|
|
Dropout
References
Studies that fall outside the Dropout Prevention protocol or do not meet evidence standards
Aron, L. Y., & Barnow, B. S. (1994, May). Evaluation of New York City’s class of 1992 I Have A Dream program. Washington, DC: The Urban Institute and Johns Hopkins University. The study is ineligible for review because it does not use a comparison group.
Byrne, P. J. (2001). The educational effectiveness of the Albany I Have A Dream program (New York) (Doctoral dissertation, State University of New York at Albany, 2001). Dissertation Abstracts International, 62(04A), 73–1322. The study does not meet WWC evidence standards because the intervention and comparison groups are not shown to be equivalent at baseline.
Coons, C. A., & Petrick, E. W. (1992). A decade of making dreams into reality: Lessons from the I Have A Dream program. Yale Law & Policy Review, 10(1), 82–103. The study is ineligible for review because it does not examine the effectiveness of an intervention.
Davis, A. E., Hyatt, G., & Arrasmith, D. (1998). I Have A Dream program—class one evaluation report. Portland, OR: Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory. The study does not meet WWC evidence standards because the intervention and comparison groups are not shown to be equivalent at baseline.
Herman, J. L., & Muñoz, J. S. (1995). Review and evaluation of I Have A Dream—Los Angeles group 8. Los Angeles, CA: UCLA Center for the Study of Evaluation. The study does not meet WWC evidence standards because the intervention and comparison groups are not shown to be equivalent at baseline.
Higgins, C., Furano, K., Toso, C., & Branch, A. Y. (1992). I Have A Dream in Washington, DC: Initial report. Philadelphia, PA: Public/Private Ventures. The study is ineligible for review because it does not include an outcome within a domain specified in the protocol.
Kahne, J., & Bailey, K. (1999). The role of social capital in youth development: The case of I Have A Dream programs. Educational Evaluation & Policy Analysis, 21(3), 321–343. The study does not meet WWC evidence standards because the intervention and comparison groups are not shown to be equivalent at baseline.
Additional Sources:
Kahne, J. (1999). Personalized philanthropy: Can it support youth and build civic commitments? Youth & Society, 30(3), 367–387.
Kuboyama, E. M. (2000). East Palo Alto I Have A Dream program evaluation report. Stanford, CA: Stanford University, School of Education. The study does not meet WWC evidence standards because the intervention and comparison groups are not shown to be equivalent at baseline.
Levine, A., & Nidiffer, J. (1996). Beating the odds: How the poor get into college. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Inc. The study is ineligible for review because it is not a primary analysis of the effectiveness of an intervention.
Maria, K. (2001). The I Have A Dream project, Mount Vernon, NY: 1987–1997. Unpublished manuscript. The study is ineligible for review because it does not use a comparison group.
McGrath, R., & Hayman, J. (1997). The Paterson, New Jersey I Have A Dream program: Academic performance and outcomes. Teaneck, NJ: Fairleigh Dickinson University, School of Psychology. The study does not meet WWC evidence standards because the measures of effect cannot be attributed solely to the intervention—there was only one unit of assignment in one or both conditions.
Shoemaker, M. (1997). Delivering on a promise: An evaluation of the I Have A Dream Foundation. Pasadena, CA: “I Have A Dream” Foundation—Pasadena. The study is ineligible for review because it does not include an outcome within a domain specified in the protocol.
Strusinski, M. (1997, June). Evaluation of the I Have A Dream project. Miami, FL: Dade County Public Schools, ED 421 502. The study is ineligible for review because it does not use a sample within the age or grade range specified in the protocol.
Torres, J. S., Weichun, W., & Blank, R. (1990). Three years later: An evaluation and follow-up of the impact of the I Have A Dream program on participating students from 1986–1989. Office of Research, Evaluation, and Assessment, New York City Board of Education. The study does not meet WWC evidence standards because the estimates of effects did not account for differences in pre-intervention characteristics while using a quasi-experimental design.