OMB83 C Memo

Memorandum United States Department of Education

Institute of Education Sciences

National Center for Education Statistics

DATE: February 17, 2009

TO: Kashka Kubzdela, NCES

FROM: Ted Socha

Postsecondary Studies Division, NCES

SUBJECT: Summary of changes for full-scale data collection for B&B:08/09

OMB forms clearance (No. 1850-0729 v2) was received in February 2008 for the field test and full-scale data collections of the 2008/09 Baccalaureate and Beyond Longitudinal Study (B&B:08/09). This memo serves to summarize the planned changes to the full-scale data collection as they relate to what was approved previously.

Overview

B&B:08/09 is the first follow-up study of baccalaureate recipients identified as part of the 2008 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS:08). The 2008/09 Baccalaureate and Beyond Longitudinal Study (B&B:08/09) sample will consist of those students who were eligible to participate in NPSAS:08 and completed requirements for a bachelor’s degree during the 2007–08 academic year at postsecondary institutions in the United States, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico.

The primary purpose of the B&B series of studies is to focus on the value of obtaining bachelor’s degrees, and to track the paths of recent graduates into employment and additional education. This submission to OMB requests approval for the planned changes to the previously obtained clearance (OMB No. 1850-0729 v2). NPSAS and the B&B longitudinal study are authorized under the Education Sciences Reform Act of 2002 (P.L. 107-279, Title 1 Part C), and Section 183 of the Education Sciences Reform Act of 2002.

The B&B:08/09 study involves two data collection components: a transcript collection that collects postsecondary transcripts from each of the sample members (NPSAS graduating institutions only) and the sample members will be interviewed using a telephone- or web-based interview, scheduled to begin in July 2009. The full-scale transcript collection received OMB clearance along with the field test submission in February 2008 and is currently underway. Additional data for the B&B:08/09 sample will be obtained from a variety of extant data sources, including the Central Processing System (CPS), the National Student Loan Data System (NSLDS), Pell grant files, and the National Student Clearinghouse (NSC).

Previous iterations of the B&B first follow-up interview have laid the foundation for a large majority of the survey items for which we will be seeking information, so much will be simply carried-over or updated. Questions will cover topics related to finances and indebtedness, transition to employment and/or graduate education, family formation, volunteerism, and career plans. For those sample members in the teaching occupation, the interview will also cover their teacher preparation, experiences and job satisfaction relating to their first year in field. The data elements submitted for the full-scale study have been developed based on feedback from the Technical Review Panel (TRP) held in November 2008.

Summary of Planned Changes:

This section summarizes the changes planned for the B&B:08/09 full-scale data collection. Topics addressed include the incentive plan, the sample design, the final data elements, and estimated burden. Supporting documentation is provided in attachments and referenced in the sections below.

First, based on the results of the field test evaluations, some revisions have been made to the mailout and incentive plans. Attachment A provides the results of each experiment. Outlined below are the recommended changes based on those results.

• _{Data collection notification materials will be sent to sample members in a plain US Department of Education 9” x 12” large envelope.}

• During the early response period, sample members will be offered a $5 prepaid cash incentive, followed by a $30 postpaid check upon early survey completion (the first four weeks of data collection.)

• Incentives will be offered for interviews completed during the early response period and the nonresponse conversion period. No incentives will be offered during production—time period between early response and nonresponse—interviewing.

• _{All incentive offers made after the early response period will be promised rather than prepaid.}

Second, there have been some changes in the sample design planned for the B&B:08/09 full scale data collection. The revised sample design is provided in Attachment B. In summary, the following revisions to the design are planned.

• The expected sample size has been decreased from 23,600 to 17,312 due to a lower number of students being confirmed in the NPSAS:08 base year study as completing bachelor’s degree requirements during the 2007-08 academic year.

• The expected eligibility rate has been increased to 99 percent from the 90 percent stated in the original OMB submission because transcript data will be used to help determine cohort eligibility.

• The expected response rate has been decreased to 86 percent from the original estimate of 90 percent based on a review of prior B&B 1-year follow-ups and the field test results.

Third, as stated above, the final set of full-scale data elements was developed with feedback from the TRP during their meeting in November 2008. The revised set of elements, with changes from the field test instrument noted, is provided in Attachment C. Of note is a new set of items related to language course taking and proficiency, that has been added to better understand the labor market outcomes of recent graduates entering the workforce where foreign language skills are now considered essential career skills (Attachment D). The majority of these items come from the National Assessments of Adult Literacy (NAAL) and, therefore, have been fielded already with a slightly different – adults ages 16 and above -- but overlapping population.

Also noteworthy is the handling of the TEACH and SMART grant items following the NPSAS:08 base year interview. Using administrative data sources, those who received TEACH grants will be identified in the first follow-up study, making it possible to track their entry into teaching through the TEACH program. Because SMART grant program participation is limited to undergraduate enrollment, there will be few newly qualified SMART grant recipients in the B&B first follow-up interview to permit analysis. Consequently, those items were recommended for deletion by the TRP. However, in order to allow longitudinal analysis, a flag will be retained on the data file identifying base year participants in the SMART grant program.

To ensure item quality once the interview has been programmed (May 2009), cognitive testing will be performed on the entire instrument with a group of 9 participants, including six who are prequalified to answer the full set of language items. Although the items contained in the B&B survey have either been used in other NCES surveys, the cognitive testing will inform us about the appropriateness of the items, particularly the new items (e.g. recession items, language items), and the approach for the B&B cohort as well as the usability of the instrument. Any needed modifications will be made prior to the start of data collection in July 2009.

And finally, as shown in Attachment E, the student interview is expected to require an average of 25 minutes per response, a decrease of 5 minutes from the original submission, with a range of times from 10 to 45 minutes. From the anticipated starting sample of 17,312, 14,722 interviews are expected for a total burden of 6,134. That burden estimate is 3,416 hours less than stated in the initial submission.

Attachment A

Results of Field Test Experiments

Three experiments were conducted during the B&B:08/09 field test. These experiments assessed the following questions:

• Would study materials sent via Priority Mail produce higher participation rate during the early response period than materials sent in a large 9” x 12” envelope via regular mail?

• Would a $5 prepaid cash or check incentive ($5 up front, followed by a promised $30 check for NPSAS:08 interview respondents or $50 check for NPSAS:08 interview nonrespondents upon interview completion) produce higher participation rate during the early response period than those who were offered the promise of a $35 or $55 incentive check upon interview completion?

• Would a $20 production incentive—or $40 for NPSAS:08 interview nonrespondents—produce higher participation rates during the production phase than no production incentive?

Analysis of Priority Mail

To test the impact of the visibility of mailout materials on participation rates, ¹ the field test sample was randomly assigned to two groups prior to the start of data collection: one group received the initial study materials via regular mail in a large envelope, and the other group received the same materials via Priority Mail also delivered in a large envelope.

Table 1 presents the results of this experiment. Overall, those who received the study materials via Priority Mail envelope had an early participation rate of 43 percent, compared with a participation rate of 41 percent for those who received via regular mail. There is no indication of a statistically significant difference in the early participation rate between the two types of mailing materials.

Table 1. Early participation rates, by type of mailing: 2008

Type of initial mailing	Eligible sample	Participated
		Number	Percent
All cases	1,820	760	41.6
Priority Mail	910	390	42.6
Regular Mail	910	370	40.8

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2008 Baccalaureate and Beyond Longitudinal Study (B&B:08/09) Field Test.

Analysis of Prepaid Incentives

The effectiveness of a prepaid incentive was also examined in the field test. Prior to the start of data collection, the field test sample was randomly assigned to one of three groups: one group received $5 prepaid cash with promise of a $30 check upon completion, one group received $5 prepaid check with promise of a $30 check, and the other group received only the promise of a $35 check. Sample members had to complete the interview during early response period in order to receive their promised checks. In addition, all NPSAS:08 interview nonrespondents were offered an additional $20 to complete the interview during the early response period. That is, if they were assigned to the $5 prepaid cash or check incentive group, they were offered a $50 check on interview completion. If they were assigned to the no prepaid group and completed the interview within the early response period, they were offered a $55 check on interview completion.

Table 2 presents the results of the prepaid incentive experiment. Overall, the $5 cash group had a significantly higher participation rate (49 percent) during early response period than both the $5 check group (37 percent, z = 3.54, p < .01) and the promised group (41 percent, z = 2.81, p < .01). For NPSAS:08 interview respondents, the participation rates were also significantly higher for the $5 cash incentive (61 percent) than for the $5 check incentive (47 percent, z = 3.30, p < .01) or the promised incentive (52 percent, z = 2.49, p < .01). Participation rates followed this same trend for NPSAS:08 interview nonrespondents but the differences were not significant.

Aside, a nominal negative relationship was observed in response between those offered a $5 prepaid check compared to those not offered an incentive at all, but it was not statistically significant. That said, the result is still bewildering since it was not in the expected direction, i.e. those not incentived yielded a better response rate than those who were. (This trend was observed for both NPSAS respondents and nonrespondents.)

Table 2. Early participation rates, by prepaid incentive status: 2008

	Overall				NPSAS interview respondents				NPSAS interview nonrespondents
	Eligible	Partici-pated	Percent		Eligible	Partici-pated	Percent		Eligible	Partici-pated	Percent
$5 cash	450	220	48.5		310	190	60.5		150	40	23.6
$5 check	460	170	36.9		310	140	47.2		150	20	16.0
Promised	910	370	40.5		610	320	51.8		300	50	17.7

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2008 Baccalaureate and Beyond Longitudinal Study (B&B:08/09) Field Test.

Analysis of Production Incentives

Prior results from other studies (BPS:04/06 field test) suggested that paying an incentive during the production interviewing phase of data collection does increase the likelihood that sample members will participate. The effect, however, was not a strong one. Consequently, the experiment was conducted again for the B&B:08/09 field test. Prior to data collection, the field test sample was randomly assigned to a production incentive group according to their NPSAS interview response status. NPSAS respondents were randomly assigned a $0 or $20 production incentive, while NPSAS nonrespondents were randomly assigned a $0 or $40 production incentive. Once the early response period ended, interviewers began contacting the remaining sample members to complete the interview over the telephone. Sample members were notified of the production incentive (if one was assigned to them) by an interviewer, or through an e-mail and/or letter.

Table 3 presents the results of the production incentive experiment. No significant difference was found between the $0 and $20 groups for NPSAS respondents, or between the $0 and $40 groups for NPSAS nonrespondents.

Table 3. Interview participation rates, by production incentive status: 2008

Type of production incentive	Eligible sample	Participated
		Number	Percent
NPSAS interview respondents
$0	610	67	11.0
$20	610	65	10.7
NPSAS interview nonrespondents
$0	300	21	7.1
$40	300	22	7.4

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2008 Baccalaureate and Beyond Longitudinal Study (B&B:08/09) Field Test.

Attachment B

Revised Full-Scale Sample Design

Sampling Specifications for the Full-Scale Study

Section A. Introduction

Identification of the B&B:08/09 full-scale sample requires a multi-stage process that began, first, with selection of the NPSAS:08 sample of institutions and was followed by selection of students within institutions. The third and final stage is a B&B-specific activity that will confirm the cohort eligibility of sample members identified during NPSAS as baccalaureate recipients during the 2007–08 academic year. The sampling specifications presented here describe that confirmation process. Section B describes the target population and Section C details the specific sample design to be applied in identifying the B&B:08 cohort.

Section B. B&B:08 Target Population

B&B-eligible persons are individuals who completed requirements for the bachelor’s degree from NPSAS-eligible institutions between July 1, 2007 and June 30, 2008 and were awarded their baccalaureate degree by the institution from which they were sampled no later than June 30, 2009. This definition provides theoretically complete coverage of the population of students completing their degree requirements during the 07-08 academic year because every completer is associated with one 4-year institution on the NPSAS sampling frame, i.e., there is no student multiplicity. Moreover, it assigns a known and well-defined probability of selection for each student in the B&B sample. Through the institution awarding the degree, each completer has exactly one linkage to the B&B sampling frame. Consequently, although NPSAS sample weights must include a multiplicity adjustment to account for multiple linkages to the NPSAS sampling frame, the B&B sample weights need not.

Section C. B&B:08 Sample Design

The B&B:08 sample will consist of all students who completed requirements for the bachelor’s degree at any time between July 1, 2007 and June 30, 2008. Eligibility for the B&B:08 full-scale cohort will be based primarily on information obtained from the student’s transcript. Lacking a transcript, eligibility will be based on responses provided during the NPSAS:08 student interview. Without either the transcript or the interview, eligibility will be based on the student’s institutional record obtained through NPSAS:08 CADE or the enrollment list provided by the NPSAS institution at the time of student sampling.

There are other data sources, such as the Central Processing System (CPS) and the National Student Clearinghouse (NSC) that might provide information on degree completion, but the value of these sources is unknown. These sources will be evaluated through the course of the study and will not be used to confirm cohort eligibility. Table 8 shows the distribution of the 25,000 NPSAS:08 sample members who are potentially eligible for membership in the B&B cohort according to their current interview, CADE, and/or enrollment list status. It should be noted that the B&B:08 sample is not intended to be representative at the state level.

The final step in identifying the B&B:08 sample will occur in the spring of 2009, in time to begin student contacting in June. At the time of sample selection, the transcript collection will be nearing completion, and B&B eligibility based on transcripts will be known for most of the potential B&B:08 sample members. Transcripts are expected for about 90% of the 25,000 students for whom transcripts were requested.

The sample sizes presented in this document are based on the B&B:08/09 field test results, and will be updated prior to sample selection based on transcript results to date. Applying the rates observed in the field test, of the 18,005 students who were confirmed in the NPSAS full-scale interview to be B&B eligible, we expect about 81.1 percent (14,597) to have a transcript that confirms eligibility, 6.6 percent (1,193) to be ineligible based on transcripts, and 12.3 percent (2,215) to not have a transcript. Table 9 shows the expected transcript status of the B&B:08 sample with baccalaureate receipt confirmed in the NPSAS:08 interview.

In order to have full population coverage of the B&B sample, a subsample of 500 of the 7,000 NPSAS:08 interview nonrespondents who were either confirmed in CADE to be degree candidates or listed by the NPSAS sample institution as bachelor’s degree candidates will be selected. A subsample size of 500 has been typical for the NCES postsecondary longitudinal studies (B&B and BPS). Because the subsample will not be analyzed separately, 500 is a sufficient size to ensure that the full sample is representative of all baccalaureate recipients. Also, because the response rate for sample members who were NPSAS interview nonrespondents is expected to be lower than the response rate for NPSAS interview respondents, a larger subsample size is likely to result in a lower overall response rate.

The 7,000 NPSAS:08 interview nonrespondents will be stratified based on study respondent, transcript, CADE, and list statuses. Within each stratum the nonrespondents will be sorted by institution sector to ensure representation of the sample. The samples will be drawn within each stratum with probabilities proportional to the NPSAS:08 sampling weight. The sampling rates used in each stratum will be different in order to maximize response rates while also representing the various types of sample members. This approach is known to introduce some unequal weighting and, consequently, result in larger design effects, but the overall mean design effect is expected to be between 2.0 and 3.0, which is similar to past postsecondary longitudinal studies.

Based on the B&B:08/09 field test results, the highest sampling rates are expected among students who were NPSAS study respondents, are potentially eligible based on CADE or the enrollment list, and are confirmed eligible by the transcript. The next highest sampling rates will be among students who were NPSAS study respondents, are potentially eligible based on CADE or the enrollment list, but have no transcript, and among students who were not NPSAS study respondents, are potentially eligible based on CADE or the enrollment list, and are confirmed eligible by the transcript. The lowest sampling rates are expected among students who were not NPSAS study respondents, are potentially eligible based on CADE or the enrollment list, but have no transcript.² Table 10 shows the estimated eligible sample and subsample sizes of the NPSAS:08 potential baccalaureate recipients without a NPSAS interview.

Table 8. Distribution of the NPSAS:08 sample by B&B eligibility

NPSAS:08 B&B eligibility	Count
Total potentially B&B eligible	25,045
Baccalaureate receipt confirmed in interview	18,005
Baccalaureate receipt confirmed in CADE	4,623
Listed as potential baccalaureate recipient	2,417

Table 9. Estimated transcript status of the B&B:08 sample members with baccalaureate receipt confirmed in the NPSAS:08 interview

Transcript status	Count
Total	18,005
Confirmed B&B eligible	14,597
Confirmed B&B ineligible	1,193
No transcript	2,215

Table 10. Estimated eligible sample and subsample sizes of the NPSAS:08 potential baccalaureate recipients without a NPSAS interview

Study respondent	Transcript	CADE or list	Expected number eligible	Preliminary sample size
Total				500
Yes	Yes	CADE	3,280	384
Yes	Yes	List	580	58
Yes	No	CADE	540	27
Yes	No	List	210	11
No	Yes	CADE	140	7
No	Yes	List	200	10
No	No	CADE	60	2
No	No	List	30	1

Based on the sample sizes in tables 9 and 10, it is expected that the sample size for student data collection will be about 17,310. The expected eligibility rate of these sample members is expected to be about 99 percent, which will give an eligible sample size of about 17,130. We also expect a response rate of about 86 percent among the eligible sample members, which will yield about 14,720 responding baccalaureate recipients. See table 11 for expected eligibility and response rates by base-year response status and transcript status.

T

Supporting Statement Request for OMB Review (SF83i) 15

able 11. Expected eligibility and response rates, by base-year response status and transcript status

Sample of NPSAS:08 interview respondents
NPSAS:08 interview respondent		Transcript receipt		Transcript status			Count	Sample available for B&B:09 student data collection		Assumed eligibility rate from student interview		Expected eligible cases		Expected response rate			Expected interview yield
Y		Y		Received, confirmed B&B eligible			14,597	14,597		100%		14,597		87%		12,699
Y		Y		Received, confirmed B&B ineligible			1,193
Y		N		Transcript not received, eligibility unconfirmed			2,215	2,215		92%		2,038		87%		1,773
				Total			18,005	16,812		99%		16,635		87%		14,472
Subsample of NPSAS:08 interview non-respondents
NPSAS:08 study respondent	Transcript receipt		NPSAS:08 eligibility source		Expected number eligible	Sample available for B&B:09 student data collection			Assumed eligibility rate from student interview		Expected eligible cases		Expected response rate		Expected interview yield
Y	Y		CADE		3,280	384			100%		384		51%		196
Y	Y		List		580	58			100%		58		51%		30
Y	N		CADE		540	27			75%		20		51%		10
Y	N		List		210	11			75%		8		51%		4
N	Y		CADE		140	7			100%		7		51%		4
N	Y		List		200	10			100%		10		51%		5
N	N		CADE		60	2			75%		2		51%		1
N	N		List		30	1			75%		1		51%		0
			Total		290	500			98%		490		51%		250
			Total Sample			17,312			99%		17,125		86%		14,722

Attachment C

Proposed Full-Scale Data Elements

Changes to the B&B:09 Data Elements for Full-Scale
Data element	Applies to3	Purpose/issues	Changes for full scale
B&B eligibility
Confirm received bachelor’s degree or completed requirements between July 1, 2007 and June 30, 2008?	All	Eligibility confirmation
Date received bachelor’s (month and year)	All	Eligibility confirmation
Undergraduate enrollment history
Institution granting the degree (confirm NPSAS or add code on-line)	All	Path/time to degree
Term and year first began undergraduate education	All
Undergraduate enrollment at other institutions between high school and bachelor’s degree	All
Names of other colleges attended (on-line coding) (up to 6)	Attended multiple
Terms/years attended other colleges	Attended multiple
Degree program and degrees attained at other colleges	Attended multiple
Class level at other colleges	Attended multiple		Dropped attendance status element, retained class level
Previous educational attainment prior to bachelor’s (previous certificate, associate’s, bachelor’s, other) at NPSAS3	NPSAS non-respondents		Ask only of respondents for whom this information is not available from NPSAS and revise question wording to mimic NPSAS
Dates of NPSAS attendance (month and year)	All
Continuous enrollment for bachelor's degree	All
Reasons for enrollment gaps	Stopouts
Reasons for attending a 2-year college	Attended a 2-year		Revise question wording to ask generally about reasons for 2-year institution enrollment
Original major at NPSAS	NPSAS non-respondents		Ask only of respondents for whom this information is not available from NPSAS
Number of times changed major	NPSAS non-respondents		Ask only of respondents for whom this information is not available from NPSAS and revise question wording to mimic NPSAS
Final major at NPSAS	NPSAS non-respondents		Ask only of respondents for whom this information is not available from NPSAS
Transfer or multiple enrollment (transfer/multiple enrollment/both)	Attended multiple
Credits attempted to transfer/were accepted from other colleges	Attended multiple
Reasons for transferring (financial/academic /personal/location/other)	Transfers		Drop; not analytically useful
Purpose of overlapping enrollment (transfer/additional courses/additional degree/financial/other)	Overlapping enrollment		Drop; not analytically useful
Performance
Withdrew from any course because failing	All
Repeated any course to improve grade	All
Received any incompletes	All
Ever on academic probation	All
Graduated with academic honors	All
Ever on Dean's list	All		New
SMART grants
Received Pell grant after July 2006	All		Drop all SMART and Pell grant items; the TRP recommended using this item set for NPSAS only. We will include a flag to identify SMART recipients (obtained as part of NPSAS from NSLDS) so analysts can track outcomes of B&B SMART recipients
Received SMART grant 3rd/4th years	All
Chose or changed major to qualify for SMART grant	SMART recipients
Major change from what to what	Changed major
Reason not eligible in 4th year (no Pell/not full time/not qualifying major/didn’t earn 3.0 GPA)	Received SMART 3rd year/not 4th
Undergraduate student loan debt
Confirm total amount borrowed in student loans (from NPSAS)	All	Debt and finances	Was not included in field test, will not be in full scale
Loan type	Borrowers
Amount borrowed	Borrowers
Amount owed	Borrowers
Currently repaying student loans	Borrowers
Amount of monthly payments	Repaying
Parents helping to repay the loans	Repaying
Reasons not repaying	Borrowers not repaying
Deferment reason	Borrowers not repaying
Participation in loan forgiveness program	Borrowers
Has the debt influenced career plans	Borrowers
Consider the student loan debt a worthwhile investment	Borrowers
Assessment of education
Undergraduate education was worth cost	All
Satisfaction with quality of education from NPSAS	All
Satisfaction with undergraduate major choice	All
Current status (at time of interview)	All	Labor market outcomes
Working for pay at a full-time or part-time job
Taking courses toward a graduate or professional degree or postbaccalaureate certificate
Taking courses toward an undergraduate degree or certificate
Taking other courses, not for a formal award
Serving in an internship or training program			Drop; not analytically useful
Serving on active duty in the armed forces
Keeping house (full-time homemaker)
Holding a job but on temporary layoff from work or waiting to report to work
Looking for work
Traveling
Disabled
Volunteering (Peace Corps, VISTA)
Post-baccalaureate enrollment
Enrolled since earning bachelor’s degree	All
Enrolled for degree/certificate	Enrolled		Added; missing in FT data elements
When first enrolled for post-BA degree/certificate	Enrolled for degree/certificate		Exclude nondegree enrollees
Name of institution attending (on-line coding)	Enrolled for degree/certificate		Exclude nondegree enrollees
Currently enrolled	Enrolled for degree/certificate		Exclude nondegree enrollees
Degree type	Enrolled for degree/certificate		Exclude nondegree enrollees
Type of master's/doctoral/professional degree			Drop; not analytically useful
Degree program/field of study (on-line coding)	Enrolled for degree/certificate		Exclude nondegree enrollees
Attendance status	Enrolled for degree/certificate		Exclude nondegree enrollees
When completed/expect to complete program	Enrolled for degree/certificate		Exclude nondegree enrollees
Reasons for enrolling: - To gain further education before beginning a career - To prepare for graduate school or further education - To change your academic or occupational field - To gain further skills or knowledge in your academic or occupational field - For licensure or certification - To increase opportunities for promotion, advancement, or higher salary - Required or expected by employer - For leisure or personal interest	Enrolled		Drop; not analytically useful
Reason for choosing this institution (reputation/faculty/location/financial aid/can go part time/other)	Enrolled		Drop; not analytically useful
Reason for choosing this program (academic/financial/personal/other)	Enrolled		Was not included in field test, will not be in full scale
Type of financial aid received	Enrolled for degree/certificate		Exclude nondegree enrollees
Receiving any employer aid to support post-baccalaureate education	Enrolled for degree/certificate and working		Exclude nondegree enrollees
Number of hours worked per week while enrolled	Enrolled for degree/certificate and working		Exclude nondegree enrollees
Consider yourself primarily an employee or student	Enrolled for degree/certificate and working		Exclude nondegree enrollees
Plans for future enrollment in degree/certificate program
Expect to pursue a higher degree/certificate	Not enrolled		Drop; behavior predictions are of limited utility
Reasons not going to continue education (no interest/academic/job/financial/personal)	STEM majors only		Drop; dropped all STEM-related items
When expect to start (coming year/next year/2 years/5 years/more than 5 years)	Expect more education		Drop; behavior predictions are of limited utility
Taken GRE or other graduate/first professional entrance exam	All
Type of degree/field of study expected	Expect more education		Drop; behavior predictions are of limited utility
Intended enrollment intensity	Expect more education		Drop; behavior predictions are of limited utility
Expect tuition reimbursement	Expect more education		Drop; behavior predictions are of limited utility
Reasons for delay (financial, academic/personal)	Expect more education		Drop; behavior predictions are of limited utility
Other coursetaking (nondegree)
Taken/taking formal courses (credit or noncredit) other than those taken while enrolled in a degree or certificate program	All		Drop; replaced by "Enrolled in any nondegree coursework"
Enrolled in any nondegree coursework	All		New
Reasons for taking courses	Enrolled in nondegree coursework
Any of school-related costs paid by employer	Taken/taking courses		Drop; not analytically useful
Employment at time of interview
Employed as an elementary/secondary school teacher	Employed	Labor market outcomes	Drop; this can be determined from the occupation coder
Date began job
Employed full-time or part-time
Prefer to have a full-time job	Employed PT
Number of jobs held currently	Employed
Number of jobs held since graduation
Type of occupation (on-line coding)
Type of duties (specify)
Type of industry (on-line coding)
Type of firm
Size of the company (number of employees)			Drop; not analytically useful
Salary (indicate per time period)
Average number of hours per week worked
Self-employed
Future plans for self-employment			Drop; not analytically useful
Reasons for self-employment	Future plans for self-employment		Drop; only applies to a very small percentage so won't be useful data
College degree required to obtain this job	Employed		Drop; we can get a measure of prestige from the occupation codes
Related to undergraduate major
Job part of career path
Difficult to get hired	On career path		New
Type of non-career job	Not on career path
Flexibility of job (very flexible/somewhat flexible/not flexible)	Employed		Drop; not analytically useful
Could do this job without flexibility	Flexible job		Drop; not analytically useful
Able to telecommute (y/n/does not make sense)	Employed		Drop; not analytically useful
Frequency of telecommuting	Telecommuters		Drop; not analytically useful
Job satisfaction
Compensation	Employed	Labor market outcomes	Revised item to "compensation" from "pay and fringe benefits"
Importance and challenge
Opportunity for advancement			Drop; not analytically useful
Opportunity to use training and education			Drop; not analytically useful
Job security
Opportunity for further training and education			Drop; not analytically useful
The job as a whole
Benefits
Medical and/or other health insurance (dental, vision, etc.)	Employed	Labor market outcomes
Life insurance
Retirement or other financial benefits, such as 401(k)/403(b)
Other
Stock options			Drop; not analytically useful
Flexible spending accounts			Drop; not analytically useful
Employee discounts			Drop; not analytically useful
Other employee facilities or subsidies, such as for childcare, transit, or fitness			Drop; not analytically useful
Employee assistance program (counseling/legal)			Drop; not analytically useful
Tuition reimbursement			Drop; not analytically useful
Responsibilities
Supervise work of others	Employed	Labor market outcomes	Drop; not applicable to this group (1 year after bachelor's degree receipt)
Participate in hiring/firing decisions
Participate in setting salary rates
Level of autonomy
Reasons for part-time work	Part-time		Drop; not analytically useful
Full-time unavailable
None of the employees worked a full-time schedule
Family responsibilities
Attended school while working
No need or desire to work full-time
Pursuing other interests or hobbies
Health problems prohibited full-time work
Other
Job search
Looking for work	All
Job search strategies	Looking for work		Drop; not analytically useful
Method for finding job			Drop; not analytically useful
Which job search activity led to job	Employed		Drop; not analytically useful
Number of jobs applied to before current job			Drop; not analytically useful
Location of job search	Employed or looking for work		Drop; not analytically useful
Employed since earning bachelor's	All		Added; missing in FT data elements
Employment status by month
July 2007 (working/looking for work)			Added some months that were missing from the FT data elements, edited years
August 2007 (working/looking for work)
September 2007 (working/looking for work)
October 2007 (working/looking for work)
November 2007 (working/looking for work)
December 2007 (working/looking for work)
January 2008 (working/looking for work)
February 2008 (working/looking for work)
March 2008 (working/looking for work)
April 2008 (working/looking for work)
May 2008 (working/looking for work)
June 2008 (working/looking for work)
July 2008 (working/looking for work)
August 2008 (working/looking for work)
September 2008 (working/looking for work)
October 2008 (working/looking for work)
November 2008 (working/looking for work)
December 2008 (working/looking for work)
January 2009 (working/looking for work)
February 2009 (working/looking for work)
March 2009 (working/looking for work)
April 2009 (working/looking for work)
May 2009 (working/looking for work)
June 2009 (working/looking for work)
July 2009 (working/looking for work)
August 2009 (working/looking for work)
September 2009 (working/looking for work)
Work-related training
Any work-related training such as workshops or seminars (not college courses)	Employed		Drop; not analytically useful
Areas of training (management or supervisor/training in occupational field/general professional training, such as speaking, writing, computer software skills/other	Had training		Drop; not analytically useful
Reasons for training (facilitate change in occupational field/gain skills or knowledge in current occupational field/licensure or certification/increase opportunities for advancement or salary increases/learn skills for recently acquired position/required or expected by employer)	Had training		Drop; not analytically useful
Most important reason (select one of above)	Had training		Drop; not analytically useful
Current demographics
Date of birth	NPSAS non-respondents	Background information for analyses of debt/teaching/other employment	Limit question to those for whom we do not have preloaded information
Citizenship status (citizen, permanent resident, other)	NPSAS non-respondents and non-citizens in NPSAS		Limit question to those for whom we do not have preloaded information saying they are a citizen
Current state of legal residence	All
Live more than 50 miles from NPSAS institution	All
Live more than 50 miles from where attended high school	All
Reasons live more than 50 miles from where attended high school (work/school/location preference/family/other personal)	Those who lived more than 50 miles from where attended high school		Drop; not analytically useful
Reasons live more than 50 miles from where graduated from college (work/school/location preference/family/other personal)	Those who lived more than 50 miles from NPSAS institution		Drop; not analytically useful
Household composition	All
Marital status (never married/ married/ separated/divorced/partner)	All
Date of last change in status	All		Drop item; detail not necessary
Number of dependent children	All
Age of youngest dependent child	Have children
Employment/enrollment status of spouse/partner	Have spouse/ partner		Condensed items
Income/debt of spouse/partner	Have spouse/ partner		Condensed items
Income in 2008	All		Adjust question wording to make clear that respondent should report his/her income only, not household income
Type of disability	All		Longitudinal item from NPSAS:08; inadvertently omitted from FT data elements
Main disability	Disabled
Native language	All		New
Other language	All		New
Language coursetaking	Know a non-English language		New
Non-English language use during childhood	Know a non-English language		New
Use of non-English language	Know a non-English language		New
Proficiency in non-English language	Know a non-English language		New
Assets and debt
Own home or rent	All	Debt and finances
Monthly mortgage/rent amount	All
Other type of housing (parents/military/job includes/religious/other)	No mortgage/rent payment		Drop; the important items here are captured other places (military service and living with parents)
Own any motor vehicles	All
Monthly auto payments	Vehicle owners
Untaxed benefits	All		Drop; not analytically useful
Impact of recession on enrollment and employment decisions	All		New
Civic and volunteer activity
Registered to vote in U.S.	U.S. citizens
Voted in any election	U.S. citizens
Military status (veteran, active, reserves, none)	All
Perform any community service/volunteer work in last year	All
Types of service and time commitment	All
Volunteer hours per month	Volunteers		Added; missing in FT data elements
Reasons why volunteered	Volunteers		Drop; not analytically useful
Volunteer benefits	Volunteers		Drop; not analytically useful
Future plans to volunteer	Volunteers		Revised from "Volunteer again in next 12 months" to "Future plans to volunteer"
Identifying prospective teacher pipeline members
Teaching experience at K-12 level	All	Screen for K–12 teaching pipeline
Prepared for teaching	All who hadn’t taught
Considering teaching	All who hadn’t taught or prepared
Teaching experiences
Types of teaching positions held since NPSAS school: regular, short-term substitute, long-term substitute, teacher’s aide, support, itinerant, student teacher	All who had taught	Identify K-12 teachers (those who had regular, long-term substitute, support, or itinerant positions in a public or private K-12 school)
Number of schools/districts held teaching positions since NPSAS school
For types held, month/year when first taught		Teaching career paths
Held substitute or teacher’s aide position to get permanent K-12 job	Taught only in short-term substitute or teacher’s aide positions	Identify transition jobs into teaching	Drop; not analytically useful
Current teaching position/most recent position if not currently teaching	K-12 teachers		Drop; this information can be derived from responses to items in the school/district loop
Participated in teacher internship program	K-12 teachers	Teaching career paths
How well did your student teaching or internship experience prepare you for teaching?	K-12 teachers	Teacher education/training, teaching career paths	Drop; not analytically useful
How well did your education courses in college prepare you for teaching?	K-12 teachers	Teacher education/training, teaching career paths	Drop; not analytically useful
How well did your academic courses in college prepare you for teaching?	K-12 teachers	Teacher education/training, teaching career paths	Drop; not analytically useful
How many K-12 teaching jobs (not including teacher’s aide, short-term substitute, or student teaching jobs)?	K-12 teachers	Teaching career paths	Was not included in field test, will not be in full scale
For each school/district (not including teacher’s aide, short-term substitute, or student teaching jobs):	K-12 teachers	Teaching career paths
Type of teaching job (regular, long-term substitute, support, itinerant)
Start and end date
Number of schools at which taught in this job
School(s) where taught (CCD/PSS coder)
Sector and level of school	If school not in coder
County and district of school for itinerant position	Itinerant teachers
Whether participated in a formal induction program (first job only)
Grades taught
Subject areas taught
Taught any college prep, AB/IB, honors, bilingual/ESL, gifted, or remedial classes (check all that apply)			Drop; not analytically useful
Whether prepared to teach all subjects taught
Whether taught full or part-time
Academic year base salary and other compensation
Why did you leave that school/district?
Degree of preparation for first teaching position	K-12 teachers	Teaching career paths
Support from school or district in first teaching job	K-12 teachers	Teaching career paths
Satisfaction with aspects of teaching	K-12 teachers	Teaching career paths
How long do you plan to continue teaching?	Currently teaching	Teaching career paths	Drop; not analytically useful
Do you plan to return to teaching?	Taught but no longer teaching	Teaching career paths	Drop; not analytically useful
Certification and preparation		Teacher education/training, teaching career paths
Ever certified to teach at the K-12 level? (Do not include emergency certificates or waivers.)	Prepared to teach		Drop; not analytically useful
Currently certified to teach in any of grades K-12 in any state?	Ever certified
State of certification	Ever certified		Drop; not analytically useful
Type of certification	Ever certified		Added; missing in FT data elements
Name of teaching certification	Ever certified		Drop; was used only to generate data to help determine response categories for type of certification item
Date first certified (month, year)	Ever certified
Field(s) in which certified	Ever certified
Certified through an alternative certification program?	Ever certified		Drop; not analytically useful
Type of alternative certification program	Certified by alternate route		Drop; not analytically useful
Completed or completing student teaching or teacher practicum	No regular certification or not teacher education majors		Ask only of respondents without regular/standard certifications or who were not teacher education majors
Taken or taking courses towards certification	Prepared but never certified
Teaching job applications
Applied for teaching jobs since completing degree	Not taught, but had prepared or were currently considering	Teaching career paths
Received any offers?	Applied
Rejected all offers?	Received an offer		Was not included in field test, will not be in full scale
Reasons for not taking offered teaching job(s) - Received offer after another job was accepted - Pay was not adequate - Job offer too far from home - Job offer in dangerous/difficult school - Offer not in area for which I was qualified - Another job offered more interesting/challenging work - Poor teaching conditions - Already in another job - Received better offer	Rejected offers		Was not included in field test, will not be in full scale
Reasons for not applying for a teaching position	Did not apply
Have you had any non-teaching jobs in elementary or secondary education? (principal, assistant principal, program administrator, curriculum coordinator, department head, school psychologist/counselor/advisor, coach, library media specialist/librarian, support staff (e.g., secretary), other)	Taught, prepared, or were currently considering	Teaching career paths	Was not included in field test, will not be in full scale
Do you have any plans to move into or continue in a non teaching job in elementary or secondary education?	Taught, prepared, or were currently considering	Teaching career paths
Why did you major in teacher education?	Teacher education majors who said no to screeners 1 and 3 and had neither applied nor taught since graduation		Drop; not analytically useful
Plan to teach in future	Teacher education majors who said no to screeners 1 and 3 and had neither applied nor taught since graduation
Loan forgiveness program awareness and participation	All who taught, prepared, or are currently considering	Loan forgiveness programs	NOTE: This addresses TEACH grants
Locating information	All	Tracing for next follow-up

Attachment D

Additional Foreign Language Questions

Proposed Wording	NAAL 2003 Question	Similar/modified/ new	Justification
Is English your native language?	A-5, A-6	Similar	This a gateway question to differentiate between native and non-native speakers.
What language do you consider to be your native language?	A-7	Similar	This question to be used to set primary language acquisition
Do you know any other language(s) or have you ever taken classes in a foreign language?	A-8	Modified	The NAAL currently asks this question in respect to ESL classes. We would like to modify it have it apply to all people who know more than one language.
Which second language do you know best?	A-13	Similar	This question to be used to set secondary language acquisition
How long ago did you last take a [T_LNGNAM] class?	A-10	Similar	This question asked to understand when last formal class was taken.
Growing-up, did you speak [T_LNGNAM] at home always, sometimes, or never?	A-5	Similar	This language to determine how non-english language was spoken in home.
In comparison to your English, how proficient in [T_LNGNAM] are you in the following:	A-14, A-15	Similar	Question asked to get self-assessment of non-english language skills versus english.
Currently, do you interact with people in [T_LNGNAM] on a regular basis?	---	New	These questions are not asked in the NAAL. We would like to cognitively test these so that we may get an accurate picture of how people are maintaining their 2nd language skills
Do you use, or plan to use, your [T_LNGNAM] in your career?	---	New

Attachment E

Change to Response Burden

The burden estimates and estimates of costs to respondents are provided in tables 4 and 5 below. The response time for participating institutions was described in the previously approved package that covered the transcript collection. The focus here will be on student sample members.

Projected estimates for response burden and costs for B&B:08/09 are based on experiences from B&B:93/03 and more recent studies, including NPSAS:08 and BPS:04/09 as well as the B&B:08/09 field test. Estimated response burden for students is based on extensive timing analysis conducted in previous B&B interviews.

Table 4. Estimated burden on B&B:08/09 full-scale respondents

Full-scale Data collection activity	Sample	Expected eligible	Percent expected response rate	Number of respondents	Average time burden per response	Range of response times	Total time burden (hours)
Student interview	17,312	17,125	86	14,722	25 min.	10 to 45 min.	6,134

NOTE: B&B:08/09 = 2008/09 Baccalaureate and Beyond Longitudinal Study.

Table 5. Estimated costs to students for the B&B:08/09 full-scale implementation

Full scale Data collection activity	Sample	Response rate (percent)	Number of respondents	Average burden (time)	Total burden (time)	Rate per hour ($)	Total cost ($)
Student interview	17,312	86	14,722	25 min.	6,134 hrs.	10	61,342

NOTE: B&B:08/09 = 2008/09 Baccalaureate and Beyond Longitudinal Study.

1 Participation was measured as the outcome, rather than response rates. The participation rate includes those cases that initiated the interview, but were determined to be ineligible cases were not counted as completes, and thus are not represented in the response rates. However, it was the response to different data collection strategies that is of primary interest for these analyses. . There was little difference in the numbers that participated and that completed – e.g. there were very few ineligibles.

2 If the number of students who were not NPSAS study respondents, are potentially eligible based on CADE or the enrollment list, but have no transcript is lower than expected, then the sampling rate may be a little higher so that a few cases can be sampled.

3 Column 2 indicates the subsample to whom the item will apply. Column 3 provides the purpose or issue being addressed by the data element, and column 4 indicates how the data element has been changed since the original OMB submission if it has changed. Rows with data elements to be deleted are highlighted.

Supporting Statement Request for OMB Review (SF83i)