Description   The National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) is mandated to "collect and disseminate statistics and other data related to education in the United States". Specific areas of interest include the educational, vocational, and personal development of young people starting with their primary or secondary school years, and following them as they move into adult roles and responsibilities. To this end, it has initiated several large scale studies in which a cohort is studied at regular intervals over several years. The studies attempt to gather comparable data so that education and labor trends can be studied using the data from several cohorts. The first of these studies was the National Longitudinal Study of the High School Class of 1972 (NLS-72). The NLS-72 consisted of a cohort of about 19,000 students who were high school seniors in 1972.

High School and Beyond (HS&B) included two cohorts: the 1980 senior class, and the 1980 sophomore class. It was designed to build on NLS-72 by studying high school seniors and by replicating many survey items. In addition, the sophomore cohort was added so that choices and changes made between 10^th and 12^th grades could be tracked. Finally, HS&B added survey items on many life cycle factors, such as family formation and social participation.

Waves/Rounds   Both cohorts were surveyed every two years starting with the Base Year (BY), 1980 through the 3rd Follow-up (FU3) in 1986. The 1980 sophomore class was also surveyed again in the 4th Follow-up (FU4) in 1992.

Components/Instruments (only for Sophomore cohort)

Sophomore cohort questionnaire (BY-FU4)

Not-currently in high school questionnaire (FU1)

Transfer and Early Graduate Supplements (FU1)

Student identification pages (BY)

Cognitive tests (BY and FU1)

School questionnaire (FU1)

Teacher comment checklist (BY)

Parent questionnaire (mailed to a sample of parents during BY and FU1)

After the first follow-up survey, high school transcripts were sought for a probability subsample of nearly 18,500 members of the 1980 sophomore cohort. The post-secondary transcript study was based on the 9,064 sophomore cohort members who reported postsecondary attendance. (December, 1992 to October, 1993)

In addition to the main student file, data files include: Language File, Parent Files, Twin and Sibling File, Sophomore Teacher Comment File, Friends File, Offering and Enrollments File, Updated School File, Postsecondary Education transcript file, Sophomore and Senior Financial Aid files, and Institution Code files.

Mode of administration

Base Year: For both cohorts, group administration of surveys at school.

First Follow-up: For the senior cohort, a self-administered mail-back questionnaire; For the sophomore cohort, group administrations at school, or off-campus for dropouts, etc.

Second Follow-up: For both cohorts, data were collected through a self-administered mail-back questionnaire. Packets containing survey questionnaires, instruction sheets, and incentive payment checks were sent to sample members.

Third Follow-up: As in the second follow-up survey, data were collected through mail-back questionnaires; approximately 27,000 packets of survey materials were mailed to the last known addresses of the sample members. Contact procedures for nonrespondents remained unchanged from the previous rounds. Approximately 66% of both samples mailed back their completed questionnaires; 5% of the seniors and 6% of the sophomores were interviewed in person; and about 16% of the seniors and 19% of the sophomores were interviewed by telephone. The survey design again required respondents interviewed by telephone or in person to use a copy of the questionnaire during the interview to minimize the bias due to method of administration. Follow-up interviewing resulted in a completion rate of 88% for the seniors and 91% for the sophomores.

Fourth Follow-up: Approximately 12,000 packets containing survey questionnaires, instruction sheets, and incentive payment checks were sent to sample members during the first week of February 1982. Postcards with dual messages seeking a quick reply from nonrespondents and thanking early respondents for their cooperation were mailed during the third week following the initial mailout. Approximately 75% of the targeted senior cohort members completed and returned first follow-up questionnaires by mail. Two weeks later, those who still had not responded were called by trained telephone interviewers. An additional 19% completed the questionnaires through either in-person or telephone interviews. Respondents who completed the questionnaire by telephone were required to have a copy of the questionnaire in front of them while doing so in order to keep the survey experience as similar as possible to that of the mail questionnaires. Follow-up interviewing was halted in mid-July 1982 after a response rate of 94% had been obtained.

Survey lengths   In the base year, the students were given 60 minutes to complete surveys and cognitive tests (sophomore only) were approximately 68 minutes. In the 1st follow-up, the transfer supplement took approximately 10 minutes to complete, and the early graduate supplement took 10-15 minutes. For the fourth follow-up, the average administration time was 30.6 minutes for the respondent survey.

Sample sizes   The total number of schools selected for the BY sample was 1,122, from a frame of 24,725 schools with grades 10 or 12 or both.  Over 30,000 sophomores and 28,000 seniors enrolled in 1,015 public and private high schools across the country participated in the base year survey.

The first follow-up sample consisted of about 30,000 1980 sophomores and 12,000 1980 seniors. It retained the multi-stage, stratified, and clustered design of the base year sample, and all students who had been selected for inclusion in the base year survey, whether or not they actually participated, had a chance of being included in the first follow-up survey.

Conducted during the spring and summer of 1984, the second follow-up survey retained probability samples of about 15,000 1980 sophomores and 12,000 1980 seniors. The sample for the senior cohort was unchanged from that used for the first follow-up survey, while the sample for the sophomore cohort was selected from among the 18,500 cases selected in 1982 for the High School Transcripts study. The sample design for the sophomore cohort was modelled after that used for the first and subsequent follow-ups of the senior cohort, in that subgroups of special relevance to education policy formation (high school dropouts from the sophomore cohort, members of racial and ethnic minorities, those with data from the base year Parents Survey, those enrolled in postsecondary educational institutions, and so forth) were retained in the second follow-up with substantially higher probabilities than others.  However, all individuals selected for the base year survey had a nonzero chance of retention in the second follow-up, regardless of whether they participated in the base year or first follow-up surveys.

The senior and sophomore cohort samples for the third follow-up survey were the same as those used for the second follow-up. Again, survey activities were initiated for all sample members.

The fourth follow-up sample of the sophomore cohort contained the same 15,000 members as
the second and third follow-up surveys, and attempts were made to contact all but 56 deceased sample members.

14,670 students were in the sample in all 5 waves.

Incentives   Schools were sent reimbursement vouchers to cover the costs of reproducing student transcripts.  During FU1, school leavers were offered monetary incentives for participation ($5 for filling out the follow-up questionnaire and $10 for taking the test), and were reimbursed (up to $10) for travel expenses to and from the survey sites.  Respondents from the senior cohort were sent incentive checks for an unknown amount with the self-administered mail-back questionnaire during FU1.  During subsequent follow-ups as well,, unknown monetary incentives were sent with self-administered mail-back questionnaires to all sample members.

Response rates   School nonresponse rate for the study was about 30%. Public schools had higher response rates than private and parochial schools.

Unlike "refusal" schools, nonparticipating students were not dropped from the sample; they remained eligible for selection into the follow-up samples. Base year student response rate was 92.8%. FU1 student response rate was 95.3%. FU2 student response rate was 92.5%. FU3 student response rate was 90.8%. FU4 student response rate was 86.2%. These response rates are calculated based on the 14,670 students who were in the sample for all five study years.  Overall, student response rate was 71.8% (% eligible who participated in ALL five rounds).   See table on page 33 of Fourth Follow-up Methodology Report for the source of these figures.

For 4^th follow-up, the highest nonresponse rates occur in the West (16.3%) and the Northeast (16.1%). The lowest nonresponse rates occur among participants who had been students in the North Central region (10.9%). Non-response was positively correlated with urbanization. Students at schools with a large percentage of Blacks (>=25 %) showed somewhat higher rates of nonresponse than students at schools with fewer Blacks.  Student nonresponse is also positively correlated with school size.

For 4^th follow-up, non-response by race: White 10.1%, Black 20.6%, Hispanic 19.4%, Other/unknown 40.3%; non-response by SES quartile: 9.5% top quartile, 11.7% middle two, 14.7% lowest, 38.8% of other/unknown. Students who had no postsecondary education (by the time of the second follow-up) had higher rates of nonresponse (14.3%) than students with only vocational postsecondary education (9.2%) or other postsecondary education (8.1%).

For the post-secondary transcript study (1992-93) response rates varied by institution type from 50.4% at private, for-profit institutions to 95.1% at public, 4-year institutions; 80.8% overall. The response rate by students reporting postsecondary attendance was 93.2% (with at least one transcript).

*Note:  much of the material on this page is taken directly from the High School and Beyond Fourth Follow-Up Methodology Report.

Data availability   Basic descriptive statistics can be obtained by using the NCES Data Analysis System.  For the full dataset, users must apply for a restricted data license from NCES.

 
Data Analysis System (DAS)

The Data Analysis System (DAS) is a Windows software application that provides public access to NCES survey data. With the DAS, users can generate tables of percentages, means, or correlation coefficients simply by choosing the DAS variables (based on survey questionnaire items) that they would like to appear in a table and indicating what function should be used. Users specify the information they would like to appear in a table by creating a table parameter file (TPF) and sending the TPF to the NCES DAS Web site. The Web site will process the TPF and generate the table in the form of a PRN file. The PRN file provides the table numbers (usually percentages of students) and the corresponding standard errors that have been calculated taking into account the complex sampling procedures used in the NCES surveys.

If you would like to be linked to the DAS Web site to obtain more information or to download a DAS, please click here.

Restricted data licenses

First, verify whether your organization already has a restricted data license; and if so, the license number, to whom it was issued, the purpose of the research, and for which NCES datasets(s) it is valid. One can find this out from the contact person listed below.

If your organization does not have a restricted data license already, you will need to review the procedures described in "NCES' Restricted-Use Data Procedures Manual".  If your organization has a valid restricted data license, at the very least you will need to have it amended to add any additional datasets or to add your name as an authorized user of the data. Other requirements are described below.

To obtain a restricted data license (or to amend an existing license), one must send a letter addressed to the NCES Data Security Office, formally requesting the data. The mailing address is as follows:
 

Data Security Office
Department of Education/NCES/ODC
1990 K Street NW, Room 9061
Washington, D.C. 20006


In that letter, you will need to include the following:

1.The license number you wish to amend
2.The name of the dataset(s) you wish to use
3.The purpose for the loan of the data
4.The length of time you will need the data
5.The computer security plan you will follow
6.The list of authorized users
7.An affidavit of nondisclosure for each person, promising to keep the data completely confidential.


If you are amending an existing license and if your purpose is a continuation of the project that was approved originally, you may be able to omit (or condense) the abstract of your research design, but it must be specific enough to justify using the raw data. Similarly, if you plan to use the same computer(s) as the person(s) who are already licensed users, you may be able to update the computer security plan previously approved. Please be sure to follow the computer security plan carefully as spot site inspections do occur.

In the case of postsecondary institutions, only faculty can serve as the primary project officer. Graduate students may be listed as authorized users only.  For more information, contact:
 

Cynthia L. Barton
Data Security Assistant
Phone: (202) 502-7307
E-mail: Cynthia_Barton@ed.gov


*Note: the information in the data availability section is taken directly from the High School and Beyond Overview web-page: http://www.nces.ed.gov/surveys/hsb/ and from the NCES restricted data license page: http://www.nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/licenses.asp

For more information on High School and Beyond, contact:

 
Aurora D'Amico
Phone:(202) 502-7334
Email: Aurora_D'Amico@ed.gov
Web-site:  http://www.nces.ed.gov/surveys/hsb/

Funding and administration NELS:88 was sponsored by the National Center for Education Statistics, Department of Defense, National Science Foundation, Department of Health and Human Services and other U.S. Education Department offices. The Office of Bilingual Education and Minority Language Affairs and the Office for Civil Rights (OCR) within the Department of Education provided additional support for the Hispanic supplement. The survey firm was the National Opinion Research Center (NORC) at the University of Chicago.

References

Zahs, D., Pedlow, S., Morrissey, M., Marnell, P., Nichols, B. 1995. High School and Beyond Fourth Follow-Up Methodology Report. Prepared by the National Opinion Research Center for the National Center for Education Statistics.

Other HS&B publications are available here.

Citation

Modi, Manisha.  "High School and Beyond."  Surveys measuring well-being.  9/14/00.  Internet document: http://www.wws.princeton.edu/~kling/surveys/HSB.htm
 
 

Return to main Surveys Measuring Well-Being page