Recently Added
CLEAR searches the existing literature for research relevant to this topic area's focus. Browse the most recently reviewed research below.
Displaying 211 - 220 of 511
Study Type: Descriptive Analysis
The study's objective was to determine what characteristics of a college department (referred to as the climate) were conducive to retaining women and underrepresented minorities enrolled in an…Study Type: Descriptive Analysis
The study's objective was to suggest successful strategies for increasing the number of women and girls in STEM classes. The author used studies of other programs and lessons learned from personal…Study Type: Descriptive Analysis
This study described the implementation of the National Science Foundation Research Experiences for Undergraduates (REU) program at New York City College of Technology. This year-long program…Study Type: Descriptive Analysis
The study examined institutional and student factors that had the greatest effect on students’ decisions to persist in STEM majors, emphasizing factors promoting STEM degree completion for female…Study Type: Descriptive Analysis
The study's objective was to examine differences in students’ likelihood of majoring in a science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) field, based on gender and ethnicity. The study…Study Type: Descriptive Analysis
This report from the Government Accountability Office (GAO) summarizes the findings of a descriptive study of Youth Opportunity Grants. The 36 grants issued under this program, which began in 2000…Study Type: Descriptive Analysis
This report summarizes YouthBuild participants’ experiences after program completion. YouthBuild was founded in 1991 and offers academic instruction and construction training to economically…Study Type: Implementation Analysis
This report summarizes the findings of an implementation and outcomes analysis of Young Offender grants. These grants, which were awarded to 30 YouthBuild USA sites in 2004 and 2005, were to provide…Study Type: Descriptive Analysis
This study examined the work of six dropout recovery programs to explore how similar programs might more effectively prepare youth for postsecondary education and employment. It focused on the key…Study Type: Descriptive Analysis
This report describes the work of Our Piece of the Pie (OPP), an organization that gives young people in Hartford, CT, access to a range of services, including academic assistance, vocational…
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.