Dropout Rates in the United States: 1994
Definition of Who Is a Dropout
There are variations in the dropout definitions in the existing data sources, including the Current Population Survey (CPS), the High School and Beyond Study (HS&B), and the National Education Longitudinal Study of 1988 (NELS:88). In addition, the age or grade span examined and the type of dropout ratestatus, event, or cohortvaries across the data sources. Furthermore, there were potentially significant changes in CPS procedures in 1986, 1992, and 1994.
The new collection through the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) Common Core of Data (CCD) is designed to be consistent with the current CPS procedures. However, the CCD will include all dropouts in grades 7 through 12 versus only grades 10 through 12 in CPS, will be based on administrative records rather than a household survey as in CPS, and will count as dropouts anyone receiving a GED outside of a regular (approved) secondary education program as opposed to the CPS approach of counting GED certificate holders as high school completers.
One of the concerns addressed in the new National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) Common Core of Data (CCD) data collection on dropouts is the development and implementation of a nationally consistent definition of a dropout to be used in school districts and state departments of education. Currently, there is considerable variation across local, state, and federal data collections on such issues as:
There will, no doubt, be some discontinuities in dropout reporting as the new and more consistent data become available.
Defining and Calculating Event Dropout Rates Using the CCD
The Common Core of Data (CCD) administered by NCES is an annual survey of the state-level education agencies in the 50 states, the District of Columbia, and the outlying areas. Statistical information is collected on public schools, staff, students, and finance.
A dropout data collection component was field tested during the 1989-90 school year. The participants were in approximately 300 school districts that included representatives from 27 states and two territories. The data were gathered through administrative records maintained ar school districts and schools. The field test data were used to inform the design of a dropout statistics component for CCD.
In the CCD dropout data collection the event of dropping out is the focus of the collection. A school dropout is defined as an individual who was enrolled in school at some time during the previous year, was not enrolled at the beginning of the current school year, had not graduated from high school or completed an approved educational program, and did not meet any of the following exclusionary conditions:
For the purpose of this definition:
This new collection was initiated with a set of instructions to state CCD coordinators in the summer of 1991. Those instructions specified the details of dropout data to be collected during the 1991-92 school year. Dropouts, like graduates, are reported for the preceding school year. The 1991-92 data were submitted to NCES as a component of the 1992-93 CCD data collection. More recently, the 1992-93 date were submitted as a component of the 1993-94 CCD.
There were 15 states that reported 1991-92 data that are consistent with the specified definition. State data submissions for the 1993-94 CCD show that xx states submitted dropout data for 1992-93, and in 18 of the states the data are consistent with the specified definition.
Defining and Calculating Dropout Rates Using the CPS
Event Rates
The October Supplement to the CPS is the only current national data source that can be used to estimate annual national dropout rates. As a measure of recent dropout experiences, the event rate measures the proportion of students who dropped out over a one year interval of time.
The numerator of the event rate for 1994 is the number of persons 15 through 24 years old surveyed in 1994 who were enrolled in high school in October 1993, were not enrolled in high school (grades 1012) in October 1994, and who also did not complete high school (that is, had not received a high school diploma or an equivalency certificate) between October 1993 and October 1994.
The denominator of the event rate is the sum of the dropouts (that is, the numerator) and the number of all persons 15 through 24 years old who attended grades 10, 11, and 12 last year who are still enrolled or who graduated or completed high school last year.
The dropout interval is defined to include the previous summer and the current school year; so that once a grade is completed, the student is then at risk of dropping out of the next grade. Given that the data collection is tied to each young adult's enrollment status in October of two consecutive years, any students who drop out and return within the 12-month period are not counted as dropouts.
Status Rates
The status dropout rate is a cumulative rate that estimates the proportion of young adults who are dropouts, regardless of when they dropped out.
The numerator of the status rate for 1994 is the number of young adults ages 16 through 24 who, as of October 1994, have not completed high school and are not currently enrolled. The denominator is the total number of 16 through 24 year olds in October 1994.
CPS Design
CPS is a nationally representative sample survey of all households. The survey is conducted in approximately 60,000 dwelling units in 729 primary sampling units. Dwelling units are in-sample for four successive monthly interviews, out-of-sample for the next 8 months, and then returned to the sample for the following four months. The sample frame is a complete list of dwelling-unit addresses at the Census updated by demolitions and new construction and field listings. The population surveyed excludes members of the Armed Forces, inmates of correctional institutions, and patients in long-term medical or custodial facilities; it is referred to as the civilian, non-institutionalized population. Typically, about 4 percent of dwelling units are not interviewed, because occupants are not at home after repeated callbacks, or for some other reason.
An adult member of each household serves as the informant for that household, supplying data for each member of the household. In addition, supplementary questions regarding school enrollment are asked about eligible household members 3 years old and over. Some interviews are conducted by phone using computer assisted telephone interviewing.
CPS Dropout Data Collection
CPS data on educational attainment and enrollment status in the current year and prior year are used to identify dropouts; and additional CPS data are used to describe some basic characteristics of dropouts. The CPS provides the only source of national time series data on dropout rates. However, because CPS collects no information on school characteristics and experiences, its uses in addressing dropout issues are primarily for providing some insights into who dropouts. In addition, the sample design of the CPS yields estimates for Hispanics that tend to have large standard errors which make it difficult to understand patterns in Hispanic dropout rates.
Changes Introduced in 1986
In an effort to improve data quality, in 1986 the Bureau of Census instituted new editing procedures for cases with missing data on school enrollment items. The effect of the editing changes were evaluated for data from 1986 by applying both the old and new editing procedures. The result was an increase in the number of students enrolled in school and decrease the number of students enrolled last year but not enrolled in the current year. The new editing procedures lowered, but not significantly, the 1986 event rate for grades 10-12, ages 14 through 24, by about 0.4 percentage points, from 4.69 to 4.28. The changes in the editing procedures made even less of a difference in the status dropout rates for 16- through 24-year olds (12.2 percent based on the old procedures and 12.1 percent based on the new.
Changes Introduced in 1992
Prior to 1992, educational attainment was based on the control card questions on highest grade attended and completed. Identification as a high school graduate was derived based on attendance and completion of grade 12.
The control card items used to identify educational attainment were:
The last redesign of the CPS introduced a change in the data used to identify high school completers. Dropout data from the CPS year are now based on a combination of control card data on educational attainment and October Supplement data on school enrollment and educational attainment. In 1992 the Census Bureau changed the items on the control card which measured each individual's educational attainment.
The new control card educational attainment item is as follows:
The October CPS Supplement items used to identify dropouts include the following:
Educational attainment status is based on the response to the control card item. The following response categories are used for high school:
Students who last attended the 9th, 10th, or 11th grades are assumed to have dropped out in the next grade after the highest grade they reported completing.
The following response categories are used to identify high school completers:
Although the response categories are not automatically read to each respondent, they can be used as a prompt to help clarify the meaning of a question or a response. Identification as a high school completer is based on this direct response.
Differences in the pre- and post-1992 methods of identifying high school completers come from the observation that not all 12th grade completers receive a high school diploma or equivalent, and not all holders of a high school diploma or certificate complete the 12th grade. These differences have an impact on the numbers and proportions of event and status dropouts.
In the case of the event rate, in prior years students who completed 12th grade and left school without graduation or certification were counted as completers when they were in fact dropouts. On the other hand, students who left school because they completed high school before the 12th grade were identified as dropouts when they were really early completers. The current use of actual graduation or completion status includes the first group as dropouts and the second group as completers.
The event dropout rate now includes the 12th graders who did not receive a credential of some sort in the numerator count of dropouts and the early completers are subtracted from the numerator. The denominator is not changed. The net effect of this change is small, resulting in an increase in the aggregate event dropout rate that is not significant.
The status rate involves a third group of students who were miscoded prior to 1992. These students leave high school before completing the 12th grade, never complete the 12th grade, but later graduate or complete high school by some alternative means, such as an equivalency exam. Prior to 1992 these young adults were coded as dropouts. Since 1992 members of this group have been coded as graduates or completers. Furthermore, the explicit inclusion of high school graduation or completion, including the GED (e.g. GED" as a response category may have increased the likelihood of identifying late completers.
Under the current procedures the 12th graders who do not complete high school or the equivalent are added to the numerator of the status dropout rate and early and late completers are subtracted from the numerator. The denominator is not changed. These changes, especially the identification and removal of late completers from the dropout count, may have contributed to a decrease in the status dropout rate.
One exception to these procedures is the categorization of special education students. In principle, efforts are made by the Census Bureau to identify special education students in special schools and treat them as not enrolled. However, if special education students are not identified, they may be reported as completing 12th grade with no diploma. They will, by definition, be counted as dropouts.
Changes Introduced in 1994
During the 1994 data collection and processing two additional changes were implemented in the CPS. Computer assisted telephone interviewing was introduced, resulting in higher completion rates for each individual data item and thus less reliance on allocation of missing responses. If the allocation procedures yielded a distribution different from the 1994 reported patterns, there is the potential for a change in the distribution of the high school completion status.
In fact, when the unweighted frequency distribution for the number of status dropouts in each race/ethnicity group in 1994 is compared to the distribution in 1993, the largest change is evident for the Hispanic groupwhere the unweighted number of dropouts increased by 9 percent between 1993 and 1994. By comparison the unweighted dropout counts for whites decreased by 5 percent and the unweighted dropout count for blacks decreased by 11 percent. These changes translate into a small decrease in the percent of all 1994 dropouts who were white or black and a three percentage point increase in the percent of all 1994 dropouts who were Hispanic (see following table).
Table B1-Number and percent of persons, ages 16-24: October 1993 and
October 1994
Table B2-Number and percent of status dropouts, ages 16-24: October 1993 and
October 1994
In 1994 there were also changes introduced in the processing and computing phase of data preparation. The benchmarking year for these survey estimates was changed from the 1980 Census to the 1990 Census, and adjustments for undercount were included. Thus, any age, sex, or race/ethnicity groups that were found to be under-represented in the 1990 Census are given increased weights. This change especially effects the weights assigned to Hispanic young adults. These changes have the potential for impacting both the numerator and denominator of the dropouts rates.
Analyses of the weighted number of dropouts in each year by race/ethnicity show that the number of Hispanic dropouts increased by 34 percent between 1993 and 1994, while whites and blacks remained relatively stable. In terms of the resulting dropout distribution, the percent black is comparable in both 1993 and 1994, but the percent white decreased by 4 percentage points, and the percent Hispanic increased by over 6 percent.
Defining and Calculating High School Completion Rates Using the CPS
The educational attainment and high school completion status data from the October CPS are also used to measure the high school graduation and completion rates.
In prior years, completion rates have been reported in a series of separate two year age groups, but no overall rates comparable to the event and status dropout rates have been computed. The completion rate reported in this report is for the young adult population in the years beyond high schoolthat is, the 18- to 24-year old population. These rates are reported nationally by race-ethnicity and at the state level, three year moving averages are computed to yield more stable estimates.
As was noted in the text, the state completion rates reflect the experiences of the 18- to 24-year olds living in the state at the time of the interview; thus, movements in and out of states to accommodate employment and post-secondary education may be evident in some states. For example, a state with a relatively large unskilled labor workplace sector might have a lower high school completion rate than anticipated, due to an influx of young workers. Conversely, a state with a disproportionate number of colleges and universities might have a higher high school completion rate than anticipated, due to an influx of post-secondary students.
Definition of Family Income in CPS
Family income is derived from a single question asked of the household
respondent. Income includes money income from all sources including jobs,
business, interest, rent, social security payments, and so forth. The income of
nonrelatives living in the household is excluded, but the income of all family
members 14 years old and over, including those temporarily living away, is
included. Family income refers to receipts over a 12-month period.
Income for families from which no income information was obtained (about 5 percent of families) was imputed. A sequential hotdeck procedure was used. A total of 200 imputation classes were created5 levels of the age of head of household by 5 levels of the education of the head of household by 2 levels for the employment status of the head of household, and 4 levels of the number of workers in the household. To minimize the multiple use of a single donor, up to 5 donors were placed in each imputation class. A donor was selected at random from these when a family with missing income information was encountered. In a few instances (about 10 of 50,000 families in each year) an imputation class had no donors but a family from the class with missing income information was encountered. In these cases a donor was selected by collapsing similar classes until a nonempty imputation class was created.
To facilitate comparisons over time, the categorical family income information was transformed into a continuous family income variable. The transformation was accomplished by randomly assigning for each family an income value from the income interval to which their income belonged. For intervals below the median a rectangular probability density function was used; for those above the median a Pareto probability density function was used. The methodology has a feature that if the continuous family income variable were transformed back to a categorical family income variable, the value for each family would be identical to the original data. Based on the continuous family income variable, a family income percentile variable is calculated for each person in the survey which represents that person's position in the family income distribution. For example, if 25 percent of all persons have a lower value of family income (and 75 percent have a higher value), then the person's family income percentile variable has a value of 25. The methodology gives all persons in the same household the same value of both the categorical and continuous versions of family income. There are several issues that affect the interpretation of dropout rates by family income using the CPS. First, it is possible that the family income of the students at the time they dropped out was somewhat different than their current family income. (The problem is potentially greatest with status dropouts who could have dropped out several years ago.)
Furthermore, family income is from a single question asked of the household respondent in the October CPS. In some cases, there are persons 15 through 24 years old living in the household that are unrelated to the household respondent, yet whose family income is defined as the income of the family of the household respondent. Therefore, the current household income of the respondent may not accurately reflect that person's family background. In particular, in 1991 some of the dropouts in the 15- through 24-year age range were not still living in a family unit with a parent present. However, an analysis of 1991 status dropout rates by family income, raceethnicity, and family status (presence of parent in the household) indicates that the bias introduced by persons not living in their parent's household is small (table B2). For example, while only 62 percent of 16- through 24-year-olds lived with at least one parent, the status dropout rates for black and white persons were similar with or without the parent present. For example, 20.6 percent of low income blacks without a parent present were dropouts compared with 21.3 percent of those living in their parent's household. In addition, the relationship between dropout rates and income held within each racial category regardless of whether the person was living in a household with his or her parent. That is, blacks and whites within income levels dropped out at similar levelswith or without the parent present. However, this was not true of Hispanics. Hispanics in upper income levels not residing with either parent were more likely than upper income Hispanics with parents present to be status dropouts.
Table B3-Percentage of status dropouts by household type by race-ethnicity
and income: October 1992
Defining and Calculating Cohort Dropout Rates Using NELS:88
The NELS:88 baseline comprised a national probability sample of all regular public and private 8th-grade schools in the 50 states and District of Columbia in the 198788 school year. Excluded from the NELS:88 sample were Bureau of Indian Affairs schools, special education schools for the handicapped, area vocational schools that do not enroll students directly, and schools for dependents of U.S. personnel overseas; such school-level exclusions have a quite small impact on national estimates.
NELS:88 started with the base-year data collection in which students, parents, teachers, and school administrators were selected to participate in the survey. NELS:88 began with a target sample of 1,032 sample schools, of which 30 were deemed ineligible. Some 698 of the 1,002 eligible schools agreed to participate in the study. Given the longitudinal nature of the study, the initial school response rate of 69.7 percent was deemed too low to yield acceptable levels of schools, administrators, teachers, parents, and most importantly, students. To address this concern, a sample of sister schools was selected and 359 replacement schools were identified and added to the study. Responses were obtained from 1,057 schools, thus increasing the school response rate to 77.7 percent (1,057/(1,002+359)). Usable student data were received for 1,052 of the schools.
The total eighth-grade enrollment for the 1,052 NELS:88 sample schools was 202,996. During the listing procedures (before 24-26 students were selected per school), 5.35 percent of the students were excluded because they were identified by school staff as being incapable of completing the NELS:88 instruments owing to limitations in their language proficiency or to mental or physical disabilities. Ultimately, 93 percent or 24,599 of the sample students participated in the base-year survey in the spring of 1988.
The NELS:88 first follow-up survey was conducted in the spring of 1990. Students, dropouts, teachers, and school administrators participated in the followup, with a successful data collection effort for approximately 93 percent of the base-year student respondents. In addition, because the characteristics and education outcomes of the students excluded from the base year may differ from those of students who participated in the base-year data collection, a special study was initiated to identify the enrollment status of a representative sample of the base-year ineligible students. Data from this sample were then combined with first and second follow-up data for the computation of 8th- to 10th-grade, 10th- to 12th-grade, and 8th- to 12th-grade cohort dropout rates.
The second follow-up survey was conducted in the spring of 1992. Students, dropouts, parents, teachers, and school administrators participated in this followup. Approximately 91 percent of the sample of students participated in the second follow-up survey, with 88 percent of the dropouts responding.
The second follow-up High School Transcript Study was conducted in the Fall of 1992. Transcript data spanning the three or four years of high school (ninth or tenth through twelfth grades) were collected for 1) students attending, in the spring of 1992, schools sampled for the second follow-up school administrator and teacher surveys; 2) all dropouts and dropouts in alternative programs who had attended high school for a minimum of one term; 3) all early graduates, regardless of school contextual sample type; and 4) triple ineligibles enrolled in the twelfth grade in the spring of 1992, regardless of school affiliation. Triple ineligibles are sample members who were ineligibledue to mental or physical handicap or language barrierfor the base year, first follow-up, and second follow-up surveys. The transcript data collected from schools included student-level data (e.g., number of days absent per school year, standardized test scores) and complete course-taking histories. Complete high school course-taking records were, of course, obtained only for those transcript survey sample members who graduated by the end of the spring term of 1992; incomplete records were collected 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 twelve years of schooling.
A total of 1,287 contextual schools and 256 noncontextual schools responded to the request for transcripts. Reasons cited by school staff for not complying with the request included: inadequate permission for transcript release (some schools required parental permission for the release of minors' transcripts); no record of the sample, member, or no course-taking record because of brevity of enrollment; insufficient staff for transcript preparation (despite offers of remuneration for preparation costs); and archiving or transfer of sample member records. Student coverage rates were 89.5 percent for the total transcript sample and 74.2 percent for the dropout/alterative completers.
Missing from the cohort rates from NELS:88 is anyone who had dropped out prior to the spring of their eighth-grade year. Thus, the overall cohort rates reported here may be lower than they would have been if a younger cohort were used. This may be particularly important for Hispanics, given that CPS data show that Hispanic dropouts tend to have completed less schooling than other dropouts. The cohort rates also reflect the school enrollment status of both eligible and ineligible nonparticipants and participants, to the extent that this information could be obtained.
The following definition of a dropout was employed in NELS:88:
1. an individual who, according to the school (if the sample member could not be located), or according to the school and home, is not attending school (i.e., has not been in school for 4 consecutive weeks or more and is not absent due to accident or illness); or
2. a student who has been in school less than 2 weeks after a period in which he or she was classified as a dropout.
Thus, a student who was a temporary dropout (stopout) who was found by the study to be out of school for 4 consecutive school weeks or more and had returned to school (that is, had been back in school for a period of at least 2 weeks at the time of survey administration in the spring of 1990) would not be classified as a dropout for purposes of the cohort dropout rates reported here.
The basic NELS:88 procedure for identification of a dropout was to confirm school reported dropout status with the student's household. For the first followup, dropout status was obtained first from the school and then confirmed with the household for 96.4 percent of the dropouts. Thus only 3.6 percent of the dropouts were identified by only school-reported information. For the second followup, 4.9 percent of the dropouts were identified by only school-reported information.
The 1988-1990 dropout rate requires data from both 1988 and 1990. As a
result, the size of the sample used in computing the 1988 to 1990 rate is tied
to the size of the sample in 1990. Many students changed schools between 1988
and 1990. Because of the costs associated with following small numbers of
students to many schools, a subsampling operation was conducted at the time of
the first follow-up (figure B1). Of the 24,599 students who participated in
1988, 20,263 students were sampled, and 130 were found to be out of scope (due
to death or migration out of the country). The dropout rates from 1988-1990
reflect the experiences of 20,133 sample cases. Some 1,088 sample cases dropped
out and 19,045 sample cases continued in school.
The 1990-1992 rate starts from the 19,045 student sample cases. Some 91 of
the student sample cases from 1990 were identified as out of scope in 1992. The
dropout rates from 1990 to 1992 reflect the experiences of 18,954 student sample
cases.
The 1988-1992 rates reflect the experiences of the 20,070 student sample cases. These cases result from the 20,263 subsampled student cases in 1990, less the 92 cases that were out of scope in both 1990 and 1992, less the 91 students sample cases identified as out of scope in 1992, less the 10 dropout sample cases identified as out of scope in 1992. Note that 24 student sample cases who were out of the country in 1990 returned to school in the U.S. by spring 1992, and an additional 14 student sample cases who were out of the country in spring 1990 returned to the U.S. by spring 1992 but did not reenroll (dropouts). And, another 354 student sample cases who dropped out between 1988 and 1990 returned to school by spring 1992.
HS&B Calculation of Cohort Dropout Rates
In HS&B, students are reported as having either a regular diploma or some alternative credentialdescribed as the equivalent of a class of 1982 held alternative credentials by 1986 refers to a comparison of alternative completers with all regular diploma recipients. The estimates of a 16.6 percent dropout rate and an 8.2 percent alternative completion rate by 1986 are based on a comparison of online regular diploma recipients versus all other completers. The difference in the last two estimates is due to the fact that they are computed from two differently derived variables on the public use data files.
Variables Used in Comparison of HS&B and NELS:88
Listed below are the definitions for the poverty and family composition variables used in the section comparing 10th- to 12th-grade dropout rates in HS&B and NELS:88.
Poverty
HS&B
1. Below poverty line:
If family size (famsize) is 1 to 3 and family income (bb101) is $7,000 or
less or;
If family size is 4 to 6 and income is $11,999 or less or;
If family size is 7 or more and income is under $15,999
2. Not below poverty line:
All other cases.
NELS:88
Below poverty line:
If family size (byfamsize) is I or 2 and family income (byfaminc) is
$7,499 or less or;
If family size is 3 and family income is $9,999 or less or;
If family size is 4 or 5 and family income is $14,999 or less or;
If family size is 6 or 7 and family income is $19,999 or less or;
If family size is 8 and family income is $24,999 or less or;
If family size is 9 or more and family income is $34,999 or less;
Not below poverty line:
All other cases.
Family composition
HS&B
1. Intact:
If father in household (bb036b=l) and mother in HH (bb036d=l)
2. Parent plus step parent
If father not in HH (bb036b=0) and mother in HH (bb036d=l) and male
guardian in HH
(bb036c=l) or;
If mother not in HH (bb036d=0) and father in RH (bb036b=1) and female
guardian in HH (bb036e=l)
3. Single parent
If father is in HH (bb036b=l) and no other adult partner is in HH (bb036d
to bb036e=0) or;
If mother is in HH (bb036d=l) and not other adult partner is in HH (bb036b
to bbO36c=0)
4. Other
All other cases.
NELS:88
1. Intact:
If father in household (f1s92a=1) and mother in HH (f1s92d=1)
2. Parent plus step parent
If father not in HH (f1s92a=0) and mother in HH (f1s92d=1) and male
guardian or
stepfather in HH (f1s92c=1 or f1s92b=1) or;
If mother not in HH (f1s92d=0) and father in HH (f1s92a=1) and female
guardian or stepmother in HH (f1s92e=1 or f1s92f)
3. Single parent
If father is in HH (f1s92a=1) and no other adult partner is in HH (f1s92d
to f1s92f=0) or;
If mother is in HH (f1s92c=1) and no other adult partner is in HH (f1s92a
to f1s92c=0).
4. Other
All,other cases.
Variables used in NELS:88
High School Completion Status
1. High school graduate:
If individual has received a high school diploma (f3diplom=1);
2. Received alternative credential
If individual has received a GED (f3diplom=2) or received a certificate of
attendance (f3diplom=3);
3. Still enrolled in high school
If individual is currently in high school (f3diplom=4) or is working
toward an equivalent (f3diplom=5);
4. Dropout
If individual is not a graduate or GED/certificate holder (f3diplom = 6)
Postsecondary Enrollment Status
1. No postsecondary education
If no postsecondary enrollment (f3pseatn=0);
2. Enrolled in degree program
If no degree but in associate program (f3pseatn=2), or no degree but in
current bachelor program (f3pseatn=3), or hold associate degree (f3pseatn=6);
3. Certified or enrolled in certificate program
If currently in certificate/license program (f3pseatn=1) or hold
certificate or license (f3pseatn=5);
4. Other enrollment
If currently enrolled in some other postsecondary program (f3pseatn=4).
Employment and Education Status
1. Postsecondary education only
If traditional postsecondary education student (labfor93=1) or
postsecondary student not employed (labfor93=2);
2. Postsecondary education and work
If student is primarily a postsecondary education student (labfor93=3);
3. Employed only
If student is primarily employed (labfor93=4);
4. Unemployed
If student is employed 6+ months (labfor93=5) or employed 1-5 months
(labfor93=6);
5. Not in labor force
If student is unemployed and not a student (labfor93 = 7) or out of the
work force (labfor93 = 8).
1993 Income Level
1. Low income
If total 1993 earning is greater than or equal to $0 and less than or
equal to $4,000 (totlear2);
2. Low middle income
If total 1993 earning is greater than $4,000 and less than or equal to
$8,778;
3. High middle income
If total 1993 earning is greater than $8,778 and less than or equal to
$12,240;
4. High income
If total 1993 earning is greater than $12,240.
Timing of Birth
1. Prior to 8/92
Date of first birth prior to August 1992 (f3chlddt 9208);
2. After 8/92
Date of first birth in August 1992 or later (f3chlddt 9208).
Number of Children Born
1. None
If number of biological children equals zero (f3numchl = 0);
2. One
If number of biological children equals one (f3numchl = 1);
3. Two or more
If number of biological children equals two or more (f3numchl 2).
Marital Status
1. Ever married
If respondent was ever married (f3marst = 2), divorced or separated
(f3marst = 3), widowed (f3marst = 4), not married but living in a marriage-like
relationship (f3marst = 5), by time of fourth followup;
2. After 8/92
If respondent is single and was never married at time of fourth followup
(f3marst = 1);
Definition of Geographic Regions in CPS
There are four Census regions used in this report: Northeast, Midwest, South, and West. The Northeast consists of Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Rhode Island, New York, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania. The Midwest consists of Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Michigan, Wisconsin, Iowa, Minnesota, Missouri, North Dakota, South Dakota, Nebraska, and Kansas. The South consists of Delaware, Maryland, Washington D.C., Virginia, West Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, Florida, Kentucky, Tennessee, Alabama, Mississippi, Arkansas, Louisiana, Oklahoma, and Texas. The West consists of Montana, Idaho, Wyoming, Colorado, New Mexico, Arizona, Utah, Nevada, Washington, Oregon, California, Alaska, and Hawaii.
[Appendix B: Table 1]
