2015-16

NATIONAL TEACHER AND PRINCIPAL SURVEY (NTPS)

FULL-SCALE DATA COLLECTION

OMB SUPPORTING STATEMENT

PART B

OMB# 1850-0598 v.11

February 2015

Rev. April 27, 2015

National Center for Education Statistics (NCES)

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. Respondent Universe.................................................................................................................................................... 1

1.1. SCHOOLS............................................................................................................................................................ 1

1.2. TEACHERS........................................................................................................................................................... 1

2. Statistical Procedures for Collecting Information.......................................................................................................... 1

2.1. SAMPLING.......................................................................................................................................................... 1

Sampling – Public Schools............................................................................................................................................. 1

Sampling – Teachers Within All Schools........................................................................................................................ 4

Sampling – Principals Within All Schools....................................................................................................................... 4

2.2. SURVEY WEIGHTS ................................................................................................................................................ 4

2.3. RESPONSE RATES ................................................................................................................................................. 4

2.4. PROCEDURES FOR COLLECTION OF INFORMATION....................................................................................................... 4

3. Methods for Maximizing Response Rates........................................................................................................................... 5

4. Tests of Procedures and Methods...................................................................................................................................... 7

5. Reviewing Statisticians....................................................................................................................................................... 7
1

B. COLLECTION OF INFORMATION EMPLOYING STATISTICAL METHODS

1. Respondent Universe

1.1. Schools

The respondent universe for the 2015-16 full-scale data collection consists of 96,405 public schools in the 

50 U.S. states and the District of Columbia (DC) that offer instruction in any of grades K-12. To be 

eligible for inclusion in the sample, schools must provide classroom instruction to students, have one or 

more teachers to provide instruction, serve students in at least one of grades 1-12 or the ungraded 

equivalent, must be located in one or more buildings, and must be located in the U.S. and not in the 

outlying areas or U.S. territories.

NCES’ 2013-14 Common Core of Data (CCD) will be used to construct the public school sampling 

frame. The respondent universe for charter schools will be identified as those public charter schools that 

meet the NTPS definition of an eligible school found on the CCD. Table 1.1 below presents the number 

of public schools on the 2012-13 CCD by urbanicity and school level. The universe has been adjusted to 

remove K-terminal schools, which are not eligible for NTPS.

Table 1.1. Respondent universe by urbanicity and school level for the proposed public school 

sample, based on the 2012-13 CCD

School level

Region Primary Middle High Combined Total

City 15,233 3,584 5,124 2,182 26,123

Suburban 17,865 4,980 5,746 1,515 30,106

Town 6,223 2,381 3,430 924 12,958

Rural 13,608 3,989 7,266 2,355 27,218

Total 52,929 14,934 21,566 6,976 96,405

SOURCE: 2012-13 CCD.

1.2. Teachers

Teachers will be randomly sampled within the second design stage from roster information provided by 

each participating sampled school. Teachers within the sampled school are classified as ineligible for 

NTPS if they are a short-term substitute teacher, student teacher, a teacher’s aide, or do not teach any of 

grades K-12 or comparable ungraded levels. This information is obtained from the Teacher Questionnaire.

2. Procedures for Collecting Information

2.1. Sampling

The final 2015-16 NTPS samples will include no more than:

 8,300 schools and school principals (7,000 traditional public and 1,300 charter schools);

 40,000 teachers (34,300 traditional public, and 5,700 charter school teachers); plus

 An additional 1,000 schools and principals will be selected for an internet response experiment 

following similar procedures as the main NTPS sample

Sampling – Public Schools

The level of precision achieved by the 2011-12 SASS was evaluated to inform the sample design 
2

decisions for the 2015-16 NTPS. The precision analysis was based on important analysis variables and on

generic proportions to address other important SASS characteristics. The following variables and values 

were evaluated:

 by state (public schools);

 by school type (public charter, traditional public, overall public);

 by urbanicity within school type;

 by grade level (primary, middle, high, and combined);

 by grade level and urbanicity within school type;

 by poverty status (more than 75% of students eligible for free or reduced price lunch, 75% or less);

 by poverty status, grade level, and urbanicity within school type; and

 by teachers’ years of experience, subject, race/ethnicity.

The desired level of precision for NTPS estimates was defined in terms of a 95% confidence interval halfwidth (corresponding to 1.96 times the standard error). The desired goal was to achieve a 95% confidence 

interval half-width of 2.5% on a generic 20% characteristic.

Table 2.1.a presents a portion of the analysis for public schools by school type, grade level, urbanicity, 

and poverty status. Presented are the anticipated number of responding schools or principals for the NTPS 

design and the expected precision based on the analysis of SASS 11-12.

Table 2.1a. School-level precision analysis results for major characteristics of interest - NTPS 2015-16

Characteristic

Frame 

Schools

Expected 

Completed 

Interviews

Expected 

Standard 

Error

95% 

Confidence 

Interval HalfWidth1Design 

Effect

Studies Needed 

to Achieve 2.5% 

Half-width 

Criterion

All 95,464 5,3002

0.68% 1.33% 1.51 1

Charter 6,254 707 1.75% 3.43% 1.35 2

Non-charter 89,210 4,593 0.72% 1.40% 1.46 1

Primary 52,868 2,418 0.95% 1.86% 1.35 1

Middle 14,912 940 1.52% 2.97% 1.35 2

High 21,199 1,340 1.47% 2.86% 1.78 2

Combined 6,485 602 2.15% 4.20% 1.73 3

City 25,818 1,599 1.24% 2.41% 1.51 1

Suburban 29,900 1,670 1.18% 2.30% 1.44 1

Town 12,785 771 1.72% 3.38% 1.44 2

Rural 26,961 1,260 1.40% 2.75% 1.55 2

High poverty 23,731 1,321 1.33% 2.59% 1.44 2

Low/medium poverty 71,733 3,979 0.79% 1.54% 1.54 1

1

The bold values represent domains that do not meet the 2.5% criterion for the confidence interval half-width in one study.

2

The small difference in this total (5,300) as compared to the estimated number of respondents in Part A’s burden table (5,312) is due to 

rounding.

Table 2.1.b provides the analogous precision analysis for public school teachers. The expected standard 

errors were calculated based on the SASS 11-12 and scaled for the expected NTPS 2015-16 number of 

respondents.
3

Table 2.1.b. Teacher-level precision analysis results for major characteristics of interest – NTPS 2015-16

Characteristic

Frame Full-Time 

Equivalent

Teachers (In 1000s)

Expected 

Teacher 

Completed 

Interviews

Expected 

Standard 

Error

95% Confidence 

Interval HalfWidthDesign 

Effect

All 3,088.3 26,500 0.41% 0.80% 2.82

Charter 132.7 3,022 1.18% 2.30% 2.60

Non-charter 2,955.5 23,478 0.43% 0.84% 2.68

Primary 1,490.6 10,951 0.64% 1.25% 2.75

Middle 543.2 4,869 0.94% 1.84% 2.68

High 908.4 7,924 0.74% 1.46% 2.70

Combined 146.0 2,755 1.24% 2.43% 2.63

City 904.8 8,163 0.76% 1.48% 2.94

Suburban 1,187.4 9,210 0.69% 1.36% 2.75

Town 364.2 3,626 1.09% 2.13% 2.66

Rural 631.8 5,501 0.90% 1.76% 2.78

High poverty 724.7 6,317 0.85% 1.68% 2.89

Low/medium poverty 3,088.3 20,183 0.47% 0.93% 2.79

Based on this analysis, the sampling frame will be partitioned into 50 sampling strata for public schools.

Public schools are divided into two categories to create the sampling strata: charter schools (18 strata) and 

traditional public schools (32 strata).

Charter schools are identified from the CCD. The 18 charter school sampling strata are constructed by

crossing the school grade level variable (primary, middle, high, and combined) with urbanicity (city, 

suburban, town, and rural) and poverty status (high, low/medium percent of students eligible for free or 

reduced price lunch).

The 32 sampling strata for the traditional public schools, excluding charters schools, are defined by

crossing the four-category school grade level variable (primary, middle, high, and combined) with 

urbanicity (city, suburban, town, and rural) and poverty status (more than 75% of students eligible for free 

or reduced price lunch, 75% or less percent of students eligible for free or reduced price lunch).

Grade level (# Groups) State Grade level (# Groups) State

Primary (6)

City high poverty

City low/medium poverty

Suburban high poverty

Suburban low/medium poverty

Town

Rural High (4)

City high poverty

City low/medium poverty

Suburban

Town and rural

Middle (3)

City high poverty

City low/medium poverty

Suburban, town, and rural Combined (5)

City high poverty

City low/medium poverty

Suburban

Town

Rural
4

Sampling – Teachers within All Schools

Teachers will be randomly sampled from roster information provided by each participating sampled 

school. No stratification will be used as the precision analysis indicated that no oversampling is needed. 

The average number of teachers sampled per school will be five for primary and combined schools, and 

5.375 for middle and high schools. The larger cluster size for middle and high schools allows for greater 

precision of teachers by subject area. The maximum number of teachers per school will be set at 20 to 

avoid overburdening the schools.

Sampling – Principals within All Schools

For each sampled traditional public and public charter schools, the principal will be included in the survey 

as a result of the school being selected.

2.2. Survey Weights

Schools, principals, and teachers will be weighted by the inverse of the probability of selection. The final 

weight contains adjustments for nonresponse and any other sampling or field considerations that arise 

after the sample has been drawn.

2.3. Response Rates

We expect the response rates of the 2015-16 NTPS to approximate those of the 2011-12 SASS or to fall 

lower given the long-term trend in declining response rates for federal surveys. Table 2.3 provides the 

base-weighted response rates for the 2011-12 SASS.

Table 2.3. Base-weighted response rates for the 2011-12 SASS by respondent type and school type

School Type

Unit of Observation

Teacher Principal School

Traditional Public 77.92% 72.90% 72.68%

Charter 70.36% 69.67% 69.15%

2.4. Procedures for Collection of Information

The data collection methods for the 2015-16 NTPS will be based on those used in the 2014-15 NTPS 

Pilot Test and past cycles of SASS. The 2015-16 NTPS will seek school coordinators and will utilize 

clerical look-ups of school websites for teacher lists and email addresses along with commercial vendor 

sources. School coordinators were utilized in past SASS cycles but not in the 2014-15 NTPS Pilot Test.

Beginning in August 2015, all schools will receive an initial mailout package addressed to the principal at 

the school address. The package will contain a letter to the principal, a letter to the school coordinator 

(including instructions for completing online a brief screener interview using the NTPS Respondent 

Status Center), a Teacher Listing Form, a School Questionnaire, and a Principal Questionnaire. The 

completion of the questionnaires is to be facilitated by the school coordinator. The internet-based 

Respondent Status Center will allow schools to upload or manually enter the Teacher Listing Form, as 

well as check the status of all of the school’s questionnaires.
5

From September 2015 through October 2015, follow-up operations will be conducted for schools that 

have not returned the Teacher Listing Form. These operations will consist of field staff contacting the 

schools by telephone or personal visit. Schools will be assigned follow up priority at the time of sampling 

based on their likelihood to respond and impact on final estimates.

Additional reminder letters to the school and school coordinator will be sent in October and November 

2015. Field staff will conduct telephone and personal visit follow-up of remaining nonresponding schools 

in December 2015 through May 2016.

3. Methods for Maximizing Response Rates

A variety of procedures will be employed to ensure high response rates at both the level of the responding 

unit (i.e., sample member) and at the level of the individual survey items in each survey questionnaire.

The final NTPS design is based on results from the 2014-15 pilot test, which examined effectiveness of 

different contact strategies (OMB# 1850-0803 approved in July 2014).

The entire survey process, starting with securing research cooperation from key public school groups and 

individual sample members and continuing throughout the distribution and collection of individual 

questionnaires, is designed to increase survey response rates. In addition, we believe that the following 

elements of the data collection plan, in particular, will contribute to overall success of the survey and will 

enhance the survey response rates.

(1) Visible support from top-level Federal, State, and local education officials. Without the support of 

high-level officials in the U.S. Department of Education, State Education Agencies, and the 

sampled local school districts, surveys of public school principals and teachers cannot be 

successfully implemented. Obtaining endorsements from these officials is a critical factor in the 

success of the data collection procedures. Top-level Education Department officials will need to 

fully support the data collection by endorsing the survey in writing and sending advance letters 

and notices to sampled districts' Superintendents, and individual survey participants (principals 

and teachers) to encourage participation.

(2) Endorsements from key public school groups. The level of interest and cooperation demonstrated 

by key groups can often greatly influence the degree of participation of survey respondents. 

Endorsements are viewed as a critical factor in soliciting cooperation from state and local 

education officials. The NTPS is seeking endorsement by the following organizations or agencies:

American Association of School Administrators

Association of American Educators

American School Counselors Association

Association of Supervision and Curriculum Development

American Federation of Teachers

American Counseling Association

Association for Middle Level Education

Council of Chief State School Officers

Council of the Great City Schools

National Association of Elementary School Principals

National Association of Secondary School Principals

National Education Association

American Association of School Librarians

American Montessori Society

National Parent Teacher Association

As more endorsements are received, they will be added to questionnaires’ cover page (Attachment A).
6

(3) Stressing the importance of the survey and the respondents' participation. Official letters will be 

used to motivate respondents to return surveys. For 2015 we plan to send an initial letter from the 

Director of the Census Bureau. Follow up letters will be sent from the Commissioner or Associate 

Commissioner of NCES. The additional personalization of survey materials (cover letters and 

survey packets with teachers' names) is also expected to have positive effects on the response 

rates.

(4) Minimize the survey burden on school-level authorities. The procedures for the surveys are 

designed to minimize the survey burden on schools and sampled individuals (principals and 

teachers) and the survey instruments have been designed to be completed as quickly and easily as 

possible.

Good questionnaire design techniques have been employed to minimize item nonresponse. All 

completed questionnaires from the 2011-12 SASS have been carefully analyzed to determine 

which items had the highest levels of item nonresponse. This information guided NCES in 

reviewing the clarity of item wording, definitions, and instructions. Items that were not considered 

to be effective or useful were deleted so as to streamline the questionnaires and ease the response 

burden.

NTPS also plans to provide links to or incorporate data from other NCES collections such as 

EDfacts and the Civil Rights Data Collection (CRDC) into final datasets to allow researchers and 

policymakers to include additional data in their analyses. This will further reduce the need to 

collect data from schools that have already been collected at the state or district level.

(5) Seeking the recruitment of a school coordinator. An important procedural measure for helping to 

maximize response rates is the plan to establish a school-based "survey coordinator" to serve as a 

primary point of contact for NTPS staff. The use of a school coordinator is expected to help keep 

response rates high, provide some minimal data quality checks, and simplify the follow-up process 

by having one point of contact.

(6) Tailoring non response follow up strategies. After sample selection, cases will be assigned a

“priority” flag based on the weighted response influence of the case. The weighted response 

influence takes into account both the response propensity and the base weight of a school to create 

a measure of a school’s potential effect on nonresponse weighting adjustments and final estimates.

The weighted response influence can be calculated as:

φ = log(

) 

1





where: φis the final weighted response influence for a school,

is the baseweight for a school, and

is the estimated response propensity for a school

As the formula shows, a case with either an extremely high weight or an extremely low response 

propensity will have a large response influence, reflecting the fact that if they are a nonrespondent, 

they will disproportionately affect the nonresponse adjustment cell in which they are located.

Missing that particular school’s information may result in biased estimates (if variables in the 

propensity model are related to outcomes of interest), and will certainly result in increased 

variance in the estimates (due to more variable final weights). In order to avoid having extreme 

weights drive the value of weighted response influence, we take the natural log of the base weight 

in the formula.

Using data from the 2011-2012 SASS and the 2014 NTPS Pilot Test, including frame variables 

and response statuses, we calculated a weighted response propensity model, keeping in mind 
7

domains of interest and estimates of interest for the 2015 NTPS. Specific categories of variables 

available for evaluation include geography, urbanicity, racial/ethnic makeup, enrollment, grades 

levels, free lunch recipiency, and type of school. These variables are available in the 2011-2012 

SAS sample files, the NTPS Pilot Test sample files, and the 2015 NTPS sample file, allowing us 

to leverage past experience in creating the response propensity models.

The priority flag will be used throughout data collection to make non response follow up 

decisions. For example, cases with the highest weighted response influence will receive early 

follow up by field interviewers rather than progressing through multiple data collection operations 

that are likely to be unproductive.

Weighted response influence was also used, with great success, by the National Survey of College 

Graduates (NSCG) for identifying high influence sample persons. These high influence cases were 

targeted during data collection with an experimental incentive to increase sample balance and 

overall response rate. Response influence has been implemented by the NSCG in production as a 

way of identifying high influence sample persons for data collection interventions. More 

information about response influence can be found in: Särndal, C., Lundström, S. (2008). 

Assessing auxiliary vectors for control of nonresponse bias in the calibration estimator. Journal of 

Official Statistics 24, 167-191.

(7) Increased use of email and internet for collection of teacher lists and survey reminders. The 2014 

NTPS pilot test demonstrated that email was an effective tool to drive participation in the NTPS 

teacher survey. The pilot test also showed that email addresses and teacher lists could be collected 

from school websites. The 2015-16 NTPS includes clerical operations to look up principal email 

addresses and lists of teachers as well as their email addresses during data collection. The teacher 

lists will be collected for schools that do not return a completed Teacher Listing Form or do not 

include teacher email addresses on the returned form. Depending on results of the experiment 

conducted during the NTPS pilot test, commercial vendor lists may also be used to identify and 

sample teachers at schools that did not complete a TLF. Emails will be sent to sampled teachers 

with links to the NTPS teacher survey. Additionally, principals of schools in the internet 

experiment will receive email invitations and reminders to complete the survey.

4. Tests of Procedures and Methods

The 2017-18 NTPS will be built on the experience of previous rounds of SASS and NTPS. Results 

from the 2015-16 NTPS Schools and Principals Internet Test will impact the final 2017-18 NTPS 

design. These results and the final design will be described in the 2017-18 NTPS data collection 

clearance package expected to be submitted in early 2017.

5. Reviewing Statisticians

The following statisticians have been contributing to the NTPS sample design:

Randall Parmer, U.S. Census Bureau, Suitland, MD

David Marker, Westat, Rockville, MD

Lou Rizzo, Westat, Bethesda, MD

Sharon Lohr, Westat, Bethesda, MD

Edward Mulrow, NORC, Bethesda, MD

Kirk Wolter, NORC, Chicago, IL

Andrew Zukerberg, NCES, Washington, DC

Marilyn Seastrom, NCES, Washington, DC