Recently Added
CLEAR searches the existing literature for research relevant to this topic area's focus. Browse the most recently reviewed research below.
Displaying 11 - 20 of 76
Mentoring practices proven to broaden participation in STEM disciplines (Crumpton-Young et al. 2014)
Study Type: Descriptive Analysis
The study identified effective mentoring practices, mostly at postsecondary institutions, for women and minority students in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) fields. The…Study Type: Descriptive Analysis
The article discussed how career counselors can use social cognitive career theory (SCCT), a theory that one’s background and characteristics influence self-efficacy and ultimately career choice, to…Study Type: Descriptive Analysis
This study aimed to determine if student characteristics; financial aid receipt; and labor market conditions (such as unemployment, weekly wages, and professors’ salary) predicted doctoral degree…Study Type: Descriptive Analysis
The study’s objective was to examine the effects of the Washington Alternative Work Search Experiment on the employment, earnings, and unemployment insurance benefit receipt among those who…Study Type: Descriptive Analysis
The study’s objective was to assess the effects of a women’s entrepreneurship training program on children’s participation in school and work. The study was a regression discontinuity design, using…Study Type: Descriptive Analysis
This objective of this study was to examine the impact of a conditional cash transfer program, National Plan for Social Emergency Assistance (PANES), on child labor and school attendance for…Study Type: Descriptive Analysis
In a study performed over the course of a summer engineering program for 4th- through 8th-grade girls, the authors sought to determine whether participants’ attitudes toward engineering changed from…Study Type: Descriptive Analysis
This study explored the successes and challenges of implementing Youth Opportunity grants, which were awarded to 36 low-income communities in May 2000 to address high unemployment, low graduation…Study Type: Descriptive Analysis
This article introduced an issue of the Social Security Bulletin that featured articles drawn from the 2010 Ticket to Work (TTW) evaluation report and provided more expansive information than that…Study Type: Descriptive Analysis
The article provided an overview of experimental evaluations of unemployment insurance (UI) reforms conducted from 1977 to 1992 in the United States. These reforms typically tried to improve the…
CLEAR Icon Key
Below is a key for icons used to indicate important details about a study, such as its type, evidence rating, and outcome findings.
High Causal Evidence
Strong evidence the effects are caused by the examined intervention.
Moderate Causal Evidence
Evidence that the effects are caused to some degree by the examined intervention.
Low Causal Evidence
Little evidence that the effects are caused by the examined intervention.
Causal Impact Analysis
Uses quantitative methods to assess the effectiveness of a program, policy, or intervention.
Descriptive Analysis
Describes a program, policy, or intervention using qualitative or quantitative methods.
Implementation Analysis
Examines the implementation of a program, policy, or intervention.
Favorable
The study found at least one favorable impact in the outcome domain, and no unfavorable impacts.
Mixed
The study found some favorable and some unfavorable impacts in the outcome domain.
None
The study found no statistically significant impacts in the outcome domain.
Unfavorable
The study found at least one unfavorable impact in the outcome domain, and no favorable impacts.
Not applicable
Not applicable because no outcomes were examined in the outcome domain.
Favorable - low evidence
The study found at least one favorable impact in the outcome domain, and no unfavorable impacts. The study received a low causal evidence ratings so these findings should be interpreted with caution.
Mixed - low evidence
The study found some favorable and some unfavorable impacts in the outcome domain. The study received a low causal evidence ratings so these findings should be interpreted with caution.
None - low evidence
The study found no statistically significant impacts in the outcome domain. The study received a low causal evidence ratings so these findings should be interpreted with caution.
Unfavorable - low evidence
The study found at least one unfavorable impact in the outcome domain, and no favorable impacts. The study received a low causal evidence ratings so these findings should be interpreted with caution.
Describes a program, policy, or intervention using qualitative or quantitative methods.