Preparing New York City High School Students for the Workforce: Evaluation of the Scholars at Work Program. Research Report. RR-2488-NYCCEO
Bozick, Robert; Gonzalez, Gabriella C.; Lanna, Serafina; Mean, Monica (2019). RAND Corporation. Retrieved from: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED618295
-
examining16,765Students, grade12
Single Study Review
Review Details
Reviewed: December 2021
- Single Study Review (findings for Scholars at Work (SAW) Program: Internship)
- 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Enrolled in College within one year of graduation |
Scholars at Work (SAW) Program: Internship vs. Business as usual |
1 Year |
Cohorts graduating from high school in 2012-2015;
|
67.77 |
63.80 |
No |
-- |
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Employed at Least Once in New York State Within One Year of Graduation |
Scholars at Work (SAW) Program: Internship vs. Business as usual |
1 Year |
Full sample;
|
75.51 |
73.00 |
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.
-
2% English language learners -
Female: 15%
Male: 85% -
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 15% Black 41% Other or unknown 34% White 10% -
Ethnicity Hispanic 34% Not Hispanic or Latino 66%
Study Details
Setting
The Scholars at Work (SAW) program was available to New York City high school seniors enrolled in Career and Technical Education (CTE) programs at high schools that opted to participate. The study included two interventions: (1) career exploration and (2) internship. This review focuses on the internship component only.
Study sample
The analytic sample for the internship component is approximately 10% White, 41% Black, and 15% Asian. Over a third (34%) of students in the analytic sample were Hispanic and the majority (85%) were male. About 1.5% of the sample is classified as English Language Learners, 8% have an individualized education program, and 75% live in poverty.
Intervention Group
The SAW program has two core components, each a semester in length: (1) a career exploration module in the fall semester; and (2) an internship that places high school seniors with employers in the spring semester. In career exploration, students engage in activities in a classroom setting designed to develop their soft skills and workplace competencies while learning about career opportunities through visits from industry experts. In the internship module, students participate in a paid internship at a local business for approximately 13 weeks after school for five days a week. Most SAW students in the study participated in either the career exploration module (34%) or the internship module (59%), while a small percentage (7%) participated in both. This review focuses on the internship component only.
Comparison Group
While the study includes two comparison groups, review team leadership confirmed that this review should focus on comparisons between the intervention group and the weighted Summer Youth Employment Program (SYEP) applicant comparison group attending SAW schools. As such, comparison group members either opted to not apply to SAW or were refused admission to SAW.
Support for implementation
Workforce1 Industrial & Transportation Career (ITC) Centers is the arm of the New York City Department of Small Business Services (SBS) that is responsible for implementation of the SAW program.
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).