School, Individual and Item Nonresponse in the National Education Longitudinal Study of 1988 (NELS:88) Base Year Survey.

Autor/inn/en	Ingels, Steven J.; und weitere
Institution	National Opinion Research Center, Chicago, IL.
Titel	School, Individual and Item Nonresponse in the National Education Longitudinal Study of 1988 (NELS:88) Base Year Survey.
Quelle	(1989), (64 Seiten) PDF als Volltext kostenfreie Datei Verfügbarkeit
Sprache	englisch
Dokumenttyp	gedruckt; online; Monographie
Schlagwörter	Data Collection; Educational Assessment; Elementary Secondary Education; Estimation (Mathematics); Evaluation Methods; Grade 8; Longitudinal Studies; Middle Schools; National Surveys; Questionnaires; Research Methodology; Response Rates (Questionnaires); Sampling; School Surveys; Testing Problems + Suchen Sie Ihr Suchwort? Data capture; Datensammlung; Education; assessment; Bewertungssystem; Estimation; Mathematics; Schätzung; School year 08; 8. Schuljahr; Schuljahr 08; Longitudinal study; Longitudinal method; Longitudinal methods; Längsschnittuntersuchung; Middle school; Mittelschule; Mittelstufenschule; Fragebogen; Research method; Forschungsmethode; Antwortkontrolle
Abstract	Nonresponse issues are investigated for the base year (1988) survey of the United States Department of Education's National Education Longitudinal Study of 1988 (NELS:88), a national probability sample of middle schools and eighth-grade students in the spring of 1988. The total eighth-grade enrollment for the NELS:88 sample of schools was 203,002; of these, 10,583 students were excluded due to limitations in their language proficiency or to mental or physical disabilities. As in the 1980 High School and Beyond (HSB) Study, the NELS:88 sample included about 70% initial selections and 30% replacement schools. NELS:88 non-respondents were 51.96% male and 43.07% female, with the gender of 4.96% not indicated, while NELS:88 respondents were 49.8% male and 50.2% female. Part 1 of this paper gives a brief overview of the study and its sample design, and outlines the main non-response issues, namely: (1) school and individual ineligibility for the study; (2) unit non-response, i.e., the fact that some schools and individuals declined to participate; and (3) item non-response in the student questionnaires and cognitive tests. Part 2 describes the methodology used for adjusting school level non-response in the NELS:88. Actual estimators are given, along with a method for evaluating the estimators and a method for deriving the estimate of response propensities for each school. Part 3 reports the results of an item non-response analysis of the student questionnaire data and the cognitive tests. Some comparisons are offered with non-response in the first year of the HSB survey. (SLD)
Erfasst von	ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC