Bridging the School-to-Work Divide: Interim Implementation and Impact Findings from New York City's P-TECH 9-14 Schools
Rosen, Rachel; Byndloss, D. Crystal; Parise, Leigh; Alterman, Emma; Dixon, Michelle (2020). MDRC. Retrieved from: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED605308
-
examining1,203Students, grades9-11
Single Study Review
Review Details
Reviewed: January 2021
- Single Study Review (findings for P-TECH 9-14)
- Randomized Controlled Trial
- Meets WWC standards without reservations because it is a randomized controlled trial with low attrition.
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 |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Passed ELA Regents Exam to CUNY Standard |
P-TECH 9-14 vs. Business as usual |
3 Years |
Full sample;
|
58.40 |
50.60 |
Yes |
|
|
|
|
Passed Math Regents Exam to CUNY Standard |
P-TECH 9-14 vs. Business as usual |
3 Years |
Full sample;
|
47.60 |
40.80 |
Yes |
|
|
|
| Show Supplemental Findings | |||||||||
|
Passed ELA Regents Exam to CUNY Standard |
P-TECH 9-14 vs. Business as usual |
1 Year |
Full sample;
|
8.20 |
1.40 |
No |
-- | ||
|
Passed ELA Regents Exam to CUNY Standard |
P-TECH 9-14 vs. Business as usual |
2 Years |
Full sample;
|
42.00 |
25.20 |
Yes |
|
||
|
Cumulative Regents Passed, score of 65+ |
P-TECH 9-14 vs. Business as usual |
1 Year |
Full sample;
|
1.30 |
1.10 |
No |
-- | ||
|
Cumulative Regents Passed, score of 65+ |
P-TECH 9-14 vs. Business as usual |
2 Years |
Full sample;
|
3.00 |
2.70 |
Yes |
|
||
|
Cumulative Regents Passed, score of 65+ |
P-TECH 9-14 vs. Business as usual |
3 Years |
Full sample;
|
4.40 |
4.00 |
Yes |
|
||
|
Passed Math Regents Exam to CUNY Standard |
P-TECH 9-14 vs. Business as usual |
1 Year |
Full sample;
|
34.40 |
31.50 |
No |
-- | ||
|
Passed Math Regents Exam to CUNY Standard |
P-TECH 9-14 vs. Business as usual |
2 Years |
Full sample;
|
42.70 |
40.00 |
No |
-- | ||
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Attendance - percentage of 180 days attended |
P-TECH 9-14 vs. Business as usual |
3 Years |
Full sample;
|
70.60 |
66.80 |
Yes |
|
|
|
| Show Supplemental Findings | |||||||||
|
Attendance - percentage of 180 days attended |
P-TECH 9-14 vs. Business as usual |
2 Years |
Full sample;
|
74.30 |
71.20 |
Yes |
|
||
|
Attendance - percentage of 180 days attended |
P-TECH 9-14 vs. Business as usual |
1 Year |
Full sample;
|
78.50 |
76.60 |
No |
-- | ||
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|---|
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Cumulative total credits earned |
P-TECH 9-14 vs. Business as usual |
3 Years |
Full sample;
|
33.60 |
31.60 |
Yes |
|
|
|
| Show Supplemental Findings | |||||||||
|
Cumulative CTE/Other credits earned |
P-TECH 9-14 vs. Business as usual |
2 Years |
Full sample;
|
5.00 |
2.70 |
Yes |
|
||
|
Cumulative CTE/Other credits earned |
P-TECH 9-14 vs. Business as usual |
3 Years |
Full sample;
|
7.30 |
4.40 |
Yes |
|
||
|
Cumulative CTE/Other credits earned |
P-TECH 9-14 vs. Business as usual |
1 Year |
Full sample;
|
2.50 |
1.40 |
Yes |
|
||
|
Cumulative total credits earned |
P-TECH 9-14 vs. Business as usual |
2 Years |
Full sample;
|
22.80 |
21.40 |
Yes |
|
||
|
Cumulative total credits earned |
P-TECH 9-14 vs. Business as usual |
1 Year |
Full sample;
|
11.70 |
11.40 |
No |
-- | ||
|
Cumulative total academic credits earned |
P-TECH 9-14 vs. Business as usual |
3 Years |
Full sample;
|
23.20 |
24.00 |
No |
-- | ||
|
Cumulative total academic credits earned |
P-TECH 9-14 vs. Business as usual |
2 Years |
Full sample;
|
15.80 |
16.50 |
No |
-- | ||
|
Cumulative total academic credits earned |
P-TECH 9-14 vs. Business as usual |
1 Year |
Full sample;
|
8.10 |
8.60 |
No |
-- | ||
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.
-
11% English language learners -
Female: 47%
Male: 53% -
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
New York
-
Race Asian 7% Black 42% Other or unknown 49% White 3% -
Ethnicity Hispanic 47% Not Hispanic or Latino 53%
Study Details
Setting
The study includes students who applied for admission to one of seven P-TECH 9-14 schools in New York City.
Study sample
The full analytic sample included 3,161 students who attended one of seven New York City’s P-TECH 9-14 schools from 2013–2017. In this group – labeled the Year 1 sample – 46 percent of students were Hispanic, 40 percent were Black, four percent were White, and eight percent were Asian. Ten percent of students were English language learners and 40 percent were female. In the subsample for which three years of data are available – labeled the Year 3 sample – and which provides the impacts for the study’s main contrasts, out of 1,203 students, 47 percent of students were Hispanic, 42 percent were Black, three percent were White, and seven percent were Asian. Eleven percent were English language learners and 47 percent were female.
Intervention Group
The P-TECH 9-14 model involves a partnership between a high school, a local community college, and one or more employer partners that focus on preparing students for both college and careers within six years. P-TECH 9-14 schools partner with local community colleges to provide students with an opportunity to earn both a high school diploma and an associate’s degree, free of cost. During the six-year program, the employers who are partners support P-TECH 9-14 schools by providing students with internships, mentoring, job shadowing, and other work-based learning experiences.
Comparison Group
Students in the comparison group applied to one of the P-TECH 9-14 schools, but were not admitted and, instead, enrolled in one of 399 other high schools across New York City. One hundred of these schools were either dedicated career and technical education (CTE) high schools or academic high schools with some CTE programming available. Thirty-eight percent of comparison group students were enrolled in dedicated CTE high schools or schools that offered some CTE programming; the rest of the comparison group students attended other academic high schools.
Support for implementation
Each P-TECH 9-14 school relies on a partnership between the high school, college partner, and employer partners. In New York City, the P-TECH 9-14 school development process is co-led by CUNY’s Early College Initiative (ECI) and NYC Department of Education’s Office of Postsecondary Readiness (OPSR). Through collaboration, these organizations identify employer partners and provide support for and oversight of the P-TECH 9-14 model implementation. More specifically, during the startup of a school, ECI and OPSR provide analysis of labor market trends to identify potential career pathways, map out necessary skills, and contact and convene partners. After startup, P-TECH 9-14 schools meet regularly with ECI and OPSR staff, who conduct professional development activities for school staff members, participate in steering committees made up of representatives from each partner organization, and convene P-TECH 9-14 school principals at least twice a year.
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).