Taking stock of the California Linked Learning district initiative. Sixth-year evaluation report.
Warner, M., Caspary, K., Arshan, N., Stites, R., Padilla, C., Park, C., ...Adelman, N. (2015). Menlo Park, CA: SRI International.
-
examining13,653Students, grades9-10
Practice Guide
Review Details
Reviewed: April 2024
- Practice Guide (findings for Linked Learning)
- Additional source not reviewed because it is not the primary source for the study (View primary source).
This review may not reflect the full body of research evidence for this intervention.
Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.
Findings
Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.
Sample Characteristics
Study sample characteristics were not reported.Practice Guide
Review Details
Reviewed: September 2017
- Practice Guide (findings for Dropout Prevention)
- Quasi-Experimental Design
- Meets WWC standards with reservations because it uses a quasi-experimental design in which the analytic intervention and comparison groups satisfy the baseline equivalence requirement.
This review may not reflect the full body of research evidence for this intervention.
Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.
Findings
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
High school graduation rate |
Dropout Prevention vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample of Linked Learning students;
|
N/A |
N/A |
Yes |
|
|
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Did not drop out (%) |
Dropout Prevention vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample of Linked Learning students;
|
N/A |
N/A |
Yes |
|
|
Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.
Sample Characteristics
Characteristics of study sample as reported by study author.
-
21% English language learners -
Female: 50% -
Suburban, Urban
-
- B
- A
- C
- D
- E
- F
- G
- I
- H
- J
- K
- L
- P
- M
- N
- O
- Q
- R
- S
- V
- U
- T
- W
- X
- Z
- Y
- a
- h
- i
- b
- d
- e
- f
- c
- g
- j
- k
- l
- m
- n
- o
- p
- q
- r
- s
- t
- u
- v
- x
- w
- y
California
-
Race Asian 14% Black 15% White 13% -
Ethnicity Hispanic 58% Not Hispanic or Latino 42%
Study Details
Setting
The study took place in high schools in nine school districts in California: Antioch, Long Beach, Los Angeles, Montebello, Oakland, Pasadena, Porterville, Sacramento City, and West Contra Costa. These districts range in size from around 14,000 to 640,000 students and represent a wide variety of geographic regions in California. Outcomes were measured for students in the class of 2013 (in 4 districts) and 2014 (in 9 districts).
Study sample
Just under half of students in the sample were female. 78.7% of students were considered to be low SES based on their parents' educational attainment and their participation in the National School Lunch Program. Over half of students were Latino, just under 15% were African American, and just over 12% were White. Nearly one-quarter of students were classified as having low prior academic achievement based on their score on the English Language Arts California Standards Test. Over 20% of students were classified as English Language Learners.
Intervention Group
Linked Learning career pathways consist of comprehensive programs of study that combine classroom learning with real-world application outside of school. The Linked Learning approach has four main components: 1) rigorous academics, 2) career-technical education, 3) work-based learning, and 4) comprehensive support services. Pathways focus on a variety of topics, such as media and communications, business and tourism, and computer science. As of November 2015, there were 40 certified pathways offered in the nine districts included in the study. Students could enroll in a pathway beginning in 9th or 10th grade (depending on the district) and continue their enrollment until the end of high school. To become a Linked Learning career pathway, a program had to be certified by one of two organizations, ConnectEd or the National Academy Foundation (NAF). The present study also examines the effects of non-certified career pathways. These programs typically share some characteristics with Linked Learning pathways, such as their focus on a career theme, but they vary in their fidelity to the Linked Learning approach.
Comparison Group
The comparison condition consisted of students in traditional high school programs (i.e., those who were not enrolled in a certified or non-certified career pathway).
Support for implementation
Most school districts hired dedicated work-based learning staff and internal coaches to build and sustain strong industry connections between the community and the district, and to develop high-quality work-based learning structures within schools. ConnectEd, NAF, and a handful of other regional consortiums provided technical assistance for these work-based programs and helped train work-based staff. However, the study does not provide additional details on the staff training necessary to implement the intervention.
An indicator of the effect of the intervention, the improvement index can be interpreted as the expected change in percentile rank for an average comparison group student if that student had received the intervention.
For more, please see the WWC Glossary entry for improvement index.
An outcome is the knowledge, skills, and attitudes that are attained as a result of an activity. An outcome measures is an instrument, device, or method that provides data on the outcome.
A finding that is included in the effectiveness rating. Excluded findings may include subgroups and subscales.
The sample on which the analysis was conducted.
The group to which the intervention group is compared, which may include a different intervention, business as usual, or no services.
The timing of the post-intervention outcome measure.
The number of students included in the analysis.
The mean score of students in the intervention group.
The mean score of students in the comparison group.
The WWC considers a finding to be statistically significant if the likelihood that the finding is due to chance alone, rather than a real difference, is less than five percent.
The WWC reviews studies for WWC products, Department of Education grant competitions, and IES performance measures.
The name and version of the document used to guide the review of the study.
The version of the WWC design standards used to guide the review of the study.
The result of the WWC assessment of the study. The rating is based on the strength of evidence of the effectiveness of the intervention. Studies are given a rating of Meets WWC Design Standards without Reservations, Meets WWC Design Standards with Reservations, or >Does Not Meet WWC Design Standards.
A related publication that was reviewed alongside the main study of interest.
Study findings for this report.
Based on the direction, magnitude, and statistical significance of the findings within a domain, the WWC characterizes the findings from a study as one of the following: statistically significant positive effects, substantively important positive effects, indeterminate effects, substantively important negative effects, and statistically significant negative effects. For more, please see the WWC Handbook.
The WWC may review studies for multiple purposes, including different reports and re-reviews using updated standards. Each WWC review of this study is listed in the dropdown. Details on any review may be accessed by making a selection from the drop down list.
Tier 1 Strong indicates strong evidence of effectiveness,
Tier 2 Moderate indicates moderate evidence of effectiveness, and
Tier 3 Promising indicates promising evidence of effectiveness,
as defined in the
non-regulatory guidance for ESSA
and the regulations for ED discretionary grants (EDGAR Part 77).