Search results

This project utilizes secondary data analysis of existing data. Recognizing that the school discipline and juvenile justice experience of immigrants may differ from non-immigrant children, the project explores the role immigration status and border location has on these outcomes.

The purpose of this project was to measure and estimate the distribution of personal income and related economic factors in both rural and urban areas of the People's Republic of China. The principal investigators based their definition of income on cash payments and on a broad range of additional components. Data were collected through a series of questionnaire-based interviews conducted in rural and urban areas at the end of 2002. There are ten separate datasets. The first four datasets were derived from the urban questionnaire. The first contains data about individuals living in urban areas. The second contains data about urban households. The third contains individual-level economic variables copied from the initial urban interview form. The fourth contains household-level economic variables copied from the initial urban interview form. The fifth dataset contains village-level data, which was obtained by interviewing village leaders. The sixth contains data about individuals living in rural areas. The seventh contains data about rural households, as well as most of the data from a social network questionnaire which was presented to rural households. The eighth contains the rest of the data from the social network questionnaire and is specifically about the activities of rural school-age children. The ninth dataset contains data about individuals who have migrated from rural to urban areas, and the tenth dataset contains data about rural-urban migrant households. Dataset 1 contains 151 variables and 20,632 cases (individual urban household members). Dataset 2 contains 88 variables and 6,835 cases (urban households). Dataset 3 contains 44 variables and 27,818 cases, at least 6,835 of which are empty cases used to separate households in the file. The remaining cases from dataset 3 match those in dataset 1. Dataset 4 contains 212 variables and 6,835 cases, which match those in dataset 2. Dataset 5 contains 259 variables and 961 cases (villages). Dataset 6 contains 84 variables and 37,969 cases (individual rural household members). Dataset 7 contains 449 variables and 9,200 cases (rural households). Dataset 8 contains 38 variables and 8,121 cases (individual school-age children). Dataset 9 contains 76 variables and 5,327 cases (individual rural-urban migrant household members). Dataset 10 contains 129 variables and 2,000 cases (rural-urban migrant households).

The Chinese Household Income Project collected data in 1988, 1995, 2002, and 2007. ICPSR holds data from the first three collections, and information about these can be found on the series description page. Data collected in 2007 are available through the China Institute for Income Distribution.

This study, Evaluation of an Intensive Truancy Reduction Program (ACT) within Communities In Schools, is a within-school, student-level randomized controlled trial evaluation of an intensive truancy reduction program (ACT) through Communities In Schools (CIS), within five schools in a large urban district in the Southwest. CIS has adapted the CIS Core model for case management (Core) with an adaption of a community-based psychiatric rehabilitation treatment model and named the new model ACT.

The three-year longitudinal study, conducted during the 2016/17 - 2018/19 school years, included 2,136 6-8th grade students (1,152 ACT students and 984 Core students). Data was collected including student demographic information, implementation fidelity information, as well as baseline and outcome data related to student attendance, behavior, standardized test scores and on-track to graduate status (when applicable). Fidelity information includes the number of received CIS services by service type and overall total number of services as well as total hours of CIS services provided by student.

City Year is an education and human development organization that partners with schools nationwide to support student success and address the root causes of inequitable educational outcomes. Every year, City Year recruits a diverse group of AmeriCorps members, ages 18-25, to deliver its holistic Whole School Whole Child (WSWC) model. The corps members commit to serving as "Student Success Coaches" in schools full time for one school year. During that time, they provide universal holistic services to all students (Tier 1 services), as well as targeted academic, social and emotional, behavior, and attendance services to students at increased risk of not graduating based on early warning indicators (Tier 2 services).

In 2017, the American Institutes for Research (AIR) and MDRC began a five-year evaluation of WSWC services in 22 middle schools in five large, urban school districts. The evaluation includes two impact studies. The first study explored the implementation and effects of the entire WSWC model (Tier 1 and Tier 2 services) for all students, using a quasi-experimental study design ("Whole School Study"). The second study attempted to isolate the effect of Tier 2 services for students who were identified as being at heightened risk of dropping out of school, using a student-level randomized experiment ("Tier 2 Study").

This data collection features data from the first study.

Across the United States (U.S.), school districts have grappled with how to create safe community- and achievement-oriented schools and how to ensure the necessary discipline is applied transparently, fairly, and without bias. Two programs that many schools have turned to in order to achieve these goals are Schoolwide Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports (PBIS) and Restorative Justice (RJ). PBIS is an evidence-driven schoolwide behavioral management approach that aims to outline clear expectations for students and to cultivate shared norms and practices across classrooms and school spaces. PBIS has become a popular approach in schools and districts: as of 2020; over 19,000 schools in the U.S. have implemented PBIS.

A second program, Restorative Justice (RJ), has grown in popularity in recent years. RJ typically focuses on restorative relationship building between affected parties, peaceful reconciliation, and non-punitive approaches to rectifying harm, using a structured circle discussion format. RJ schools use both community circles, designed to build a safe space for students and staff to share and listen to each other, and restorative circles, designed to share perspectives on and redress a behavioral issue.

Working with a large school district in a mid-Atlantic state, researchers set out to test whether these two programs substitute for or complement each other. In partnership with the school district researchers conducted two separate school-level randomized controlled trials (RCTs). The first RCT (RCT 1) sought to uncover the marginal impact of RJ by adding the program to a set of randomly selected schools that were already implementing PBIS. The second RCT (RCT 2) was designed to discover the impact of introducing both programs together into schools that had neither program at baseline. Researchers conducted student and staff surveys to collect measures of school climate, teacher logs to record program implementation, and researchers also received administrative data from the district on student test scores, teacher and student absences, student disciplinary infractions, and school costs.

There is growing evidence of the effectiveness of each of these programs in isolation. A recent meta-analysis of 32 experimental and quasi-experimental impact studies of PBIS found that PBIS reduced disciplinary exclusions and problem behavior and increased academic achievement. The findings were statistically significant and showed small to medium effect sizes. Individual studies have found that PBIS reduces the use of office disciplinary referrals and other exclusionary disciplinary measures (including the use of in-school and out-of-school suspensions), while improving student behavior and attitudes across school levels. Individual studies show variable--some statistically significant and some null--impacts on academic outcomes.

The empirical evidence on the effect of RJ in U.S. schools is more limited, with little rigorous casual evidence published to date. Based on patterns across rigorous and non-rigorous research, restorative justice is associated with decreases in suspension rates and disciplinary disparities, improved student behavior, and improved school climate and relationships.

Bullying, fighting, and other forms of interpersonal violence occur frequently in elementary schools, and are associated with student distress, poor school functioning, and increases in aggression, delinquency, and other behavior problems. Positive Behavioral Intervention and Supports (PBIS) is a holistic, multi-tiered, evidence-based approach for preventing and reducing aggression and other problem behavior in school. However, the majority of PBIS schools struggle with more intensive interventions, which many students who present aggressive and disruptive behaviors need. School mental health (SMH) offers promise for addressing these limitations in PBIS. However, SMH lacks an implementation structure and as a result a student must effectively be at a crisis level to be referred for services. Because PBIS and SMH have operated separately, the impacts of both initiatives have been limited.

To address these limitations, the Interconnected Systems Framework (ISF) has been developed by leaders from national centers for both initiatives, providing specific guidance on PBIS-SMH interconnection through effective teams, data-based decision making, implementation support for evidence-based practices, and ongoing quality improvement to assure responsiveness to school and student needs. Involving partnerships with school districts and community mental health agencies in two school districts located in South Carolina and Florida, 24 schools implementing PBIS with fidelity were randomly assigned to the three conditions: the ISF, PBIS and SMH, or PBIS alone (8 schools per condition). Data were collected from school records, teacher and student reports, and school implementation teams. The impacts of ISF were compared to the other two conditions on school climate and safety, student exposure to violence, problem behavior and discipline problems, and access to and quality of services.

Downloads of Add Health require submission of the following information, which is shared with the original producer of Add Health: supervisor name, supervisor email, and reason for download. A Data Guide for this study is available as a web page and for download.

The National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent to Adult Health (Add Health), 1994-2018 [Public Use] is a longitudinal study of a nationally representative sample of U.S. adolescents in grades 7 through 12 during the 1994-1995 school year. The Add Health cohort was followed into young adulthood with four in-home interviews, the most recent conducted in 2008 when the sample was aged 24-32. Add Health combines longitudinal survey data on respondents' social, economic, psychological, and physical well-being with contextual data on the family, neighborhood, community, school, friendships, peer groups, and romantic relationships.

Add Health Wave I data collection took place between September 1994 and December 1995, and included both an in-school questionnaire and in-home interview. The in-school questionnaire was administered to more than 90,000 students in grades 7 through 12, and gathered information on social and demographic characteristics of adolescent respondents, education and occupation of parents, household structure, expectations for the future, self-esteem, health status, risk behaviors, friendships, and school-year extracurricular activities. All students listed on a sample school's roster were eligible for selection into the core in-home interview sample. In-home interviews included topics such as health status, health-facility utilization, nutrition, peer networks, decision-making processes, family composition and dynamics, educational aspirations and expectations, employment experience, romantic and sexual partnerships, substance use, and criminal activities. A parent, preferably the resident mother, of each adolescent respondent interviewed in Wave I was also asked to complete an interviewer-assisted questionnaire covering topics such as inheritable health conditions, marriages and marriage-like relationships, neighborhood characteristics, involvement in volunteer, civic, and school activities, health-affecting behaviors, education and employment, household income and economic assistance, parent-adolescent communication and interaction, parent's familiarity with the adolescent's friends and friends' parents.

Add Health data collection recommenced for Wave II from April to August 1996, and included almost 15,000 follow-up in-home interviews with adolescents from Wave I. Interview questions were generally similar to Wave I, but also included questions about sun exposure and more detailed nutrition questions. Respondents were asked to report their height and weight during the course of the interview, and were also weighed and measured by the interviewer.

From August 2001 to April 2002, Wave III data were collected through in-home interviews with 15,170 Wave I respondents (now 18 to 26 years old), as well as interviews with their partners. Respondents were administered survey questions designed to obtain information about family, relationships, sexual experiences, childbearing, and educational histories, labor force involvement, civic participation, religion and spirituality, mental health, health insurance, illness, delinquency and violence, gambling, substance abuse, and involvement with the criminal justice system. High School Transcript Release Forms were also collected at Wave III, and these data comprise the Education Data component of the Add Health study.

Wave IV in-home interviews were conducted in 2008 and 2009 when the original Wave I respondents were 24 to 32 years old. Longitudinal survey data were collected on the social, economic, psychological, and health circumstances of respondents, as well as longitudinal geographic data. Survey questions were expanded on educational transitions, economic status and financial resources and strains, sleep patterns and sleep quality, eating habits and nutrition, illnesses and medications, physical activities, emotional content and quality of current or most recent romantic/cohabiting/marriage relationships, and maltreatment during childhood by caregivers. Dates and circumstances of key life events occurring in young adulthood were also recorded, including a complete marriage and cohabitation history, full pregnancy and fertility histories from both men and women, an educational history of dates of degrees and school attendance, contact with the criminal justice system, military service, and various employment events, including the date of first and current jobs, with respective information on occupation, industry, wages, hours, and benefits. Finally, physical measurements and biospecimens were also collected at Wave IV, and included anthropometric measures of weight, height and waist circumference, cardiovascular measures such as systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure, and pulse, metabolic measures from dried blood spots assayed for lipids, glucose, and glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c), measures of inflammation and immune function, including High sensitivity C-reactive protein (hsCRP) and Epstein-Barr virus (EBV).

Wave V data collection took place from 2016 to 2018, when the original Wave I respondents were 33 to 43 years old. For the first time, a mixed mode survey design was used. In addition, several experiments were embedded in early phases of the data collection to test response to various treatments. A similar range of data was collected on social, environmental, economic, behavioral, and health circumstances of respondents, with the addition of retrospective child health and socio-economic status questions. Physical measurements and biospecimens were again collected at Wave V, and included most of the same measures as at Wave IV.

The overall goal of Wave VI was to better understand life course trajectories, determinants, and consequences of critical dimensions of aging, health, and health disparities among U.S. early midlife adults. Data collection took place from 2022 to 2025, with participants between the ages of 39 and 51, with an average age of 44. Beyond longitudinal survey measures, newly added questions included those on cumulative stress, discrimination, despair, work-life balance, memory, physical limitations, and caregiving. Continuing from previous waves, home exams collected physical measurements and biospecimens with most of the same measures as Wave V.

The National Survey of American Life Adolescent Supplement (NSAL-A), 2001-2004, was designed to estimate the lifetime-to-date and current prevalence, age-of-onset distributions, course, and comorbidity of DSM-IV disorders among African American and Caribbean adolescents in the United States; to identify risk and protective factors for the onset and persistence of these disorders; to describe patterns and correlates of service use for these disorders; and to lay the groundwork for subsequent follow-up studies that can be used to identify early expressions of adult mental disorders. In addition and similar to the NSAL adult dataset (Collaborative Psychiatric Epidemiology Surveys (CPES), 2001-2003 [United States] (ICPSR 20240)), the adolescent dataset contains detailed measures of health; social conditions; stressors; distress; racial identity; subjective, neighborhood conditions; activities and school; media; and social and psychological protective and risk factors. Numerous variables from the adult dataset have been merged into the adolescent dataset, as the NSAL adult and adolescent respondents reside in the same households. Some of these variables apply to the entire household (i.e. region, urbanicity, and family income), while others apply specifically to the NSAL adult respondent living in the adolescent's household (i.e. adult years of education, adult marital status, and adult nativity [foreign-born vs. US born]). The immigration measures were asked of Caribbean black adult respondents only. No comparable measures assess the immigration and generational status of the Caribbean black adolescent respondents. The adult dataset measures are merged into the adolescent dataset to assist in approximating these measures for adolescent respondents. The NSAL adolescent dataset also includes variables for other non-core and experimental disorders. These include tobacco use/nicotine dependence, premenstrual syndrome, minor depression, recurrent brief depression, hypomania, and hypomania sub-threshold. Demographic variables include age, race and ethnicity, ancestry or national origins, height, weight, marital status, income, and education level.