 

least a 3.0 

academic GPA1

Total 2.9 46.9 2.7 40.1 

 

Total course credits earned 

Low 2.6 36.2 2.5 30.4 

Middle 2.9 49.9 2.8 43.0 

High 3.0 56.3 2.9 48.3 

 

Total course credits earned in academic 

subjects 

Low 2.5 25.9 2.3 18.4 

Middle 2.9 49.7 2.8 42.1 

High 3.2 69.8 3.2 65.4 

 

Total course credits earned in occupational 

subjects 

Low 3.1 62.9 3.0 58.9 

Middle 2.9 47.1 2.7 40.4 

High 2.7 34.2 2.5 24.9 

 

Total course credits earned in mathematics 

Low 2.3 22.1 2.1 15.9 

Middle 2.7 33.6 2.5 26.8 

High 3.0 56.9 2.9 50.0 

 

Total course credits earned in science 

Low 2.3 19.2 2.1 13.9 

Middle 2.7 38.4 2.6 31.4 

High 3.1 61.1 3.0 54.2 

 

Total course credits earned in English 

Low 2.4 25.3 2.2 21.6 

Middle 2.8 42.9 2.6 36.3 

High 2.9 47.4 2.7 40.5 

 

Total course credits earned in social studies 

Low 2.4 30.1 2.2 22.8 

Middle 2.8 42.1 2.6 35.4 

High 2.9 48.9 2.8 42.0 

1 GPA is based on all courses. Academic GPA is based only on math, English, science, social studies, fine arts, and nonEnglish courses. 

NOTE: "Course credits" refer to standardized Carnegie units. A Carnegie unit is a standard of measurement used for 

secondary education that represents the completion of a course that meets one period per day for one year. Core courses 

represent all courses in mathematics, science, English, and social studies. Noncore courses represent all other courses not 

defined as core courses. For course credits earned, “low” refers to students whose percentile rank on the distribution of 

course credits was below 25th, “medium” refers to students whose percentile rank on the distribution of course credits was 

at least 25th and below 75th, and “high” refers to students whose percentile rank on the distribution of course credits was at 

least 75th. The academic year extended from September 1, 2003 to August 31, 2004. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Education Longitudinal Study of 2002 

(ELS:2002), “High School Transcript Study.”
Tables

31

Table 11. Grade point average (GPA) for high school graduates, by academic and occupational 

program: Academic year 2003–04 

Academic program Mean GPA1 Percent with at least a 3.0 GPA1

Mean 

academic 

GPA1

Percent with at 

least a 3.0 

academic GPA1

Total 2.9 46.9 2.7 40.1 

 

Academic (only) 3.3 74.5 3.2 68.1 

Occupational (only) 2.6 30.1 2.4 21.8 

Both academic and occupational 3.2 67.5 3.0 54.6 

General 2.7 37.5 2.6 31.3 

1

 GPA is based on all courses. Academic GPA is based only on math, English, science, and social studies courses. 

NOTE: Highest mathematics course taken is based on a taxonomy of course types for which the student received a 

nonzero credit while in high school. The academic year extended from September 1, 2003 to August 31, 2004. 

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

2002 (ELS:2002), “High School Transcript Study.” 

Table 12. Grade point average (GPA) for high school graduates, by highest mathematics course 

level taken: Academic year 2003–04 

Highest mathematics course level 

taken Mean GPA1 Percent with at least a 3.0 GPA1

Mean 

academic 

GPA1

Percent with at 

least a 3.0 

academic GPA1

Total 2.9 46.9 2.7 40.1 

 

No math 2.4 22.0 2.3 19.8 

Basic math/pre-algebra 2.3 11.7 2.1 8.8 

Core secondary through algebra II 2.5 26.1 2.4 18.7 

Trigonometry, statistics, pre-calculus 3.1 60.9 2.9 53.0 

Calculus 3.5 90.8 3.5 86.9 

1

 GPA is based on all courses. Academic GPA is based only on math, English, science, social studies, fine arts, and 

non-English courses. 

NOTE: Highest mathematics course taken is based on a taxonomy of course types for which the student received a 

nonzero credit while in high school. The academic year extended from September 1, 2003 to August 31, 2004. 

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

2002 (ELS:2002), “High School Transcript Study.” 
Tables

32

Table 13. Mean credits earned in selected courses for high school graduates, by educational 

expectations: Academic year 2003–04 

Course credits 

Educational expectation 

Mean course 

credits 

earned 

Mean course 

credits earned 

in academic 

subjects 

Mean course 

credits 

earned in 

mathematics 

Mean course 

credits earned 

in AP/IB 

courses 

Mean course 

credits earned 

in occupational 

subjects 

Total 25.8 19.0 3.6 0.8 3.5 

 

High school or less 25.0 16.2 3.3 # 5.3 

Some college 25.2 17.1 3.2 0.1 4.7 

College graduation 25.9 19.3 3.6 0.6 3.3 

Graduate/professional degree 26.3 20.5 3.8 1.6 2.6 

# Rounds to zero. 

NOTE: "Course credits" refer to standardized Carnegie units. A Carnegie unit is a standard of measurement used for 

secondary education that represents the completion of a course that meets one period per day for one year. Core 

courses represent all courses in mathematics, science, English, and social studies. Noncore courses represent all 

other courses not defined as core courses. AP/IB = Advanced Placement/International Baccalaureate. The academic 

year extended from September 1, 2003 to August 31, 2004. 

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

2002 (ELS:2002), “High School Transcript Study.” 

Table 14. Percentage distribution of high school graduates completing various mathematics 

course levels since 9th grade, by educational expectations: Academic year 2003–04 

Highest mathematics course level taken since 9th grade1

Educational expectation Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Level 5 

Total 0.6 4.8 44.6 36.1 13.9 

 

High school or less 2.6 19.5 63.7 13.6 0.6 

Some college 0.9 10.2 69.3 18.5 1.2 

College graduation 0.3 2.0 43.9 42.7 11.0 

Graduate/professional degree 0.1 1.5 26.9 44.8 26.6 

1

 Course levels are: Level 1—no math; Level 2—basic math/pre-algebra; Level 3—core secondary through algebra II; 

Level 4—trigonometry, statistics, pre-calculus; and Level 5—calculus. 

NOTE: Highest mathematics course taken is based on a taxonomy of course types for which the student received a 

nonzero credit while in high school. Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. The academic year extended 

from September 1, 2003 to August 31, 2004. 

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

2002 (ELS:2002), “High School Transcript Study.” 
A-1 

Appendix A 

Technical Notes and Glossary 

A-3 

Appendix A 

Technical Notes and Glossary 

A.1 Overview of the Technical Appendix 

The National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) of the U.S. Department of 

Education has collected longitudinal data for more than 30 years. Starting in 1972 with the 

National Longitudinal Study of the High School Class of 1972 (NLS-72) and continuing to the 

most recent study, the Education Longitudinal Study of 2002 (ELS:2002), NCES has provided 

longitudinal and trend data to education policymakers and researchers who link secondary school 

educational achievement and experiences with important downstream outcomes, such as entry 

into the labor market and postsecondary educational access and attainment. 

The base year of ELS:2002 was the first stage of a major new effort designed to provide 

data about critical transitions experienced by students as they proceed through high school and 

into postsecondary education or their careers. The 2002 sophomore cohort was surveyed again in 

2004 and the sample freshened to make it fully representative of spring term 2004 high school 

seniors. Transcript information was collected in 2005 about a year after most of the sample had 

graduated from high school. Future follow-ups will collect policy-relevant data about 

postsecondary access and choices, postsecondary attainment, entry into the work force, family 

formation, voting, volunteerism, and life goals and values. 

The first section of this appendix details ELS:2002 study objectives; lists some of the 

major research and policy issues that the study addresses; explains the four levels of analysis—

cross-sectional, longitudinal, cross-cohort, and international comparison—that can be conducted 

with ELS:2002 data; and supplies an overview of the base-year, first follow-up, and transcript 

study designs and methodologies. 

This section is followed by a discussion of the sampling; weighting and imputation; baseyear, first follow-up, and transcript response rates; the quality of estimates; the standard errors; 

and the electronic codebooks. Finally, a glossary documents the analysis variables used in this 

report. 

A.2 Overview of ELS:2002 

A.2.1 Study Objectives 

ELS:2002 is a longitudinal study that surveys the same individuals repeatedly over time. 

Individual students are expected to be followed until about age 30; the base-year schools have 

been surveyed twice (they were surveyed in 2002 and again in 2004). In the high school years, 

ELS:2002 is an integrated multilevel study, involving multiple respondent populations, including 

students, their parents, their teachers, and their schools (school data are collected at three levels: 

from the principal, the librarian, and on a facilities checklist, completed by survey administrators 

based on their observations at the school). Transcripts were collected from the schools in 2005, 

approximately 1 year after most of the students had graduated from high school. This multilevel 

focus supplies researchers with a comprehensive picture of the home, community, and school 
Appendix A: Technical Notes and Glossary

A-4

environments and their influences on the student. This multiple-respondent perspective is unified 

by the fact that, for most purposes, the student is the basic unit of analysis.1 

Key elements in the ELS:2002 longitudinal design are summarized by wave below. 

Base Year (2002) 

• Baseline survey of high school sophomores completed in spring term 2002. 

• Cognitive tests in reading and mathematics completed. 

• Surveyed parents, English teachers, and mathematics teachers. Collected school 

administrators’ responses to questionnaires. 

• School facilities checklist and a media center (library) questionnaire completed. 

• Sample sizes of approximately 750 schools and over 17,000 students (of whom 

15,362 participated). Schools were the first-stage unit of selection, with sophomores 

randomly selected within schools. 

• Oversampling of Asians and private schools. 

• Design linkages (test score equating in reading and mathematics, some questionnaire 

items in common) with the Program for International Student Assessment (PISA) and 

score reporting linkages to the prior longitudinal studies (the High School and 

Beyond longitudinal study [HS&B] and the National Education Longitudinal Study of 

1988 [NELS:88]). 

First Follow-up (2004) 

• Follow-up in 2004, when most sample members were seniors but some were dropouts 

or in other grades. 

• Administered student questionnaire, dropout questionnaire, assessment in 

mathematics, and school administrator questionnaire; special tailored instruments for 

early graduates and homeschooled students. 

• Returned to the same schools but separately followed transfer students, as well as 

dropouts, early graduates, and sample members who went into a homeschool setting. 

• Freshened to ensure a nationally representative 2004 senior cohort. 

High School Transcript and Course Offerings Record Collection (2005) 

• High school transcript component with data collection in 2005 to ensure complete 

high school records were captured (coursetaking records for grades 9–12). School 

course offerings were also captured for most base-year schools. 

 

1

 Base-year school administrator, library media center, and facilities data can be used to report on the nation’s 

schools with schools that have 10th grade in the 2001–02 school year. (First follow-up school administrator data, on 

the other hand, do not properly generalize to the nation’s school with a senior class in 2004.) However, the primary 

use of the school-level data (and the purpose of parent and teacher surveys) is to provide further contextual 

information on the student. 
Appendix A: Technical Notes and Glossary

A-5

Second Follow-up (2006) 

• Post-high-school follow-ups using a single questionnaire with branching of questions 

to accommodate the diverse pathways followed by the cohort. 

• Questionnaire available as a single application in three electronic modalities: on the 

Web for self-administration, computer-assisted telephone interview, and computerassisted personal interview. 

Further Follow-ups 

• Number of (and dates for) further follow-ups to be determined. 

A.2.2 ELS:2002 Research and Policy Issues 

Apart from helping to describe the status of high school students and their schools, 

ELS:2002 will provide information to help address a number of key policy and research 

questions. The study is intended to produce a comprehensive dataset for developing and 

evaluating education policy. Part of its aim is to inform decisionmakers, education practitioners, 

and parents about changes in the operation of the education system over time and the effects 

various elements of the system have on the lives of the individuals who pass through it. Issues 

that can be addressed with data collected in the high school years include the following: 

• students’ academic growth in mathematics; 

• the process of dropping out of high school; 

• the relationship between family background and students’ educational success; 

• the association between coursetaking choices and academic success in the high school 

years; 

• the equitable distribution of educational opportunities as registered in the distinctive 

school experiences and performance of students from various policy-relevant 

subgroups, such as 

– students in public and private high schools; 

– language minority students; 

– students with disabilities; 

– students in urban, suburban, and rural settings; 

– students in different regions of the country; 

– students from upper, middle, and lower socioeconomic status levels; 

– male and female students; and 

– students from different racial or ethnic groups; and 

• steps taken to facilitate the transition from high school to postsecondary education or 

the world of work. 
Appendix A: Technical Notes and Glossary

A-6

After ELS:2002 students have completed high school, a new set of issues can be 

examined. These issues include 

• the later educational and labor market activities of high school dropouts; 

• the transition of those who do not go directly on to postsecondary education or to the 

world of work; 

• access to, and choice of, undergraduate and graduate educational institutions; 

• persistence in attaining postsecondary education goals; 

• entry of new postsecondary graduates into the workforce; 

• social and economic rates of return on education to both the individual and society; 

and 

• adult roles, such as family formation and civic participation. 

A.2.3 Analytic Levels 

These research and policy issues can be investigated at several distinct levels of analysis. 

The overall scope and design of the study provide for the following four analytical levels: 

• cross-sectional profiles of the nation’s high school sophomores and seniors (as well as 

dropouts after spring of the sophomore year); 

• longitudinal analysis (including examination of life-course changes); 

• intercohort comparisons with American high school students of earlier decades; and 

• international comparisons (U.S. 15-year-olds compared with 15-year-olds in other 

nations). 

Cross-sectional profiles. ELS:2002 cross-sectional data permit characterization of the 

nation’s high school sophomores in the spring of the 2001–02 school year and seniors in the 

spring of the 2003–04 school year. 

Longitudinal analysis. Longitudinal analysis is now possible with release of data from 

the 2004 first follow-up. ELS:2002 provides the basis for within-cohort comparison by following 

the same individuals over time to measure achievement growth in mathematics; monitor 

enrollment status and school completion over the high school years and thereafter; and record 

such key outcomes as postsecondary entry and attainment, labor market experiences, civic 

participation, and family formation. These outcomes, in turn, can be related to antecedents 

identified in earlier rounds, including individual, home, school, and community factors. 

Intercohort comparisons. As part of an important historical series of studies that repeats 

a core of key items each decade, ELS:2002 offers the opportunity for analyzing trends in areas of 

fundamental importance, such as patterns of coursetaking, rates of participation in extracurricular 

activities, academic performance, and changes in goals and aspirations. A 1980–2002 NCES 

high school sophomore trend report is currently in preparation. With completion of the first 

follow-up in 2004, researchers can now compare ELS:2002 high school seniors’ experience, 
Appendix A: Technical Notes and Glossary

A-7

attitudes, and achievement with that of NELS:88 seniors in 1992, HS&B seniors in 1980 and 

1982, and NLS-72 seniors in 1972. 

Starting with the ELS:2002 first follow-up academic transcript component, trend 

comparisons can also be made with transcript data containing students’ high school course 

histories and sequences because comparable transcript studies have been conducted. These 

started with HS&B (1982) and include NELS:88 (1992) and the National Assessment of 

Educational Progress (NAEP) (1987, 1990, 1994, 1998, 2000, and 2005). 

International comparisons. The Organization for Economic Cooperation and 

Development’s (OECD’s) Program for International Student Assessment (PISA) is an 

internationally standardized assessment, jointly developed by the 32 participating countries 

(including the United States) and administered to 15-year-olds in groups in their schools (Lemke 

et al. 2001). PISA covers three domains: reading literacy, numeracy, and scientific literacy; a 

subset of the PISA reading literacy and numeracy items have been included on ELS:2002. PISA 

aims to define each domain not merely in terms of mastery of the school curriculum, but also in 

terms of important knowledge and skills needed in adult life. A special feature of ELS:2002 is 

that it can be linked to PISA. Specifically, ELS:2002 base-year reading results have been put on 

the PISA:2000 literacy scale, and base-year results are also being put on the PISA:2003 

mathematics scale. It will thus be possible to relate PISA scale scores in the two areas to 

longitudinal outcomes, through ELS:2002 results from the first follow-up onward. 

A.2.4 Overview of the Base-Year, First Follow-up, and Transcript Study Design 

and Content 

Base-year study design. ELS:2002 was conducted in a national probability sample of 

about 750 participating (of 1,220 eligible contacted) public, Catholic, and other private schools 

in the spring term of the 2001–02 school year. Of 17,590 eligible selected sophomores, 15,360 

completed a base-year questionnaire, as did 13,480 of their parents and 7,140 of their teachers.2

Of the 750 participating schools, 740 principals and 720 librarians completed questionnaires. 

Seven study components comprised the base-year design: assessments of students 

(achievement tests in mathematics and reading); a survey of students; surveys of parents, 

teachers, school administrators, and librarians; and a facilities checklist (completed by survey 

administrators, based on their observations at the school). The student assessments measured 

achievement in mathematics and reading; the baseline scores can serve as a covariate or control 

variable for later analyses. Mathematics achievement was reassessed in the first follow-up, so 

that achievement gain over the last 2 years of high school can be measured and related to school 

processes and mathematics coursetaking. The student questionnaire gathered information about 

the student’s background, school experiences and activities, plans and goals for the future, 

employment and out-of-school experiences, language background, and psychological orientation 

toward learning. 

One parent of each participating sophomore was asked to respond to a parent survey. The 

parent questionnaire was designed to gauge parental aspirations for the child, home background 

 

2

 Note that the participating student sample defines the eligible parent and teacher samples. The 7,140 teacher 

completions are those linked to student respondents. Of the 15,360 student participants, 14,080 had at least one 

associated teacher-provided student report. 
Appendix A: Technical Notes and Glossary

A-8

and the home education support system, the child’s educational history prior to 10th grade, and 

parental interactions with and opinions about the student’s school. For each student enrolled in 

English or mathematics, a teacher was also selected to be surveyed. Teachers typically (but not 

invariably) reported on multiple ELS:2002 sophomores. The teacher questionnaire collected the 

teacher’s evaluation of the student and provided information about the teacher’s background and 

activities. The head librarian or media center director at each school was asked to complete a 

library media center questionnaire, which inquired into the school’s library media center facility, 

its staffing, its technological resources, collection and expenditures, and scheduling and 

transactions. Finally, the facilities checklist was a brief observational form completed for each 

school by survey administrators. The form collected information about the condition of school 

buildings and facilities. 

First follow-up study design. In the first follow-up, the base-year schools were surveyed 

by means of an administrator questionnaire. Base-year students were surveyed whether in the 

base-year school, in a new school, or out of school. Additional seniors were added in a 

freshening process, and a mathematics assessment was administered to first follow-up students in 

the original (base-year) sample of schools. Information about coursetaking (covering all years of 

high school and including the sequence in which courses were taken and grades earned) was 

collected at the end of high school, through the high school transcript component of the 

ELS:2002 first follow-up study. 

The basis for the sampling frame for the first follow-up was the sample of schools and 

students studied in the ELS:2002 base year. There were two overlapping but conceptually 

different target student populations, or populations of inferential interest, for the first follow-up. 

The first population (the ELS:2002 sophomore cohort) consists of students who were enrolled in 

the 10th grade in the spring term of 2002. The second population (the ELS:2002 senior cohort) 

comprises students who were enrolled in the 12th grade in the spring term of 2004. The former 

population includes students who dropped out of school between 10th and 12th grades, students 

who graduated early, students who went from a school setting to a homeschool setting, and 

students who fell behind the modal grade progression of their peers (e.g., students who repeated 

a grade and were 11th-graders in spring 2004). The latter population includes students in the 

sophomore cohort who were seniors in 2004, plus samples of students in the baseline schools 

from each of these missing groups who were seniors in 2004. Including representatives of these 

missing groups who were seniors in 2004 to the first follow-up data makes the entire sample of 

2004 high school seniors nationally representative. This additional group of high school seniors 

is called the “freshening sample.” 

Because of these two target populations and the major analytical subgroups, the full-scale 

sample encompasses the following types of students from the spring of 2004: 

• ELS:2002 base-year student sample members enrolled (in either the 12th grade or 

some other grade) in the school in which they were originally sampled; 

• ELS:2002 base-year sophomores who dropped out of school prior to first follow-up 

(2004) data collection; 

• ELS:2002 base-year student respondents who finished high school early, including 

those who graduated from high school early, as well as those who did not graduate 
Appendix A: Technical Notes and Glossary

A-9

but achieved alternative certification (e.g., exam-certified equivalency such as a 

General Educational Development [GED] certificate); 

• ELS:2002 base-year student respondents who transferred out of the school in which 

they were originally sampled (including homeschooled students); 

• ELS:2002 base-year sample students who were deemed unable to participate directly 

during the base year owing to severe disability or insufficient command of the 

English language such that they could not complete a questionnaire; and 

• Students at the base-year sample school who were enrolled in the 12th grade in spring 

of 2004 but were not in 10th grade in the United States during the 2001–02 school 

year. In spring term 2002, such students may have been out of the country, been 

enrolled in school in the United States in a grade other than 10th, had an extended 

illness or injury, been homeschooled, been institutionalized, or temporarily dropped 

out of school. These students comprised the first follow-up freshening sample. 

Although all groups in the sample as categorized above were eligible to complete a 

questionnaire, different instruments were tailored to different study populations. The practice 

followed was to provide a core set of items to which sample members would respond, 

supplemented by items specific to the circumstances of a particular group (such as dropouts, for 

whom questions about their current school situation would not be relevant). 

For some classifications of the sample, a first follow-up test score in mathematics has 

either been collected (students still in the base-year school who participated in the in-school 

administration) or imputed (students who had transferred to a new school or those still in the 

base-year school but who were unable to participate during the in-school sessions). For the 

senior cohort of 2004—the analysis population of this report—test data in mathematics are 

available. Note that for out-of-high-school categories of sample members, such as dropouts, 

early graduates, and the homeschooled, a test score has neither been collected nor imputed. 

(Missing test score data have been imputed for base-year nonrespondents who became 

respondents in the first follow-up. With these scores, this group can be assimilated into a 

sophomore cohort panel analysis.) 

Further details of the instrumentation, sample design, data collection results, data 

processing, weighting and imputation, and data files available for analysis may be found in the 

Education Longitudinal Study of 2002: Base-Year to First Follow-up Data File Documentation

(Ingels et al. 2005).3

 

Transcript study design. The ELS:2002 transcripts were collected from sample 

members in late 2004 and early 2005, about 6 months to 1 year after most students had graduated 

from high school. Collecting the transcripts in the 2004–05 academic year allowed for more 

complete high school records. Transcripts were collected from the school that the students were 

originally sampled from in the base year (which was the only school for most sample members) 

and from their last school of attendance if it was learned during the first follow-up student data 

collection that they had transferred. By requesting transcripts and related information for transfer 

 

3

 See appendix reference list (section A.5) for full citation. The manual can be downloaded from the NCES website: 

http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch. For more comprehensive information about the base year, see Ingels et al. 2004. 
Appendix A: Technical Notes and Glossary

A-10

students from a second school, this study offers a unique advantage by having extensive 

information on multiple school attendance and therefore increased accuracy of enrollment 

histories. Incomplete records were obtained for sample members who had dropped out of school, 

had fallen behind the modal progression sequence, or were enrolled in a special education 

program requiring or allowing more than 12 years of schooling. For freshened students, 

transcripts were only collected from their senior year school. Transcripts were collected for 

regular graduates, dropouts, early graduates, and students who were homeschooled after their 

sophomore year. 

The ELS:2002 high school transcript data collection sought key pieces of information 

about coursetaking from the student’s official high school record—including courses taken while 

attending secondary school, information on credits earned, year and term a specific course was 

taken, and final grades. When available, other information was collected, including dates 

enrolled, reason for leaving school, and standardized test scores. Once collected, information 

(e.g., course name, credits earned, course grades) was transcribed and can be linked back to the 

student’s questionnaire or assessment data. Due to the size and complexity of the file, and 

because of reporting variation by school, additional variables were constructed from the raw 

transcript file. These composite variables include standardized grade point average (GPA), high 

school academic program, total credits earned by subject, and others. Further details of the 

instrumentation, sample design, data collection results, data processing, weighting and 

imputation, and data files available for analysis may be found in the Education Longitudinal 

Study of 2002: First Follow-up Transcript Component Data File Documentation (Bozick et al. 

2006). 

A.3 Sample Design, Weighting, Response Rates, Quality of 

Estimates, Standard Errors, and the Electronic Codebook 

A.3.1 Sampling 

The ELS:2002 base-year sample design began with a nationally representative, two-stage 

stratified probability sample. The first stage of selection was schools; schools were selected with 

probability proportional to size (PPS). The public school sample was stratified by the nine U.S. 

Census divisions and by location (metropolitan status of urban, suburban, or rural). Private 

schools (Catholic and other private) were stratified by four levels of geography (Census region) 

and location; private schools were oversampled. The target sample size was 800 schools. 

Cooperation was sought from 1,220 eligible selections. The realized sample comprised 750 

participating 10th-grade schools (67.8 participation rate). The second stage of selection was 

students. Of 17,590 sampled students in the schools, 15,360 students participated. Some groups 

(e.g., Asians, students in nonpublic schools) were oversampled. The weighted student response 

rate was 87.3 percent; detailed base-year response rates are reported in section A.3.3. 

The first follow-up returned to the same schools to seek their cooperation, and to baseyear sophomore respondents and a sample of base-year nonrespondents, regardless of whether 

they had remained in the base-year school. In addition, at participating base-year schools in the 

first follow-up, a sample freshening procedure was implemented so that spring term 2004 seniors 

who had not had a chance of selection into the sophomore cohort 2 years before would have a 

chance of selection into ELS:2002 as seniors. Although 5 of the 750 base-year schools were 
Appendix A: Technical Notes and Glossary

A-11

ineligible because they no longer enrolled ELS:2002 sample members or seniors, of the eligible 

schools, 700 (93.4 percent) participated. Overall, there were 16,520 sample members (students, 

dropouts, homeschooled, or early graduates), of whom 14,990 participated. The sample included 

14,250 seniors, of whom 13,420 participated. The weighted response rate for the analysis sample 

in this report, high school seniors, was 94.4 percent. Detailed first follow-up response rates are 

reported in section A.3.3. 

The transcript study collected records from December 2004 through June 2005. Survey 

materials were sent to 2,032 schools including 759 schools that participated either in the base 

year or first follow-up4 and 1,291 transfer schools that were first contacted regarding ELS:2002 

during transcript data collection. Schools were paid $5 for each transcript. 

Transcripts for 16,105 sample members were requested. Included were 100 sample 

members who were ineligible to participate in the base year or first follow-up due to a physical 

disability, a mental disability, or language barrier. Transcripts for 247 eligible sample members 

were not requested. These included 224 eligible sample members who attended schools that 

refused to participate in the transcript collection during a prior component of ELS:2002 data 

collection and 23 eligible sample members whose schools agreed to participate, but had 

individually refused to participate during a prior component of ELS:2002 data collection. 

Ninety-five schools required explicit consent from sample members or their 

parents/guardians before releasing transcript information. Transcripts were not collected for 535 

eligible sample members who refused to sign a form granting permission for the release of their 

transcript. 

A.3.2 Weighting and Imputation 

Weighting. The general purpose of the weighting scheme was to compensate for unequal 

probabilities of selection of schools and students into the base-year sample and to adjust for the 

fact that not all schools and students selected into the sample actually participated. Three sets of 

weights were computed in the base year: a school weight, a weight for student questionnaire 

completion, and a contextual data weight for the “expanded” sample of questionnaire-eligible 

and questionnaire-ineligible students.5

 School and student weights were adjusted for 

nonresponse, and these adjustments were designed to significantly reduce or eliminate 

nonresponse bias for data elements known for most respondents and nonrespondents. In addition, 

base-year school weights were poststratified to known population totals. 

In the first follow-up, three individual-level weights were generated to accommodate the 

2002 sophomore cohort 2 years later and the freshened senior cohort of 2004: a cross-sectional 

weight based on 2004 questionnaire completion, an expanded sample weight that extended the 

 

4

 Of these 759 schools, 741 were base-year schools, five were schools that students had moved to due to a school 

closing or reorganization prior to first follow-up in-school data collection, and 13 were schools that students had 

transferred to prior to first follow-up in-school data collection. 

5

 The base-year expanded sample weight generalizes to the population of all sophomores, regardless of whether 

they were capable of completing the questionnaire. The base-year student questionnaire weight (BYSTUWT) 

generalizes only to the population of students who were eligible to complete the student questionnaire; that is, those 

who were not judged incapable of participation by virtue of a severe disability or lack of proficiency in the English 

language. 
Appendix A: Technical Notes and Glossary

A-12

weighting to encompass questionnaire-ineligible sample members, and a panel weight for 

sophomore cohort members with data at both points in time.6 

One weight, F1TRSCWT, was computed for transcript respondents. The procedure for 

assigning the weights was the following. First, the first follow-up design weight (F1DWT) was 

used as the starting weight because it was greater than zero for all transcript sample members. 

Next, generalized exponential models (GEM) were used to compute weight adjustments. 

Extreme weights were adjusted, truncated, and smoothed by GEM as part of the nonresponse and 

poststratification adjustments rather than as a separate step. As the predictors of response 

propensity were potentially heterogeneous for different types of nonrespondents, the 

nonresponse adjustment was performed in two stages: first, at the school refusal stage (e.g., the 

school refused to provide any transcript); and second, at the within-school student-level 

nonresponse stage (e.g., the school had no record of the student, there was no transcript available 

for the student, the school required student permission, or the school refused to release a 

particular transcript). These two stages were chosen because there were sufficient sample sizes in 

each group for weight adjustments and because the distribution of nonrespondents in each group 

was different. The final transcript weight for each sample member is the product of the first 

follow-up design weight, the nonresponse adjustment factor, and the poststratification factor. The 

estimates in this report were produced using F1TRSCWT. 

Imputation. For key classification variables, missing data were replaced with imputed 

values. Single imputation (by means of a weighted sequential hot deck procedure) was 

implemented for missing key questionnaire variables. Multiple imputation of the ability estimate 

(theta) was used to treat missing assessment data. Table A-1 lists variables subject to imputation 

and proportions missing. Tables A-1a (base year) and A-1b (first follow-up) list variables subject 

to imputation and percent missing (i.e., percent that were imputed). 

 

6

 There are two different cases in which a respondent can have data at two points in time. Both are covered by the 

panel weight: first, by virtue of completing a questionnaire both in the base year and first follow-up; and second, for 

base-year nonrespondents, by virtue of completing both a first follow-up questionnaire and a New Participant 

Supplement from which missing key base-year classification variables could be filled in. In addition, for base-year 

nonparticipants participating in the first follow-up, a base-year reading and mathematics score was imputed. 
Appendix A: Technical Notes and Glossary

A-13

Table A-1a. ELS:2002 base year imputation variables: 2002 

Variable Weighted percent imputed 

Student sex 0.05 

Student race/ethnicity 0.02 

Student language minority status 2.07 

Student Hispanic subgroup 2.93 

Student Asian subgroup 7.26 

School program type 6.64 

Student postsecondary educational aspirations 2.36 

Parental aspirations for student postsecondary achievement 14.53 

Family composition 12.55 

Mother’s educational attainment 3.88 

Mother’s occupation 5.58 

Father’s educational attainment 10.28 

Father’s occupation 15.03 

Family income 22.40 

10th grade ability estimates (theta) for reading 6.26 

10th grade ability estimates (theta) for mathematics 5.33 

NOTE: Additional reading and mathematics assessment variables generated on basis of imputed theta score. 

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

2002 (ELS:2002). 

Table A-1b. ELS:2002 first follow-up imputation variables: 2004 

Variable Weighted percent imputed1

Student sex 0.04 

Student race/ethnicity 0.14 

Student language minority status 0.93 

Student Hispanic subgroup 5.65 

Student Asian subgroup 7.21 

School program type 5.09 

Student postsecondary attainment: educational expectations 0.67 

Parental aspirations for student postsecondary attainment 5.52 

Family composition 0.96 

Mother’s educational attainment2 1.42 

Mother’s occupation2 2.02 

Father’s educational attainment2 2.17 

Father’s occupation2 2.50 

Family income (2001)2 7.42 

Enrollment status (in-school vs. out, grade) 2.42 

12th-grade student ability estimates (theta) for mathematics3

 18.23 

10th-grade student ability estimates (theta) for mathematics3 5.09 

10th-grade student ability estimates (theta) for reading3

 5.09 

1 The denominator used in calculating the weighted percent missing varies by variable due to restrictions on eligibility for imputation. 2 Used to construct socioeconomic status (SES). 

3 Used to construct scale, quartile, and proficiency scores. 

NOTE: Base year (10th grade) test scores were imputed in both the base year and first follow-up; in the first follow-up, the base year 

scores were imputed for base year nonrespondents who responded in 2004. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Education Longitudinal Study of 2002 

(ELS:2002). 
Appendix A: Technical Notes and Glossary

A-14

A.3.3 Base-Year, First Follow-up, and Transcript Response Rates 

Base-year response rates. Of 1,220 eligible contacted schools, 750 participated in the 

study, for an overall weighted school participation rate of approximately 68 percent (62 percent 

unweighted). Of 17,590 selected eligible students, 15,360 participated, for a weighted student 

response rate of approximately 87 percent.7

 (School and student weighted response rates reflect 

use of the base weight [design weight] and do not include nonresponse adjustments.) School and 

student unit nonresponse bias analyses were performed, as well as an item nonresponse bias 

analysis for the questionnaires. The school-level bias due to nonresponse prior to and after 

computing weights was estimated based on the data collected from both respondents and 

nonrespondents and sampling frame data. At the unit level (but not the item level), weighting 

techniques were employed to reduce detected bias; after final nonresponse adjustments, the 

remaining relative bias ranged from 0 percent to 0.2 percent for schools and from 0 percent to 

0.07 percent for students. For details of the bias analyses, see the Education Longitudinal Study 

of 2002: Base Year Data File User’s Manual (Ingels et al. 2004). Unweighted and weighted 

school-level response by stratum is summarized in table A-2. Second-stage unit response rates by 

component are summarized in table A-3. 

Table A-2. Unweighted school sampling and eligibility, and unweighted and weighted 

participation, by sampling stratum: 2002 

Sampled schools Eligible schools Participating schools 

School sampling 

stratum Number 

Unweighted 

percent1 Number 

Unweighted 

percent2 Number 

Unweighted 

percent3 Weighted percent 

Total 1,270 100.00 1,220 96.29 750 61.59 67.80 

 

School control 

Public 950 75.16 930 97.17 580 62.63 69.09 

Catholic 140 11.04 140 100.00 100 67.86 74.04 

Other private 180 13.80 160 88.57 80 49.68 62.94 

 

School location 

Urban 430 34.23 410 95.39 250 60.39 67.27 

Suburban 630 49.68 610 96.67 360 59.28 59.81 

Rural 200 16.09 200 97.06 140 71.21 79.32 

1

 Percent is based on overall total within column. Details may not sum to totals due to rounding. 2

 Percent is based on number sampled within row. 

3

 Percent is based on number eligible within row. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Education Longitudinal Study of 2002 

(ELS:2002). 

 

7

 Stage 1 (school) response rates can be multiplied by stage 2 (student) response rates for a combined two-stage 

response rate: 68 percent * 87 percent = 59 percent. 
Appendix A: Technical Notes and Glossary

A-15

Table A-3. Summary of ELS:2002 base-year completion and coverage rates: 2002 

Instrument Selected Participated 

Weighted 

percent 

Unweighted 

percent 

Student questionnaire 17,590 15,360 87.28 87.33 

Student assessment1 15,360 14,540 95.08 94.67 

Parent questionnaire2 15,360 13,490 87.45 87.80 

Teacher ratings of students3

 15,360 14,080 91.64 91.66 

School administrator questionnaire 750 740 98.53 98.80 

Library media center questionnaire 750 720 95.93 95.48 

Facilities checklist 750 750 100.00 100.00 

1

 Percentage of cases for which a student questionnaire was obtained and for which a cognitive test was also obtained. Note that

test scores have been imputed where missing so that test scores are available for all 15,362 questionnaire completers. 2

 Indicates a coverage rate: percentage of participating students with a parent report. More parents participated; these completion 

rates reflect the number of records in the public-use data file, where parent (and teacher) data were excluded for students who did 

not complete a base-year student questionnaire. 

3

 Indicates a coverage rate: ratings obtained from at least one teacher. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Education Longitudinal Study of 2002 

(ELS:2002). 

First follow-up response rates. First follow-up weighted response rates are reported at 

the student level only (the school sample was not strictly representative of the nation’s high 

schools that have 12th grade in 2003–04). Overall, 14,990 of 16,520 sample members 

participated, for a weighted response rate of 88.7 percent. However, for the analysis population 

for this report—the senior cohort—the weighted response rate was 94.4 percent, with 13,420 

seniors (of a possible 14,250) participating. Further details of first follow-up coverage and 

completion rates are provided in tables A-4 and A-5. 

High school transcript response rates. A total of 1,549 out of 1,953 schools 

participated in the request for transcripts for an unweighted participation rate of 79.3 percent. 

The base-year school weighted response rate is 94.5 percent. The course offerings response rate 

for base-year schools is 88.0 percent. Ninety-one percent (90.7 percent, weighted) of the entire 

student sample have some transcript information (14,920 out of 16,373). 

Table A-4. Summary of ELS:2002 first follow-up completion and coverage rates: 2004 

Instrument Selected Participated 

Weighted 

percent 

Unweighted 

percent 

Total sample for public-use file 16,520 14,990 88.70 90.76 

 

Student questionnaire 13,090 12,430 93.39 94.92 

Student mathematics assessment1

 12,430 11,000 87.40 88.48 

School administrator questionnaire2

 12,430 11,860 95.90 95.41 

Transfer questionnaire 1,800 1,280 68.36 70.87 

Dropout questionnaire 880 690 73.20 78.31 

Early graduate questionnaire 690 560 80.64 81.51 

Homeschooled questionnaire 60 40 61.46 67.21 

1

 Indicates a coverage rate: percentage of cases for which a student questionnaire was obtained and for which a cognitive test was 

also obtained. When a test was not obtained, test results were imputed. 2

 Indicates a coverage rate: percentage of students affiliated with base-year (2002) schools in 2004 (student questionnaire 

completers) for whom a school administrator report was obtained. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Education Longitudinal Study of 2002 

(ELS:2002). 
Appendix A: Technical Notes and Glossary

A-16

Table A-5. Questionnaire completion rate for ELS:2002 senior cohort: 2004 

Completed student 

questionnaire 

Completed transfer 

questionnaire Completion rate 

Characteristic Weighted Unweighted Weighted Unweighted Weighted Unweighted 

Total (2004 seniors) 96.84 96.78 74.32 73.79 94.42 94.25 

Participated (n) 12,270 1,160 13,420 

Sampled (n) 12,680 1,570 14,250 

School control 

Public 96.77 96.57 73.63 72.07 94.30 93.89 

Catholic 97.69 97.61 83.91 80.77 96.45 96.04 

Other private 97.66 97.29 79.47 77.89 94.86 94.59 

School location 

Urban 96.87 96.78 74.23 73.27 93.78 93.63 

Suburban 96.58 96.72 75.03 74.52 94.44 94.52 

Rural 97.46 96.94 72.55 73.09 95.25 94.66 

School region1

 

Midwest 97.54 97.53 69.40 70.36 94.44 94.41 

Northeast 96.11 96.14 80.92 77.60 95.17 94.80 

South 97.14 97.14 75.61 74.60 94.71 94.63 

West 96.28 95.84 74.62 74.38 93.37 92.92 

Race/ethnicity 

American Indian or Alaska 

Native 

96.86 95.79 83.78 83.33 93.79 93.81 

Asian or Pacific Islander 97.10 96.86 72.86 74.03 94.40 94.51 

Black or African American 97.13 96.90 77.37 76.47 93.72 93.40 

Hispanic or Latino 96.94 96.86 74.22 73.08 93.77 93.36 

More than one race 96.60 95.19 67.61 63.74 93.19 91.07 

White 96.77 96.87 73.48 73.91 94.82 94.87 

1 Region is defined by the U.S. Census Bureau based on the state in which the school is located. 

NOTE: School-level variables—school control, location, and region—are based on the base-year school in 2002 for sophomore 

cohort members. For freshened students, the variable is based on the base-year school in 2004, the time point at which freshened 

seniors entered the sample. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Education Longitudinal Study of 2002 

(ELS:2002). 

A.3.4 Quality of Estimates: Reliability and Validity of ELS:2002 Data 

The transcript items used in this report are based on the student-level file. This file 

contains a record for each of the 14,920 sample members for whom a transcript was collected 

and passed the criteria for being considered a transcript respondent. A sample member was 

considered a respondent in the ELS:2002 transcript data file if the following criteria were met: 

1. The sample member had at least one transcript sent from one of their schools; and 

2. The sample member had at least one complete course record for at least one grade 

(9th, 10th, 11th, or 12th). A complete course record was defined as having 

nonmissing information on all of the following five variables for at least one course: 

• F1CCRSE: Course title; 

• F1CYEAR: School year in which course was taken; 
Appendix A: Technical Notes and Glossary

A-17

• F1CGRLEV: Grade level in which course was taken; 

• F1CCRED: School-assigned course credit; and 

• F1CGRADE: Standardized course grade. 

If sample members met the first criterion, but not the second, their transcripts were 

examined in more detail. If enough valuable information about courses (e.g., titles, terms, credits, 

or grades) were present and judged usable, the sample member was considered a respondent. A 

total of 14,290 sample members were classified as respondents in the ELS:2002 transcript data 

file. 

Analysts should recognize and understand a key limitation of the transcript data. Fourteen 

percent of transcript respondents do not have 4 “complete” years of high school transcript 

information. This most often occurs when the data are missing or when the data are censored. 

Missing transcript information may result from unit nonresponse from the school, inability to 

obtain multiple transcripts for certain transfer students, or school recordkeeping errors or 

inconsistencies. In this case, the student should have 4 years of data but for one reason or another 

it was not reported. Censored data lead to fewer than 4 years of data because the student is a 

dropout, early graduate, or homeschooled. In this case, the student should not have 4 years of 

data. The information is “complete” in the sense that it captures the student’s entire high school 

experience but is censored artificially by the student’s pathway and status. There are also 

instances where the respondent has both missing and censored data. Since many variables are 

constructed under the assumption of having 4 years of data (e.g., total credits earned, overall 

high school GPA, etc.), recognizing this limitation is crucial to making accurate inferences from 

statistical analyses. 

Most of the nontranscript items used in the ELS:2002 questionnaires were taken from 

prior studies, particularly HS&B and NELS:88. Given their past use with large, nationally 

representative samples, their measurement characteristics are well established. A number of data 

quality studies have been conducted using these items. Interested readers should see, in 

particular, reports by Fetters, Stowe, and Owings (1984), Kaufman and Rasinski (1991), and 

McLaughlin and Cohen (1997). Data quality analyses for the subset of new questionnaire items 

used in ELS:2002 (as well as the reading and mathematics assessments) can be found in the 

base-year field test report (Burns et al. 2003). The base-year and base-year to first follow-up data 

manuals (Ingels et al. 2004, 2005) also address issues of questionnaire and assessment data 

quality for both the ELS:2002 baseline and its first follow-up. 

A.3.5 Survey Standard Errors 

Because the ELS:2002 sample design involved stratification, the disproportionate 

sampling of certain strata, and clustered (i.e., multistage) probability sampling, the resulting 

statistics are more variable than they would have been if they had been based on data from a 

simple random sample of the same size. 

Calculating exact standard errors for survey estimates can be difficult. Several procedures 

are available for calculating precise estimates of sampling errors for complex samples. 

Procedures such as Taylor Series approximations, Balanced Repeated Replication (BRR), and 
Appendix A: Technical Notes and Glossary

A-18

Jackknife Repeated Replication (JRR), which can be found in advanced statistical programs such 

as SUDAAN, AM, or WESVAR, produce similar results. The ELS:2002 analyses included in 

this report used SUDAAN and the Taylor Series procedure to calculate standard errors. 

A.3.6 Electronic Codebooks 

An electronic codebook (ECB)8 for the ELS:2002 base-year, first follow-up, and high 

school transcript combined data (NCES 2006–338) is available from NCES through a restricteduse licensing process. The ECB system is primarily an electronic version of a fully documented 

survey codebook. The data user can browse through all interview or instrument items (variables) 

contained in the ELS:2002 data files, search variable and value labels for key words related to 

particular research questions, review the actual wording of these items along with notes and 

other pertinent information related to them, examine the definitions and programs used to 

develop derived variables, and importantly, output the data for statistical analysis. The ECB also 

provides an electronic display of the distribution of counts and percentages for each variable in 

the dataset. 

Analysts can use the ECB to select or “tag” variables of interest, print hardcopy 

codebooks that display the distributions of the tagged variables, and generate SAS and SPSS 

program syntax (including variable and value labels) that can be used with the analyst’s own 

statistical software. Further details of the instrumentation, sample design, data collection results, 

data processing, and data files available for analysis may be found in the Education Longitudinal 

Study of 2002: First Follow-up Transcript Component Data File Documentation (Bozick et al. 

2006). 

A.4 Glossary—Description of Variables Used 

Each variable used in analysis for this report is described below. The topic headings are 

student demographic characteristics, family characteristics, student transcript and educational 

characteristics, and mathematics achievement. To see the original questionnaires and obtain 

specific item wording and information about the context in which particular questions were 

posed, researchers can consult web-published portable document format (pdf) files containing 

the base-year and first follow-up questionnaires at 

http://www.nces.ed.gov/surveys/els2002/index.asp. Further information about the construction of 

composite variables (such as socioeconomic status [SES]), as well as the code used to construct 

these variables, can be found in the ECB (NCES 2006–338). 

STUDENT DEMOGRAPHIC CHARACTERISTICS 

NATIVE LANGUAGE (F1STLANG): The data for F1STLANG are taken directly from 

the base-year student questionnaire for base-year respondents or from the first follow-up new 

participant supplement. Otherwise, they are imputed. The native language of the student is 

classified as either English or a language other than English. 

 

8

 Information on obtaining electronic codebooks for ELS:2002 and other NCES datasets can be found by reviewing 

the data products for the study at http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch.
Appendix A: Technical Notes and Glossary

A-19

RACE/ETHNICITY (F1RACE): The race/ethnicity variable for this report includes five 

categories: (1) American Indian or Alaska Native; (2) Asian, including Native Hawaiian/Pacific 

Islander; (3) Black or African American; (4) Hispanic or Latino; and (5) White. All race 

categories exclude individuals of Hispanic or Latino origin. 

The ELS:2002 race variables reflect new federal standards for collecting race and 

ethnicity data that allow respondents to mark more than one choice for race. For base-year 

respondents, information on race/ethnicity was obtained from the base-year student questionnaire 

when available or from (in order of preference) the sampling roster, the parent questionnaire if 

the parent respondent was a biological parent, or logical imputation based on other questionnaire 

items (e.g., surname, native language). The base-year race/ethnicity questions were asked in the 

first follow-up for newly participating students (i.e., base-year nonrespondents). 

SEX (F1SEX): For base-year respondents, this variable was constructed from the baseyear student questionnaire or, where missing, from (in order of preference) the school roster, 

logical imputation based on first name, or statistical imputation. In the first follow-up, students 

new to the study were asked whether their sex was male or female. 

EXTRACURRICULAR PARTICIPATION (F1S27): Senior year extracurricular 

participation was classified into four groups: No participation; Less than 1 hour a week; 1 to 4 

hours a week; and More than 4 hours a week. 

WORK (F1S59; F1S60): Senior year employment was determined based on two 

questions. First, students were asked if they were ever employed for pay (F1S59, Have you ever 

worked for pay, not counting work around the house?). If yes, then students were asked how 

many hours per week on average they worked (F1S60). Those who were never employed or 

reported working zero hours per week were coded as (1) No employment. Others were coded as 

either working (2) 1 to 15 hours per week or (3) More than 15 hours per week. 

FAMILY CHARACTERISTICS 

FAMILY COMPOSITION/CONFIGURATION (F1FCOMP): F1FCOMP is based on 

BYFCOMP for base-year respondents and a surrogate for first follow-up new participants. New 

participants were asked to answer questions about family composition that were asked of parents 

in the base year. Because family composition can change over time, the variable is only an 

approximation, in that information was gathered at either of two time points (2002 or 2004) 

before combining into one measure. The nine response options include (1) Mother and father, 

(2) Mother and male guardian, (3) Father and female guardian, (4) Two guardians, (5) Mother 

only, (6) Father only, (7) Female guardian only, (8) Male guardian only, and (9) Lives with 

student less than half time. These categories were collapsed into four: Mother and father (1), 

Mother or father and guardian (2 and 3), Single parent—mother or father (5 and 6), and Other (4, 

7, 8, and 9). 

FATHER’S EDUCATION (F1FATHED): The variables F1FATHED and F1MOTHED 

were used to create F1SES1 as well as F1PARED. Father’s highest level of education completed 

is taken from the parent questionnaire (BYP34A or BYP34B, depending on the sex of the 

respondent) or, where missing, from (in order of preference) the student questionnaire (BYS83B) 

or imputation. Eight distinct levels of education were identified: (1) Did not finish high school; 
Appendix A: Technical Notes and Glossary

A-20

(2) Graduated from high school or GED; (3) Attended 2-year school, no degree; (4) Graduated 

from 2-year school; (5) Attended college, no 4-year degree; (6) Graduated from college; 

(7) Completed master’s degree or equivalent; and (8) Completed Ph.D., M.D., or other advanced 

degree. Note that for about 1 percent of cases, a respondent classified under mother’s education 

could be a male spouse/partner of a 10th-grader’s biological or adoptive father and vice versa: a 

respondent classified under father’s education could be a female spouse/partner of a 10thgrader’s biological or adoptive mother.

MOTHER’S EDUCATION (F1MOTHED): Mother’s highest level of education 

completed is taken from the parent questionnaire or, where missing, from (in order of preference) 

the student questionnaire (base year for base-year respondents, first follow-up for base-year 

nonrespondents) or imputation. Eight distinct levels of education are identified: (1) Did not finish 

high school; (2) Graduated from high school or GED; (3) Attended 2-year school, no degree; 

(4) Graduated from 2-year school; (5) Attended college, no 4-year degree; (6) Graduated from 

college; (7) Completed master’s degree or equivalent; and (8) Completed Ph.D., M.D., or other 

advanced degree. (Also, see note on father’s education, above.)

PARENTS’ EDUCATION (F1PARED): F1PARED is equivalent to either 

F1MOTHED or F1FATHED, whichever is the highest level of education. For base-year 

respondents, mother’s/father’s highest level of education completed is taken from the parent 

questionnaire or, where missing, from (in order of preference) the base-year student 

questionnaire or imputation. For base-year nonrespondents who were first follow-up 

respondents, this information was taken from the New Participant Supplement. Eight distinct 

levels of education are identified: (1) Did not finish high school; (2) Graduated from high school 

or GED; (3) Attended 2-year school, no degree; (4) Graduated from 2-year school; (5) Attended 

college, no 4-year degree; (6) Graduated from college; (7) Completed master’s degree or 

equivalent; and (8) Completed Ph.D., M.D., or other advanced degree. For this report, the eight 

levels of PARED were collapsed into three: High school or less (1 and 2); Some college (3, 4, 5); 

and 4-year college degree or higher (6, 7, and 8). 

SOCIOECONOMIC STATUS (F1SES1QU): Socioeconomic status exists as both a 

continuous variable and as a categorical variable based on weighted quarters. The categorical 

form of the variable (F1SES1Q) divides SES1 into quarters based on the weighted marginal 

distribution. It was recoded to combine the middle two categories of the SES1QU variable. Three 

categories result: (1) lowest quarter of SES1 (i.e., students below the 25th percentile rank for 

SES); (2) middle two quarters of SES1 (i.e., students whose SES percentile rank was at least 

25th and below 75th); and (3) highest quarter of SES1 (i.e., students whose SES percentile rank 

was at least 75th). 

F1SES1 is a NLS-72/HS&B/NELS:88-comparable composite variable constructed from 

parent questionnaire data when available and from imputation or student substitutions when not. 

SES is based on five equally weighted, standardized components: father’s/guardian’s education 

(F1FATHED), mother’s/guardian’s education (F1MOTHED), family income (BYINCOME), 

father’s/guardian’s occupational prestige score (from F1OCCUFATH), and mother’s/guardian’s 

occupational prestige score (from F1OCCUMOTH). 
Appendix A: Technical Notes and Glossary

A-21

For a description of how F1FATHED and F1MOTHED were constructed, see above. 

Income was based on parent questionnaire information or imputed otherwise. The parent 

questionnaire was the preferred source of data for OCCUFATH and OCCUMOTH. Parent 

questionnaire respondents were asked to describe the father’s and mother’s occupations and 

subsequently code each into one of 17 categories. If the respondent provided only text, project 

staff coded the occupation. In the absence of parent questionnaire occupation data, studentsupplied parent occupation text from the base year (for base-year respondents) or first follow-up 

(for base-year nonrespondents who responded in the first follow-up) was coded by project staff, 

if possible. Missing occupations were imputed. An occupation prestige value was determined for 

F1OCCUM and F1OCCUF based on the 1961 Duncan SEI index. 

STUDENT TRANSCRIPT AND EDUCATIONAL CHARACTERISTICS 

Course-taking. Course-taking patterns will be measured using the following composite 

variables: 

• F1RHTUN: Total course credits earned; 

• F1RHTAC: Total course credits earned in academic subjects; 

• F1RHTVO: Total course credits earned in vocational subjects; 

• F1RMAT_C: Total course credits earned in mathematics; 

• F1RSCI_C: Total course credits earned in science; 

• F1RENG_C: Total course credits earned in English; 

• F1RSOC_C: Total course credits earned in social studies; 

• F1RFIN_C: Total course credits earned in fine arts; and 

• F1RNON_C: Total course credits earned in non-English language. 

For clarity of presentation and ease of interpretation, these credit count variables are 

treated in some tables as a three-category variable indicating low credit counts, medium credit 

counts, and high credit counts. These categories were constructed by dividing the distribution of 

credits into four quarters. Student whose percentile rank on this distribution was below 25th were 

classified as low. Students whose percentile rank on this distribution was at least 25th and below 

75th were classified as medium. Students whose percentile rank on this distribution was at least 

75th were classified as high. 

Also included in this report are measures of Advanced Placement (AP) and International 

Baccalaureate (IB) coursetaking: 

• F1RAPIB: Total course credits earned in AP/IB courses; 

• F1RAPMA: Total course credits earned in AP/IB mathematics courses; and 

• F1RAPCA: Total course credits earned in AP/IB calculus. 

Mathematics and science course-taking pipeline. An ordinal composite variable 

(F1RMAPIP) indicates the highest level of mathematics for which the student received non-zero 

credit while in high school. The original mathematics pipeline measure was created by Burkam 
Appendix A: Technical Notes and Glossary

A-22

and Lee (2003) using transcript data from NELS:88.

9

 They assigned 47 high school courses (with 

non-zero enrollment) to one of four levels based on their Classification of Secondary School 

Courses (CSSC) codes and a description of course content: nonacademic mathematics courses, 

low academic mathematics courses, middle academic mathematics courses, and advanced 

academic mathematics courses. This initial 4-level measure was later expanded to create a more 

sensitive 8-level measure. Additionally, as new courses were detected in subsequent transcript 

studies, they were incorporated into the pipeline at the appropriate level:10

1. No mathematics; 

2. Nonacademic mathematics (basic mathematics, consumer mathematics); 

3. Low academic mathematics (pre-algebra); 

4. Middle academic mathematics I (algebra I and geometry); 

5. Middle academic mathematics II (algebra II); 

6. Advanced mathematics I (trigonometry, analytical geometry, statistics); 

7. Advanced mathematics II (pre-calculus); and 

8. Advanced mathematics III (calculus). 

For this report, the eight levels of F1RMAPIP were collapsed into five to report the 

highest level of mathematics taken in high school: No mathematics (1); Basic mathematics and 

pre-algebra (2 and 3); Core secondary through algebra II (4 and 5); trigonometry, statistics, precalculus (6 and 7); and calculus (8). 

An ordinal composite variable (F1RSCPIP) indicates the highest level of science for 

which the student received non-zero credit while in high school. Also developed by Burkam and 

Lee, this variable captures the “breadth and depth” of a student’s science coursetaking histories 

using four criteria: (1) subject matter taken, (2) when taken (e.g., freshman, sophomore, junior, 

or senior year), (3) whether taken with another science course, and (4) academic difficulty. The 

continuum reflects the order of the most common science curriculum used in schools where 

students take general science courses first, followed by biology, then chemistry, and finally 

physics. Recent analyses of science coursetaking using NCES data have realigned the 

positioning of advanced biology. The current science coursetaking pipeline measure contains 

eight categories: 

1. No science; 

2. Primary physical science; 

3. Secondary physical science/basic biology; 

 

9

 The conceptualization and construction of the mathematics coursetaking pipeline (F1RMAPIP), the science 

coursetaking pipeline (F1RSCPIP), and the non-English language pipeline (F1RNEPIP) were modeled after initial 

research done by Burkam and Lee (2003) using the transcript data in NELS:88. See Burkam and Lee (2003) for more 

detailed information on these measures. 

10 When analyzing multiple indicators of coursetaking, users may note that students coded as having taken “no math” 

on F1RMAPIP have some mathematics credit recorded on their transcript (e.g., vocational or occupational 

mathematics). This is because the original mathematics pipeline construction was based on 47 courses and did not 

consider certain lower level and/or remedial courses to count toward the pipeline. 
Appendix A: Technical Notes and Glossary

A-23

4. General biology; 

5. Chemistry I or physics I; 

6. Chemistry I and physics I; 

7. Chemistry II or physics II or advanced biology; and 

8. Chemistry and physics and level 7. 

Academic program. There are three variables that indicate overall coursetaking patterns: 

F1RACADC, F1ROCCUC, and F1RTRPG: 

• F1RACADC: Academic concentrator; 

• F1ROCCUC: Occupational concentrator; and 

• F1RTRPG: Transcript indicated curriculum concentration. 

The first variable, F1RACADC, indicates whether the student met the minimum 

requirements to be considered an academic concentrator. These minimum requirements include 

• four credits of English; 

• one mathematics credit higher than middle academic II on the mathematics pipeline 

(F1RMAPIP) and any two other credits in math; 

• one science credit higher than general biology on the science pipeline (F1RSCPIP) 

and any two other credits in science; 

• one credit of social studies in U.S. or world history and any two other credits in social 

studies; and 

• two credits in a single foreign language. 

The second coursetaking pattern variable, F1ROCCUC, indicates whether the student met 

the minimum requirements to be considered an occupational concentrator. To be considered an 

occupational concentrator, the respondent must have earned at least three credits in one specific 

labor market preparation area. 

The third coursetaking pattern variable, F1RTRPRG, combines the information from 

F1RACADC and F1ROCCUC to jointly indicate meeting the academic and/or occupational 

concentrator requirements. This categorical variable includes four categories: Academic 

concentrator (only); Occupational concentrator (only); Academic concentrator and occupational 

concentrator; and General. Those following a general curriculum met the criteria of neither an 

academic nor an occupational concentration. Because this variable is based on updated 

definitions of academic and occupational concentrator, it is not directly comparable to a similar 

variable (F2RTRPRG) in NELS:88. 

Grade point average: Grade point average is measured two ways: overall academic 

grade point average (F1RAGP) and overall grade point average (F1RGP). Academic grade point 

average is based on grades received in academic courses (math, science, English, social studies, 
Appendix A: Technical Notes and Glossary

A-24

fine arts, and non-English language), while overall grade point average is based on grades 

received in all courses. 

Student status. The variable F1RTROUT indicates the final student status (i.e., mode of 

high school exit) as it appears on the most recent school transcript and includes 17 categories: 

1. Fall 2003–summer 2004 graduate; 

2. Post-summer 2004 graduate; 

3. Pre-fall 2003 graduate; 

4. Graduation date unknown; 

5. Diploma with special education adjustments; 

6. Certificate of attendance; 

7. Still enrolled in school; 

8. Dropped out; 

9. Transferred; 

10. Died; 

11. Left for health-related reason; 

12. Received General Educational Development (GED) certification; 

13. Withdrew; 

14. Dismissed; 

15. Incarcerated; 

16. Other; and 

17. Status cannot be determined. 

Two sets of information about the student’s base-year (BY) school and information about 

the student’s final transfer school were used to construct the school control, location, and region 

variables. If the student was enrolled in the same school in the BY interview and at the time of 

high school exit, the student will have information listed only for one school: the BY school. If 

the student transferred out of the BY school and the final transfer school provided transcripts, 

information will be listed on two schools: the BY school and the final transfer school. Only two 

schools were contacted for transcript information for transfer students: the BY school and the 

final transfer school. There is no school-level information available for other schools that the 

student may have attended in the interim. For example, if the student attended Roosevelt High 

for 9th and 10th grade, transferred to St. James for 11th grade, and transferred to Eisenhower 

High for 12th grade, information would only be collected from Roosevelt High (the BY school) 

and Eisenhower High (the final transfer school). 

The variable F1RTRFLG indicates the extent of transcript coverage across years. It 

includes five categories: 

0. No transcript data for any year; 
Appendix A: Technical Notes and Glossary

A-25

1. Transcript data for 1 academic year; 

2. Transcript data for 2 academic years; 

3. Transcript data for 3 academic years; and 

4. Transcript data for 4 academic years. 

Those classified as 1, 2, 3, or 4 on F1RTRFLG are respondents. Respondents are 

considered to have transcript information for an academic year if they have at least one complete 

course record for that academic year. 

SCHOOL CONTROL (F1RS1CTR; F1RS2CTR): This variable indicates the type of 

school attended by the respondent in the base-year and, if applicable, the transfer school. 

Students were classified by the consistency across these two school sectors. The resulting 

variable includes four categories: Public school, Catholic school, Other private school, and 

Mixed. 

SCHOOL LOCATION (F1RS1URB; F1RS2URB): This variable indicates the location 

of the school attended by the respondent in the base-year and, if applicable, the transfer school. 

Students were classified by the consistency across these two school locations. If students 

attended schools in the same location for both schools, they were assigned that location. If not, 

they were classified as “mixed.” The resulting variable includes four levels: Urban—large or 

mid-size central city; Suburban—large or small town or urban fringe of a large or mid-size city; 

Rural—school in a rural area; and Mixed. 

SCHOOL REGION (F1RS1REG; F1RS2REG): This variable indicates the region of the 

school attended by the respondent in the base-year school and, if applicable, the transfer school. 

Students were classified by the consistency across these two school regions. If students attended 

school in the same region for both schools, they were assigned that region. If not, they were 

classified as “mixed.” The resulting variable includes five categories: Northeast; Midwest; 

South; West; and Mixed. 

MATHEMATICS ACHIEVEMENT 

PROBABILITY OF PROFICIENCY SCORES IN MATHEMATICS (F1TX1MPP, 

F1TX2MPP, F1TX3MPP, F1TX4MPP, F1TX5MPP): Mathematics achievement tests were 

administered to students who remained in their base-year school in their senior year. From these 

tests, criterion-referenced proficiency probability scores were created. These scores are based on 

clusters of items that mark different levels on the mathematics scale developed in NELS:88. 

Mathematics levels include 

• simple arithmetical operations on whole numbers (level 1); 

• simple operations with decimals, fractions, powers, and roots (level 2); 

• simple problem solving, requiring the understanding of low-level mathematical 

concepts (level 3); 
Appendix A: Technical Notes and Glossary

A-26

• understanding of intermediate-level mathematical concepts and/or multistep solutions 

to word problems (level 4); and 

• complex multistep word problems and/or advanced mathematics material (level 5). 

The proficiency levels are hierarchical in the sense that mastery of a higher level typically 

implies proficiency at lower levels. The proficiency probabilities were computed using item 

response theory (IRT)-estimated item parameters calibrated in NELS:88. Each proficiency 

probability represents the likelihood that a student would pass a given proficiency level defined 

as above in the NELS:88 sample. Note that probability of proficiency scores are IRT-derived 

estimates based on overall performance, rather than counts of actual item responses. Not all 

students received all test items, owing to the two-stage adaptive format of the ELS:2002 baseyear assessments and to assignment of forms of varying difficulty in the first follow-up based on 

the prior round ability estimate. Nevertheless, the IRT model permits proficiency probabilities to 

be estimated, even for those sophomores who were not administered a particular proficiency 

cluster. Table A-6 shows variable names, descriptions, and summary statistics for the five 

ELS:2002 proficiency probability scores. 

Table A-6. ELS:2002 item response theory (IRT) NELS:88-equated estimated number-right score 

and proficiency probability scores: 2004 

Variable name Description Range 

Weighted 

mean 

Weighted 

standard deviation 

F1NELS2M Mathematics—NELS-equated estimated 

number right (1992 scale) 

0–81 50.1 14.2 

F1TX1MPP Mathematics—level 1 0–1 0.96 0.12 

F1TX2MPP Mathematics—level 2 0–1 0.78 0.37 

F1TX3MPP Mathematics—level 3 0–1 0.62 0.45 

F1TX4MPP Mathematics—level 4 0–1 0.35 0.41 

F1TX5MPP Mathematics—level 5 0–1 0.04 0.14 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Education Longitudinal Study of 2002 

(ELS:2002). 

This report illustrates a cross-sectional use of the probability of proficiency scores: 

proficiency probabilities are averaged to produce estimates of mastery rates, both overall and 

within population subgroups. (Note that dichotomous proficiency scores [as appeared on the 

NELS:88 dataset], indicating in yes/no fashion whether a given student is proficient at a 

particular level, have not been produced for the ELS:2002 data.) Because the range of the scores 

is zero to one, means can be expressed in percentage form. For example, the weighted mean for 

mastery of mathematics level 1 is 0.96, which is equivalent to saying that 96 percent of test 

takers achieved mastery at this level (simple arithmetical operations on whole numbers). 

Although the continuous probability of proficiency scores can be used to measure status, they are 

perhaps most useful for measuring change. A sophomore trend report (currently in preparation) 

will illustrate the use of the proficiency probabilities in measuring intercohort change 

(essentially, because NELS:88 and ELS:2002 have been equated and are on the same scale, mean 

gain or loss across cohorts at any proficiency level can be measured by subtracting the NELS:88 

score from the ELS:2002 score). With the addition of the ELS:2002 first follow-up data, the 

probability of proficiency scores can also be used longitudinally to measure achievement gain. 

Because base-year and first follow-up data are on the same vertical scale, mean gain (or loss) can 

be determined by subtracting the base-year probability score from the first follow-up probability 
Appendix A: Technical Notes and Glossary

A-27

score. Measuring gains in probability of proficiency at each mastery level permits researchers to 

investigate not only the amount of gain in total scale score points but also where (that is, what 

proficiency level) along the score scale different students are making their largest gains in 

achievement between sophomore and senior year. In turn, it is possible to relate gains in specific 

skills to specific school processes or curricular experiences. 

EDUCATIONAL EXPECTATIONS 

EDUCATIONAL EXPECTATIONS (F1STEXP): This variable is taken directly from 

the student questionnaire when available and imputed otherwise. Students were asked, “As 

things stand now, how far in school do you think you will get?”11 The eight response options 

were (1) Less than high school graduation; (2) High school graduation or GED only; (3) Attend 

or complete a 2-year school course in a community college or vocational school; (4) Attend 

college, but not complete a 4-year degree; (5) Graduate from college; (6) Obtain a master’s 

degree or equivalent; (7) Obtain a Ph.D., M.D., or other advanced degree; and (8) Don’t know. 

These categories were collapsed into five: High school diploma or less (1 and 2), Some college 

(3 and 4), College graduate (5), Graduate/professional degree (6 and 7), and Don’t know (8). 

 

11 While the expectations for the educational attainment variable are subject to the limitations of single-item 

measures, it is repeated over time, that is, asked on a cross-round basis. It has been one of the most frequently 

employed variables in analyzing both HS&B data and NELS:88, showing expected relationships with related variables 

when incorporated into multivariate models (see, for example, Kao and Tienda [1998]; Plank and Jordan [2001]; 

Smith-Maddox [1999, 2000]). Cross-round analyses in NELS:88 show that the expectation question behaves the way 

it “should” (in relation to what is theoretically expected) over time, with diminishing expectations as students 

accumulate a more realistic picture of their capacities and the world (see McLaughlin and Cohen [1997]). Adelman 

(1999, 2006) has created an analytically useful composite variable out of the across-wave instances of the 

expectation and timing of college entrance variables, looking at stability and change in anticipations at two points in 

time. 
Appendix A: Technical Notes and Glossary

A-28

A.5 Appendix A References 

Bozick, R., Lyttle, T., Siegel, P.H., Ingels, S.J., Rogers, J.E., Lauff, E., and Planty, M. (2006). 

Education Longitudinal Study of 2002: First Follow-up Transcript Component Data File 

Documentation (NCES 2006–338). U.S. Department of Education. Washington, DC: 

National Center for Education Statistics. 

Burkam, D.T., and Lee, V.E. (2003). Mathematics, Foreign Language, and Science 

Coursetaking and the NELS:88 Transcript Data (NCES 2003–01). U.S. Department of 

Education. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics Working Paper. 

Burns, L.J., Heuer, R., Ingels, S.J., Pollack, J.M., Pratt, D.J., Rock, D., Rogers, J., Scott, L.A., 

Siegel, P., and Stutts, E. (2003). ELS:2002 Base Year Field Test Report (NCES 

2003–03). U.S. Department of Education. Washington, DC: National Center for 

Education Statistics Working Paper. 

Fetters, W.B., Stowe, P.S., and Owings, J.A. (1984). Quality of Responses of High School 

Students to Questionnaire Items, High School and Beyond (NCES 84–216). U.S. 

Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. Washington, DC: 

U.S. Government Printing Office. 

Ingels, S.J., Pratt, D.J., Rogers, J., Siegel, P.H., and Stutts, E.S. (2004). Education Longitudinal 

Study of 2002: Base Year Data File User’s Manual (NCES 2004–405). U.S. Department 

of Education. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics. Retrieved 

December 1, 2005, from http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch. 

Ingels, S.J., Pratt, D.J., Rogers, J., Siegel, P.H., and Stutts, E.S. (2005). Education Longitudinal 

Study of 2002: Base-Year to First Follow-up Data File Documentation (NCES 2006–

344). U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. 

Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office. Retrieved December 1, 2005, from 

http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch.

Kaufman, P., and Rasinski, K. (1991). Quality of the Responses of Eighth-grade Students in 

NELS:88 (NCES 91–487). U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education 

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

Lemke, M., Lippman, L., Bairu, G., Calsyn, C., Kruger, T., Jocelyn, L., Kastberg, D., Liu, Y., 

Roey, S., and Williams, T. (2001). Outcomes of Learning: Results from the 2000 

Program for International Student Assessment of 15-Year-Olds in Reading, Mathematics, 

and Science Literacy (NCES 2002–115). U.S. Department of Education, National Center 

for Education Statistics. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office. 

McLaughlin, D.H., and Cohen, J. (1997). NELS:88 Survey Item Evaluation Report (NCES 97–

052). U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. 

Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office. 
B-1 

Appendix B 

Standard Error Tables 

Appendix B: Standard Error Tables

B-3 

Table B-1. Standard errors for table 1 estimates (mean total course credits earned by high 

school graduates, by selected student characteristics): Academic year 2003–04 

Characteristic 

Mean course credits 

earned 

Mean course credits 

earned in academic 

subjects 

Mean course credits 

earned in vocational 

subjects 

Total 0.10 0.09 0.06 

 

Sex 

Male 0.11 0.10 0.08 

Female 0.10 0.10 0.06 

Race/ethnicity1

 

American Indian or Alaska Native 0.63 0.59 0.30 

Asian or Pacific Islander 0.18 0.19 0.10 

Black or African American 0.21 0.16 0.12 

Hispanic or Latino 0.21 0.19 0.09 

White 0.12 0.10 0.08 

 

Socioeconomic status 

Lowest quarter 0.15 0.12 0.10 

Middle two quarters 0.11 0.10 0.07 

Highest quarter 0.13 0.12 0.06 

 

Native language2

 

English 0.10 0.09 0.07 

Non-English 0.19 0.17 0.08 

 

Parents' education 

High school or less 0.13 0.11 0.09 

Some college 0.11 0.11 0.07 

4-year college degree or more 0.12 0.10 0.06 

 

Family composition 

Mother and father 0.11 0.10 0.06 

Mother or father and guardian 0.13 0.13 0.09 

Single parent (mother or father) 0.13 0.12 0.08 

Other3

 0.24 0.23 0.17 

 

Extracurricular participation 

No participation 0.12 0.11 0.09 

< 1 hour a week 0.15 0.14 0.11 

1–4 hours a week 0.14 0.13 0.08 

> 4 hours a week 0.11 0.10 0.06 

 

Employment 

No employment 0.12 0.12 0.07 

1–15 hours a week 0.13 0.12 0.07 

> 15 hours a week 0.12 0.10 0.08 

See notes at end of table. 
Appendix B: Standard Error Tables

B-4

Table B-1. Standard errors for table 1 estimates (mean total course credits earned by high 

school graduates, by selected student characteristics): Academic year 2003–04—

Continued 

Characteristic 

Mean course 

credits earned 

Mean course credits 

earned in academic 

subjects 

Mean course credits 

earned in vocational 

subjects 

School control4 

Public 0.11 0.09 0.07 

Catholic 0.25 0.17 0.08 

Other private 0.42 0.37 0.11 

Mixed 0.33 0.37 0.18 

 

School location4

 

Urban 0.20 0.17 0.10 

Suburban 0.14 0.11 0.09 

Rural 0.20 0.24 0.15 

Mixed 0.26 0.23 0.19 

 

School region4,5 

Northeast 0.19 0.17 0.18 

Midwest 0.25 0.18 0.13 

South 0.15 0.11 0.10 

West 0.20 0.26 0.09 

Mixed 0.51 0.50 0.32 

1 All race categories exclude Hispanic or Latino origin. 

2 The first language students learned to speak when they were children. 3 Other includes two guardians, female guardian only, male guardian only, and guardian who lives with the student less than half of 

the time. 

4 Information about the students’ base-year (BY) school and, if applicable, their final transfer school, was used to construct the 

school control, location, and region variables. If students were enrolled in the same school in the BY interview and at the time of 

high school exit, information is given for only one school: the BY school. If students transferred out of their BY school and transcripts 

were provided by their final transfer school, information is from both schools: the BY school and the final transfer school. Transfer 

students were classified into groups in terms of school category consistency. Students who were in the same type of school for both 

schools were assigned to that group (e.g., a public school student who transferred to a public school was coded as public). If not, 

they were classified as “mixed” (e.g., a Catholic school student who transferred to a public school was coded as mixed). 5 Region is defined by the U.S. Census Bureau based on the state in which the school is located. 

NOTE: "Course credits" refer to standardized Carnegie units. A Carnegie unit is a standard of measurement used for secondary 

education that represents the completion of a course that meets one period per day for one year. Core courses represent all 

courses in mathematics, science, English, social studies, fine arts, and non-English language. Vocational courses represent all

courses in family and consumer sciences, general labor market preparation, and specific labor market preparation. The academic 

year extended from September 1, 2003 to August 31, 2004. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Education Longitudinal Study of 2002 

(ELS:2002), “High School Transcript Study.” 
Appendix B: Standard Error Tables

B-5

Table B-2a. Standard errors for table 2a estimates (mean total course credits earned in academic 

courses by high school graduates, by selected student characteristics): Academic 

year 2003–04 

Characteristic 

Mean course 

credits earned in 

academic subjects 

Mean course 

credits earned 

in mathematics 

Mean course 

credits earned 

in science 

Mean course 

credits earned 

in English 

Total 0.09 0.02 0.02 0.02 

 

Sex 

Male 0.10 0.02 0.03 0.03 

Female 0.10 0.02 0.02 0.03 

Race/ethnicity1

 

American Indian or Alaska Native 0.59 0.13 0.19 0.21 

Asian or Pacific Islander 0.19 0.04 0.06 0.05 

Black or African American 0.16 0.05 0.05 0.05 

Hispanic or Latino 0.19 0.04 0.04 0.06 

White 0.10 0.02 0.02 0.03 

 

Socioeconomic status 

Lowest quarter 0.12 0.03 0.03 0.04 

Middle two quarters 0.10 0.02 0.02 0.03 

Highest quarter 0.12 0.03 0.03 0.03 

 

Native language2

 

English 0.09 0.02 0.02 0.02 

Non-English 0.17 0.04 0.04 0.05 

 

Parents' education 

High school or less 0.11 0.03 0.03 0.03 

Some college 0.11 0.03 0.03 0.03 

4-year college degree or more 0.10 0.02 0.03 0.03 

 

Family composition 

Mother and father 0.10 0.02 0.02 0.03 

Mother or father and guardian 0.13 0.03 0.03 0.04 

Single parent (mother or father) 0.12 0.03 0.03 0.03 

Other3

 0.23 0.06 0.07 0.07 

 

Extracurricular participation 

No participation 0.11 0.03 0.03 0.03 

< 1 hour a week 0.14 0.04 0.04 0.04 

1–4 hours a week 0.13 0.03 0.04 0.03 

> 4 hours a week 0.10 0.02 0.03 0.03 

 

Employment 

No employment 0.12 0.03 0.03 0.03 

1–15 hours a week 0.12 0.03 0.03 0.03 

> 15 hours a week 0.10 0.03 0.03 0.03 

See notes at end of table. 
Appendix B: Standard Error Tables

B-6

Table B-2a. Standard errors for table 2a estimates (mean total course credits earned in academic 

courses by high school graduates, by selected student characteristics): Academic 

year 2003–04—Continued 

Characteristic 

Mean course 

credits earned in 

academic subjects 

Mean course 

credits earned 

in mathematics 

Mean course 

credits earned 

in science 

Mean course 

credits earned 

in English 

School control4 

Public 0.09 0.02 0.02 0.03 

Catholic 0.17 0.03 0.06 0.06 

Other private 0.37 0.07 0.06 0.08 

Mixed 0.37 0.11 0.10 0.10 

 

School location4

 

Urban 0.17 0.04 0.05 0.04 

Suburban 0.11 0.03 0.03 0.03 

Rural 0.24 0.05 0.05 0.07 

Mixed 0.23 0.07 0.06 0.09 

 

School region4,5 

Northeast 0.17 0.05 0.06 0.04 

Midwest 0.18 0.03 0.04 0.05 

South 0.11 0.03 0.03 0.03 

West 0.26 0.05 0.04 0.07 

Mixed 0.50 0.21 0.16 0.14 

1 All race categories exclude Hispanic or Latino origin. 

2 The first language students learned to speak when they were children. 3 Other includes two guardians, female guardian only, male guardian only, and guardian who lives with the student less than half of 

the time. 

4 Information about the students’ base-year (BY) school and, if applicable, their final transfer school, was used to construct the 

school control, location, and region variables. If students were enrolled in the same school in the BY interview and at the time of 

high school exit, information is given for only one school: the BY school. If students transferred out of their BY school and transcripts 

were provided by their final transfer school, information is from both schools: the BY school and the final transfer school. Transfer 

students were classified into groups in terms of school category consistency. Students who were in the same type of school for both 

schools were assigned to that group (e.g., a public school student who transferred to a public school was coded as public). If not, 

they were classified as “mixed” (e.g., a Catholic school student who transferred to a public school was coded as mixed). 5 Region is defined by the U.S. Census Bureau based on the state in which the school is located. 

NOTE: "Course credits" refer to standardized Carnegie units. A Carnegie unit is a standard of measurement used for secondary 

education that represents the completion of a course that meets one period per day for one year. Core courses represent all 

courses in mathematics, science, English, social studies, fine arts, and non-English language. Vocational courses represent all

courses in family and consumer sciences, general labor market preparation, and specific labor market preparation. The academic 

year extended from September 1, 2003 to August 31, 2004. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Education Longitudinal Study of 2002 

(ELS:2002), “High School Transcript Study.” 
Appendix B: Standard Error Tables

B-7

Table B-2b. Standard errors for table 2b estimates (mean total course credits earned in academic 

courses by high school graduates, by selected student characteristics): Academic 

year 2003–04 

Characteristic 

Mean course 

credits earned in 

academic subjects 

Mean course 

credits earned in 

social studies 

Mean course 

credits earned 

in fine arts 

Mean course credits 

earned in nonEnglish language 

Total 0.09 0.03 0.03 0.03 

 

Sex 

Male 0.10 0.03 0.04 0.03 

Female 0.10 0.03 0.04 0.03 

Race/ethnicity1

 

American Indian or Alaska 

Native 0.59 0.26 0.26 0.19 

Asian or Pacific Islander 0.19 0.05 0.07 0.06 

Black or African American 0.16 0.05 0.07 0.06 

Hispanic or Latino 0.19 0.05 0.07 0.06 

White 0.10 0.03 0.04 0.03 

 

Socioeconomic status 

Lowest quarter 0.12 0.04 0.05 0.04 

Middle two quarters 0.10 0.03 0.04 0.03 

Highest quarter 0.12 0.04 0.06 0.03 

 

Native language2

 

English 0.09 0.03 0.04 0.03 

Non-English 0.17 0.05 0.06 0.06 

 

Parents' education 

High school or less 0.11 0.03 0.05 0.03 

Some college 0.11 0.04 0.04 0.03 

4-year college degree or more 0.10 0.03 0.05 0.03 

 

Family composition 

Mother and father 0.10 0.03 0.04 0.03 

Mother or father and guardian 0.13 0.05 0.06 0.04 

Single parent (mother or father) 0.12 0.04 0.05 0.04 

Other3

 0.23 0.08 0.09 0.09 

 

Extracurricular participation 

No participation 0.11 0.04 0.04 0.04 

< 1 hour a week 0.14 0.05 0.06 0.05 

1–4 hours a week 0.13 0.04 0.07 0.04 

> 4 hours a week 0.10 0.03 0.05 0.03 

 

Employment 

No employment 0.12 0.03 0.06 0.04 

1–15 hours a week 0.12 0.04 0.05 0.04 

> 15 hours a week 0.10 0.03 0.04 0.03 

See notes at end of table. 
Appendix B: Standard Error Tables

B-8

Table B-2b. Standard errors for table 2b estimates (mean total course credits earned in academic 

courses by high school graduates, by selected student characteristics): Academic 

year 2003–04—Continued 

Characteristic 

Mean course 

credits earned in 

academic subjects 

Mean course 

credits earned in 

social studies 

Mean course 

credits earned 

in fine arts 

Mean course credits 

earned in nonEnglish language 

School control4 

Public 0.09 0.03 0.04 0.03 

Catholic 0.17 0.07 0.10 0.06 

Other private 0.37 0.13 0.21 0.14 

Mixed 0.37 0.09 0.14 0.17 

 

School urbanicity4

 

Urban 0.17 0.05 0.07 0.05 

Suburban 0.11 0.04 0.04 0.04 

Rural 0.24 0.08 0.08 0.06 

Mixed 0.23 0.08 0.10 0.08 

 

School region4,5 

Northeast 0.17 0.06 0.07 0.06 

Midwest 0.18 0.06 0.07 0.05 

South 0.11 0.04 0.06 0.03 

West 0.26 0.08 0.08 0.06 

Mixed 0.50 0.13 0.20 0.18 

1 All race categories exclude Hispanic or Latino origin. 

2 The first language students learned to speak when they were children. 3 Other includes two guardians, female guardian only, male guardian only, and guardian who lives with the student less than half of 

the time. 

4 Information about the students’ base-year (BY) school and, if applicable, their final transfer school, was used to construct the 

school sector, region, and urbanicity variables. If students were enrolled in the same school in the BY interview and at the time of 

high school exit, information is given for only one school: the BY school. If students transferred out of their BY school and transcripts 

were provided by their final transfer school, information is from both schools: the BY school and the final transfer school. Transfer 

students were classified into groups in terms of school category consistency. Students who were in the same type of school for both 

schools were assigned to that group (e.g., a public school student who transferred to a public school was coded as public). If not, 

they were classified as “mixed” (e.g., a Catholic school student who transferred to a public school was coded as mixed). 5 Region is defined by the U.S. Census Bureau based on the state in which the school is located. 

NOTE: "Course credits" refer to standardized Carnegie units. A Carnegie unit is a standard of measurement used for secondary 

education that represents the completion of a course that meets one period per day for one year. The academic year extended from 

September 1, 2003 to August 31, 2004. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Education Longitudinal Study of 2002 

(ELS:2002), “High School Transcript Study.” 
Appendix B: Standard Error Tables

B-9

Table B-3. Standard errors for table 3 estimates (percentage of high school graduates earning 

any credit for Advanced Placement [AP] and International Baccalaureate [IB] 

courses, by selected student characteristics): Academic year 2003–04 

Characteristic 

Percent earning any 

credits in AP/IB 

courses 

Percent earning any 

credits in AP/IB 

mathematics courses 

Percent earning any 

credits in AP/IB calculus 

courses 

Total 0.85 0.59 0.46 

 

Sex 

Male 0.96 0.72 0.62 

Female 1.07 0.66 0.53 

Race/ethnicity1

 

American Indian or Alaska Native 4.69 2.57 2.57 

Asian or Pacific Islander 2.56 2.30 2.12 

Black or African American 1.37 0.68 0.54 

Hispanic or Latino 1.72 0.75 0.60 

White 1.04 0.72 0.60 

 

Socioeconomic status 

Lowest quarter 1.10 0.56 0.50 

Middle two quarters 0.89 0.52 0.41 

Highest quarter 1.35 1.22 1.00 

 

Native language2

 

English 0.90 0.61 0.49 

Non-English 1.79 1.11 1.00 

 

Parents' education 

High school or less 1.03 0.58 0.50 

Some college 0.94 0.49 0.40 

4-year college degree or more 1.22 1.02 0.81 

 

Family composition 

Mother and father 0.99 0.73 0.60 

Mother or father and guardian 1.37 0.76 0.57 

Single parent (mother or father) 1.20 0.77 0.67 

Other3

 1.83 1.14 1.06 

 

Extracurricular participation 

No participation 0.93 0.47 0.38 

< 1 hour a week 1.69 1.00 0.81 

1–4 hours a week 1.40 0.89 0.77 

> 4 hours a week 1.19 0.95 0.81 

 

Employment 

No employment 1.35 1.06 0.89 

1–15 hours a week 1.26 0.94 0.80 

> 15 hours a week 0.96 0.59 0.50 

See notes at end of table. 
Appendix B: Standard Error Tables

B-10

Table B-3. Standard errors for table 3 estimates (percentage of high school graduates earning 

any credit for Advanced Placement [AP] and International Baccalaureate [IB] 

courses, by selected student characteristics): Academic year 2003–04—Continued 

Characteristic 

Percent earning any 

credits in AP/IB 

courses 

Percent earning any 

credits in AP/IB 

mathematics courses 

Percent earning any 

credits in AP/IB calculus 

courses 

School control4 

Public 0.91 0.63 0.48 

Catholic 2.65 1.48 1.50 

Other private 4.83 3.21 2.93 

Mixed 5.30 1.91 1.71 

 

School location4

 

Urban 1.79 1.25 0.97 

Suburban 1.19 0.85 0.68 

Rural 1.67 1.00 0.76 

Mixed 2.28 0.88 0.88 

 

School region4,5 

Northeast 1.92 1.66 1.20 

Midwest 1.67 0.92 0.83 

South 1.40 0.96 0.74 

West 1.98 1.33 1.04 

Mixed 7.42 3.95 3.95 

1 All race categories exclude Hispanic or Latino origin. 

2 The first language students learned to speak when they were children. 3 Other includes two guardians, female guardian only, male guardian only, and guardian who lives with the student less than half of 

the time. 

4 Information about the students’ base-year (BY) school and, if applicable, their final transfer school, was used to construct the 

school sector, region, and urbanicity variables. If students were enrolled in the same school in the BY interview and at the time of 

high school exit, information is given for only one school: the BY school. If students transferred out of their BY school and transcripts 

were provided by their final transfer school, information is from both schools: the BY school and the final transfer school. Transfer 

students were classified into groups in terms of school category consistency. Students who were in the same type of school for both 

schools were assigned to that group (e.g., a public school student who transferred to a public school was coded as public). If not, 

they were classified as “mixed” (e.g., a Catholic school student who transferred to a public school was coded as mixed). 5 Region is defined by the U.S. Census Bureau based on the state in which the school is located. 

NOTE: "Course credits" refer to standardized Carnegie units. A Carnegie unit is a standard of measurement used for secondary 

education that represents the completion of a course that meets one period per day for one year. The academic year extended from 

September 1, 2003 to August 31, 2004. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Education Longitudinal Study of 2002 

(ELS:2002), “High School Transcript Study.” 
Appendix B: Standard Error Tables

B-11

Table B-4. Standard errors for table 4 estimates (percentage distribution of high school 

graduates in academic and occupational programs, by selected student 

characteristics): Academic year 2003–04 

Characteristic 

Academic 

concentration 

Occupational 

concentration 

Academic and 

occupational 

concentration 

General 

curriculum 

Total 0.83 0.62 0.29 0.94 

 

Sex 

Male 0.97 0.84 0.38 1.13 

Female 0.99 0.68 0.30 1.07 

Race/ethnicity1

 

American Indian or Alaska Native 4.81 4.14 1.00 5.40 

Asian or Pacific Islander 2.26 0.97 0.47 2.22 

Black or African American 1.52 1.53 1.07 2.12 

Hispanic or Latino 1.22 1.05 0.54 1.56 

White 1.06 0.79 0.29 1.11 

 

Socioeconomic status 

Lowest quarter 0.89 1.14 0.48 1.39 

Middle two quarters 0.88 0.80 0.36 1.08 

Highest quarter 1.42 0.64 0.44 1.53 

 

Native language2

 

English 0.90 0.68 0.31 1.02 

Non-English 1.46 1.08 0.42 1.77 

 

Parents' education 

High school or less 0.88 1.02 0.42 1.26 

Some college 0.98 0.91 0.38 1.16 

4-year college degree or more 1.20 0.62 0.42 1.28 

 

Family composition 

Mother and father 0.98 0.69 0.32 1.10 

Mother or father and guardian 1.33 1.26 0.65 1.57 

Single parent (mother or father) 1.15 1.02 0.47 1.39 

Other3

 1.93 2.51 0.85 3.05 

 

Extracurricular participation 

No participation 0.87 1.04 0.35 1.22 

< 1 hour a week 1.58 1.31 0.62 1.87 

1–4 hours a week 1.40 1.04 0.58 1.64 

> 4 hours a week 1.17 0.78 0.44 1.21 

 

Employment 

No employment 1.23 0.84 0.43 1.40 

1–15 hours a week 1.33 0.91 0.36 1.46 

> 15 hours a week 0.93 0.84 0.41 1.07 

See notes at end of table. 
Appendix B: Standard Error Tables

B-12

Table B-4. Standard errors for table 4 estimates (percentage distribution of high school 

graduates in academic and occupational programs, by selected student 

characteristics): Academic year 2003–04—Continued 

Characteristic 

Academic 

concentration 

Occupational 

concentration 

Academic and 

occupational 

concentration 

General 

curriculum 

School control4 

Public 0.87 0.68 0.31 1.00 

Catholic 3.56 0.86 0.35 3.65 

Other private 4.06 0.48 0.36 4.21 

Mixed 4.62 2.44 0.37 4.81 

 

School location4

 

Urban 1.69 0.99 0.68 1.86 

Suburban 1.17 0.85 0.41 1.35 

Rural 1.90 1.92 0.34 2.04 

Mixed 1.72 2.65 0.87 3.21 

 

School region4,5 

Northeast 2.37 1.61 1.05 2.43 

Midwest 1.60 1.44 0.42 1.97 

South 1.24 0.98 0.48 1.26 

West 1.62 0.99 0.34 1.97 

Mixed 6.64 5.09 0.70 7.59 

1 All race categories exclude Hispanic or Latino origin. 

2 The first language students learned to speak when they were children. 3 Other includes two guardians, female guardian only, male guardian only, and guardian who lives with the student less than half of 

the time. 

4 Information about the students’ base-year (BY) school and, if applicable, their final transfer school, was used to construct the 

school sector, region, and urbanicity variables. If students were enrolled in the same school in the BY interview and at the time of 

high school exit, information is given for only one school: the BY school. If students transferred out of their BY school and transcripts 

were provided by their final transfer school, information is from both schools: the BY school and the final transfer school. Transfer 

students were classified into groups in terms of school category consistency. Students who were in the same type of school for both 

schools were assigned to that group (e.g., a public school student who transferred to a public school was coded as public). If not, 

they were classified as “mixed” (e.g., a Catholic school student who transferred to a public school was coded as mixed). 5 Region is defined by the U.S. Census Bureau based on the state in which the school is located. 

NOTE: The academic year extended from September 1, 2003 to August 31, 2004. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Education Longitudinal Study of 2002 

(ELS:2002), “High School Transcript Study.” 
Appendix B: Standard Error Tables

B-13

Table B-5. Standard errors for table 5 estimates (percentage distribution of high school 

graduates completing various mathematics course levels since 9th grade, by 

selected student characteristics): Academic year 2003–04 

Highest mathematics course level taken since 9th grade1

Characteristic Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Level 5 

Total 0.10 0.33 0.91 0.82 0.53 

 

Sex 

Male 0.15 0.45 1.07 0.94 0.71 

Female 0.10 0.38 1.09 1.03 0.64 

Race/ethnicity2

 

American Indian or Alaska Native 2.42 4.68 6.17 5.19 2.65 

Asian or Pacific Islander 0.25 0.43 2.37 2.21 2.45 

Black or African American 0.42 0.96 2.15 2.15 0.67 

Hispanic or Latino 0.16 1.05 1.87 1.73 0.84 

White 0.11 0.36 1.09 0.97 0.67 

 

Socioeconomic status 

Lowest quarter 0.31 0.81 1.39 1.23 0.67 

Middle two quarters 0.12 0.43 1.05 0.96 0.51 

Highest quarter 0.09 0.36 1.14 1.26 1.07 

 

Native language3

 

English 0.10 0.33 0.96 0.87 0.56 

Non-English 0.19 0.92 2.00 1.50 1.23 

 

Parents' education 

High school or less 0.26 0.71 1.20 1.06 0.66 

Some college 0.15 0.52 1.23 1.13 0.57 

4-year college degree or more 0.08 0.36 1.11 1.10 0.89 

 

Family composition 

Mother and father 0.07 0.37 1.05 0.95 0.68 

Mother or father and guardian 0.34 0.66 1.68 1.56 0.73 

Single parent (mother or father) 0.23 0.69 1.38 1.34 0.76 

Other4

 0.98 2.26 3.23 2.68 1.44 

 

Extracurricular participation 

No participation 0.26 0.75 1.38 1.37 0.54 

< 1 hour a week 0.24 0.87 1.84 1.72 0.99 

1–4 hours a week 0.17 0.46 1.47 1.51 0.90 

> 4 hours a week 0.08 0.29 1.15 1.13 0.89 

 

Employment 

No employment 0.13 0.65 1.50 1.29 1.03 

1–15 hours a week 0.17 0.40 1.26 1.20 0.89 

> 15 hours a week 0.15 0.43 1.05 1.01 0.58 

See notes at end of table. 
Appendix B: Standard Error Tables

B-14

Table B-5. Standard errors for table 5 estimates (percentage distribution of high school 

graduates completing various mathematics course levels since 9th grade, by 

selected student characteristics): Academic year 2003–04—Continued 

Highest mathematics course level taken since 9th grade1

Characteristic Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Level 5 

School control5 

Public 0.11 0.36 0.98 0.88 0.55 

Catholic 0.10 0.12 2.68 2.57 1.84 

Other private 0.23 0.07 3.01 2.71 3.98 

Mixed † 0.26 5.07 5.23 3.79 

 

School location5

 

Urban 0.25 0.56 1.78 1.74 1.06 

Suburban 0.12 0.47 1.27 1.04 0.77 

Rural 0.16 0.77 2.02 1.98 1.08 

Mixed 0.38 1.93 3.36 2.59 1.56 

 

School region5,6 

Northeast 0.23 0.85 2.32 2.00 1.45 

Midwest 0.21 0.66 1.65 1.78 0.89 

South 0.19 0.46 1.35 1.14 0.84 

West 0.09 0.81 2.24 1.90 1.22 

Mixed † 4.40 8.23 8.40 4.09 

† Not applicable. 

1

 Course levels are: Level 1—no math; Level 2—basic math/pre-algebra; Level 3—core secondary through algebra II; Level 4—

trigonometry, statistics, pre-calculus; and Level 5—calculus. 2 All race categories exclude Hispanic or Latino origin. 

3 The first language students learned to speak when they were children. 4 Other includes two guardians, female guardian only, male guardian only, and guardian who lives with the student less than half of 

the time. 

5 Information about the students’ base-year (BY) school and, if applicable, their final transfer school, was used to construct the 

school sector, region, and urbanicity variables. If students were enrolled in the same school in the BY interview and at the time of 

high school exit, information is given for only one school: the BY school. If students transferred out of their BY school and transcripts 

were provided by their final transfer school, information is from both schools: the BY school and the final transfer school. Transfer 

students were classified into groups in terms of school category consistency. Students who were in the same type of school for both 

schools were assigned to that group (e.g., a public school student who transferred to a public school was coded as public). If not, 

they were classified as “mixed” (e.g., a Catholic school student who transferred to a public school was coded as mixed). 6 Region is defined by the U.S. Census Bureau based on the state in which the school is located. 

NOTE: Highest mathematics course taken is based on a taxonomy of course types for which the student received a nonzero credit 

while in high school. The academic year extended from September 1, 2003 to August 31, 2004. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Education Longitudinal Study of 2002 

(ELS:2002), “High School Transcript Study.” 
B-15

Table B-6. Standard errors for table 6 estimates (percentage distribution of high school graduates completing v

levels since 9th grade, by selected student characteristics): Academic year 2003–04 

Highest science course level taken since 9th grade1

Characteristic Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Level 5 Level 6 

Total 0.09 0.28 0.36 0.87 0.89 0.82 

Sex 

Male 0.15 0.42 0.42 0.99 0.96 0.88 Female 0.08 0.23 0.40 1.02 1.09 0.96 

Race/ethnicity2

American Indian or Alaska Native † 2.98 3.01 8.84 6.50 5.40 Asian or Pacific Islander 0.27 0.48 0.41 1.46 1.83 1.76 Black or African American 0.31 0.71 0.64 1.83 2.16 1.66 Hispanic or Latino 0.25 0.73 0.99 1.87 1.72 1.77 White 0.09 0.33 0.39 1.06 1.05 0.97 

Socioeconomic status 

Lowest quarter 0.27 0.57 0.77 1.53 1.43 0.90 Middle two quarters 0.11 0.34 0.44 1.12 1.10 0.87 Highest quarter 0.11 0.30 0.33 0.87 1.30 1.31 

Native language3

English 0.09 0.30 0.36 0.90 0.92 0.85 Non-English 0.22 0.65 0.77 1.81 1.72 1.51 

Parents' education 

High school or less 0.22 0.56 0.67 1.42 1.32 0.88 Some college 0.12 0.37 0.55 1.19 1.17 0.91 4-year college degree or more 0.12 0.29 0.35 0.87 1.12 1.13 

Family composition 

Mother and father 0.09 0.27 0.39 0.97 1.03 0.95 Mother or father and guardian 0.22 0.52 0.63 1.57 1.54 1.08 Single parent (mother or father) 0.22 0.53 0.58 1.28 1.38 1.09 Other4 1.01 1.44 1.23 3.02 2.95 1.86 

Extracurricular participation 

No participation 0.21 0.56 0.77 1.30 1.26 0.86 

< 1 hour a week 0.28 0.55 0.57 1.87 1.79 1.46 1–4 hours a week 0.10 0.44 0.44 1.20 1.41 1.36 > 4 hours a week 0.08 0.23 0.35 1.02 1.14 1.08 

See notes at end of table. 
B-16

Table B-6. Standard errors for table 6 estimates (percentage distribution of high school graduates completing v

levels since 9th grade, by selected student characteristics): Academic year 2003–04—Continued 

Highest science course level taken since 9th grade1

Characteristic Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Level 5 Level 6 Employment 

No employment 0.15 0.42 0.52 1.21 1.28 1.18 1–15 hours a week 0.12 0.33 0.42 1.33 1.30 1.13 > 15 hours a week 0.10 0.40 0.48 1.08 1.10 0.87 

School control5

Public 0.09 0.31 0.39 0.94 0.95 0.86 Catholic 0.19 0.35 0.74 2.37 2.70 3.00 Other private † † 0.25 2.12 3.72 4.74 Mixed † † 0.47 3.13 4.86 3.19 

School location5

Urban 0.18 0.55 0.52 1.50 1.68 1.69 Suburban 0.12 0.37 0.53 1.17 1.24 1.10 Rural 0.17 0.68 0.91 2.49 2.09 1.77 Mixed 0.72 1.15 1.48 3.18 3.11 2.10 

School region5,6

Northeast 0.15 0.93 1.20 1.89 1.98 2.01 Midwest 0.16 0.41 0.71 1.93 1.83 1.57 South 0.15 0.27 0.44 1.25 1.54 1.40 West 0.22 0.79 0.65 2.06 1.84 1.67 Mixed † † 5.76 6.14 7.74 6.66 

† Not applicable. 1 Course levels are: Level 1—no science; Level 2—primary physical science; Level 3—secondary physical science and basic biology; Level 4—general b

physics I; Level 6—chemistry I and physics I; Level 7—chemistry II or physics II or advanced biology; Level 8—both Levels 6 and 7. 

2 All race categories exclude Hispanic or Latino origin. 3 The first language students learned to speak when they were children. 4 Other includes two guardians, female guardian only, male guardian only, and guardian who lives with the student less than half of the time. 5 Information about the students’ base-year (BY) school and, if applicable, their final transfer school, was used to construct the school sector, region, and 

students were enrolled in the same school in the BY interview and at the time of high school exit, information is given for only one school: the BY school. 

their BY school and transcripts were provided by their final transfer school, information is from both schools: the BY school and the final transfer school. T

classified into groups in terms of school category consistency. Students who were in the same type of school for both schools were assigned to that group 

who transferred to a public school was coded as public). If not, they were classified as “mixed” (e.g., a Catholic school student who transferred to a public 

6 Region is defined by the U.S. Census Bureau based on the state in which the school is located. 

NOTE: Highest mathematics course taken is based on a taxonomy of course types for which the student received a nonzero credit while in high school. T

from September 1, 2003 to August 31, 2004. SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Education Longitudinal Study of 2002 (ELS:2002), “High School Trans
Appendix B: Standard Error Tables

B-17

Table B-7. Standard errors for table 7 estimates (percentage distribution of high school 

graduates demonstrating mastery of specific mathematics knowledge and skills, by 

credit earned in selected courses): Academic year 2003–04 

Mathematics proficiency levels1

Credits earned in selected courses Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Level 5 

Total 0.16 0.60 0.79 0.77 0.24 

Total course credits earned 

Low 0.34 1.14 1.41 1.21 0.34 

Middle 0.18 0.77 1.05 1.07 0.32 

High 0.23 0.91 1.31 1.33 0.40 

Total course credits earned in academic subjects 

Low 0.39 1.17 1.30 0.96 0.20 

Middle 0.14 0.69 0.97 0.94 0.29 

High 0.11 0.60 0.95 1.33 0.54 

Total course credits earned in occupational subjects 

Low 0.18 0.77 1.06 1.36 0.62 

Middle 0.19 0.76 1.01 0.97 0.28 

High 0.36 1.13 1.24 0.93 0.18 

Total course credits earned in mathematics 

Low 1.17 3.68 3.81 2.93 0.44 

Middle 0.28 0.96 1.16 0.92 0.18 

High 0.16 0.59 0.83 0.96 0.35 

Total course credits earned in science 

Low 1.27 2.90 2.75 1.63 0.12 

Middle 0.21 0.76 1.00 0.89 0.19 

High 0.15 0.61 0.89 1.03 0.42 

Total course credits earned in English 

Low 4.03 10.17 12.64 9.59 4.80 

Middle 0.56 1.83 2.51 2.33 0.61 

High 0.16 0.62 0.80 0.79 0.24 

Total course credits earned in social studies 

Low 3.06 4.99 4.60 2.24 0.26 

Middle 0.34 1.14 1.44 1.34 0.38 

High 0.16 0.65 0.84 0.84 0.27 1

 Mathematics proficiency levels are: Level 1—simple arithmetical operations on whole numbers, including single-step operations 

that rely on rote memory; Level 2—simple operations with decimals, fractions, powers, and roots; Level 3—simple problem solving, 

requiring the understanding of low-level mathematical concepts; Level 4—understanding of intermediate-level mathematical 

concepts and/or having the ability to formulate multistep solutions to word problems; and Level 5—proficiency in solving complex 

multistep word problems and/or having the ability to demonstrate knowledge of material found in advanced mathematics courses. 

NOTE: "Course credits" refer to standardized Carnegie units. A Carnegie unit is a standard of measurement used for secondary 

education that represents the completion of a course that meets one period per day for one year. Core courses represent all 

courses in mathematics, science, English, and social studies. Noncore courses represent all other courses not defined as core 

courses. Level of mastery is reported at the group level by calculating the mean of the probability scores in the given area. Since the 

means are on a decimal scale between 0 and 1, they represent the proportions of members of a subgroup falling within a 

performance level. For course credits earned, “low” refers to students whose percentile rank on the distribution of course credits was 

below 25th, “medium” refers to students whose percentile rank on the distribution of course credits was at least 25th and below

75th, and “high” refers to students whose percentile rank on the distribution of course credits was at least 75th. The academic year 

extended from September 1, 2003 to August 31, 2004. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Education Longitudinal Study of 2002 

(ELS:2002), “High School Transcript Study.” 
Appendix B: Standard Error Tables

B-18

Table B-8. Standard errors for table 8 estimates (percentage of high school graduates 

demonstrating mastery of specific mathematics knowledge and skills, by academic 

program): Academic year 2003–04 

Mathematics proficiency levels1

Academic program Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Level 5 

Total 0.16 0.60 0.79 0.77 0.24 

 

Academic (only) 0.05 0.49 0.79 1.11 0.56 

Occupational (only) 0.48 1.40 1.53 1.09 0.22 

Both academic and occupational 0.34 1.59 2.58 3.27 1.25 

General 0.23 0.80 1.03 0.90 0.20 

1

 Mathematics proficiency levels are: Level 1—simple arithmetical operations on whole numbers, including single-step operations 

that rely on rote memory; Level 2—simple operations with decimals, fractions, powers, and roots; Level 3—simple problem solving, 

requiring the understanding of low-level mathematical concepts; Level 4—understanding of intermediate-level mathematical 

concepts and/or having the ability to formulate multistep solutions to word problems; and Level 5—proficiency in solving complex 

multistep word problems and/or having the ability to demonstrate knowledge of material found in advanced mathematics courses. 

NOTE: "Course credits" refer to standardized Carnegie units. A Carnegie unit is a standard of measurement used for secondary 

education that represents the completion of a course that meets one period per day for one year. Level of mastery is reported at the 

group level by calculating the mean of the probability scores in the given area. Since the means are on a decimal scale between 0 

and 1, they represent the proportions of members of a subgroup falling within a performance level. The academic year extended 

from September 1, 2003 to August 31, 2004. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Education Longitudinal Study of 2002 

(ELS:2002), “High School Transcript Study.” 

Table B-9. Standard errors for table 9 estimates (percentage of high school graduates 

demonstrating mastery of specific mathematics knowledge and skills, by highest 

mathematics course level taken): Academic year 2003–04 

Mathematics proficiency levels1

Highest mathematics course level taken Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Level 5 

Total 0.16 0.60 0.79 0.77 0.24 

 

No math 5.32 5.60 4.65 1.25 † 

Basic math/pre-algebra 1.53 2.47 1.71 0.81 0.02 

Core secondary through algebra II 0.23 0.93 1.04 0.66 0.05 

Trigonometry, statistics, pre-calculus 0.14 0.73 1.02 1.10 0.17 

Calculus 0.04 0.10 0.25 0.88 1.15 

† Not applicable. 

1

 Mathematics proficiency levels are: Level 1—simple arithmetical operations on whole numbers, including single-step operations 

that rely on rote memory; Level 2—simple operations with decimals, fractions, powers, and roots; Level 3—simple problem solving, 

requiring the understanding of low-level mathematical concepts; Level 4—understanding of intermediate-level mathematical 

concepts and/or having the ability to formulate multistep solutions to word problems; and Level 5—proficiency in solving complex 

multistep word problems and/or having the ability to demonstrate knowledge of material found in advanced mathematics courses. 

NOTE: "Course credits" refer to standardized Carnegie units. A Carnegie unit is a standard of measurement used for secondary 

education that represents the completion of a course that meets one period per day for one year. Core courses represent all 

courses in mathematics, science, English, and social studies. Noncore courses represent all other courses not defined as core 

courses. Level of mastery is reported at the group level by calculating the mean of the probability scores in the given area. Since the 

means are on a decimal scale between 0 and 1, they represent the proportions of members of a subgroup falling within a 

performance level. The academic year extended from September 1, 2003 to August 31, 2004. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Education Longitudinal Study of 2002 

(ELS:2002), “High School Transcript Study.” 
Appendix B: Standard Error Tables

B-19

Table B-10. Standard errors for table 10 estimates (grade point average [GPA] for high school 

graduates, by credits earned in selected courses): Academic year 2003–04 

Credits earned in selected courses Mean GPA1

Percent with

 at least 

a 3.0 GPA1

Mean 

academic 

GPA1

Percent with at 

least a 3.0 

academic GPA1

Total 0.01 0.74 0.01 0.70 

 

Total course credits earned 

Low 0.02 1.38 0.02 1.30 

Middle 0.01 1.08 0.02 1.04 

High 0.02 1.43 0.02 1.46 

 

Total course credits earned in academic 

subjects 

Low 0.02 1.38 0.02 1.21 

Middle 0.01 1.03 0.02 1.04 

High 0.02 1.25 0.02 1.38 

 

Total course credits earned in occupational 

subjects 

Low 0.02 1.48 0.02 1.39 

Middle 0.01 0.91 0.01 0.90 

High 0.02 1.30 0.02 1.18 

 

Total course credits earned in mathematics 

Low 0.08 4.10 0.09 3.38 

Middle 0.02 1.16 0.02 0.97 

High 0.01 0.95 0.01 0.95 

 

Total course credits earned in science 

Low 0.04 2.20 0.04 1.96 

Middle 0.02 1.04 0.02 0.95 

High 0.01 0.94 0.01 1.00 

 

Total course credits earned in English 

Low 0.16 9.92 0.18 9.66 

Middle 0.04 2.65 0.05 2.59 

High 0.01 0.78 0.01 0.74 

 

Total course credits earned in social studies 

Low 0.09 4.85 0.10 4.13 

Middle 0.02 1.49 0.02 1.38 

High 0.01 0.81 0.01 0.79 

1

 GPA is based on all courses. Academic GPA is based only on math, English, science, social studies, fine arts, and non-English 

courses. 

NOTE: "Course credits" refer to standardized Carnegie units. A Carnegie unit is a standard of measurement used for secondary 

education that represents the completion of a course that meets one period per day for one year. Core courses represent all 

courses in mathematics, science, English, and social studies. Noncore courses represent all other courses not defined as core 

courses. For course credits earned, “low” refers to students whose percentile rank on the distribution of course credits was below 

25th, “medium” refers to students whose percentile rank on the distribution of course credits was at least 25th and below 75th, and 

“high” refers to students whose percentile rank on the distribution of course credits was at least 75th. The academic year extended 

from September 1, 2003 to August 31, 2004. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Education Longitudinal Study of 2002 

(ELS:2002), “High School Transcript Study.” 
Appendix B: Standard Error Tables

B-20

Table B-11. Standard errors for table 11 estimates (grade point average [GPA] for high school 

graduates, by academic and occupational program): Academic year 2003–04 

Academic program Mean GPA1

Percent with 

at least 

a 3.0 GPA1

Mean 

academic 

GPA1

Percent with at 

least a 3.0 

academic GPA1

Total 0.01 0.74 0.01 0.70 

 

Academic (only) 0.02 1.21 0.02 1.31 

Occupational (only) 0.02 1.69 0.03 1.52 

Both academic and occupational 0.05 3.42 0.05 3.74 

General 0.02 1.00 0.02 0.94 

1

 GPA is based on all courses. Academic GPA is based only on math, English, science, and social studies courses. 

NOTE: The academic year extended from September 1, 2003 to August 31, 2004. Highest mathematics course taken is based on a 

taxonomy of course types for which the student received a nonzero credit while in high school. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Education Longitudinal Study of 2002 

(ELS:2002), “High School Transcript Study.” 

Table B-12. Standard errors for table 12 estimates (grade point average [GPA] for high school 

graduates, by highest mathematics course level taken): Academic year 2003–04 

Highest mathematics course level taken Mean GPA1

Percent with 

at least

 a 3.0 GPA1

Mean 

academic 

GPA1

Percent with at 

least a 3.0 

academic GPA1

Total 0.01 0.74 0.01 0.70 

 

No math 0.13 7.25 0.14 7.16 

Basic math/pre-algebra 0.03 1.83 0.03 1.51 

Core secondary through algebra II 0.01 0.95 0.02 0.80 

Trigonometry, statistics, pre-calculus 0.02 1.25 0.02 1.23 

Calculus 0.01 1.03 0.02 1.21 

1

 GPA is based on all courses. Academic GPA is based only on math, English, science, social studies, fine arts, and non-English 

courses. 

NOTE: Highest mathematics course taken is based on a taxonomy of course types for which the student received a nonzero credit 

while in high school. The academic year extended from September 1, 2003 to August 31, 2004. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Education Longitudinal Study of 2002 

(ELS:2002), “High School Transcript Study.” 
Appendix B: Standard Error Tables

B-21

Table B-13. Standard errors for table 13 estimates (mean credits earned in selected courses for 

high school graduates, by educational expectations): Academic year 2003–04 

Course credits 

Educational expectation 

Mean course 

credits 

earned 

Mean course 

credits earned 

in academic 

subjects 

Mean course 

credits 

earned in 

mathematics 

Mean course 

credits earned 

in AP/IB 

courses 

Mean course 

credits earned 

in vocational 

subjects 

Total 0.10 0.09 0.02 0.03 0.06 

 

High school or less 0.21 0.20 0.05 0.01 0.20 

Some college 0.15 0.13 0.03 0.01 0.12 

College graduation 0.12 0.10 0.02 0.03 0.06 

Graduate/professional degree 0.11 0.09 0.02 0.06 0.06 

NOTE: "Course credits" refer to standardized Carnegie units. A Carnegie unit is a standard of measurement used for secondary 

education that represents the completion of a course that meets one period per day for one year. Core courses represent all 

courses in mathematics, science, English, and social studies. Noncore courses represent all other courses not defined as core 

courses. AP/IB = Advanced Placement/International Baccalaureate. The academic year extended from September 1, 2003 to 

August 31, 2004. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Education Longitudinal Study of 2002 

(ELS:2002), “High School Transcript Study.” 

Table B-14. Standard errors for table 14 estimates (percentage distribution of high school 

graduates completing various mathematics course levels since 9th grade, by 

educational expectations: Academic year 2003–04 

Highest mathematics course level taken since 9th grade1

Educational expectation Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Level 5 

Total 0.10 0.33 0.91 0.82 0.53 

 

High school or less 0.81 2.07 2.71 1.97 0.34 

Some college 0.29 0.99 1.52 1.25 0.28 

College graduation 0.13 0.32 1.20 1.20 0.63 

Graduate/professional degree 0.05 0.28 1.07 1.15 1.04 

1

 Course levels are: Level 1—no math; Level 2—basic math/pre-algebra; Level 3—core secondary through algebra II; Level 4—

trigonometry, statistics, pre-calculus; and Level 5—calculus. 

NOTE: Highest mathematics course taken is based on a taxonomy of course types for which the student received a nonzero credit 

while in high school. The academic year extended from September 1, 2003 to August 31, 2004. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Education Longitudinal Study of 2002 

(ELS:2002), “High School Transcript Study.”