Search Results: (16-30 of 223 records)
| Pub Number | Title |  Date |
|---|---|---|
| NCES 2008479 | NAEP 1971–2004 Reading Long-Term Trend Restricted Use Data File
This CD-ROM contains data and documentation files for the NAEP Reading Long-Term Trend assessments at ages 9, 13, and 17 for the years 1971, 1975, 1980, 1984, 1988, 1990, 1992, 1994, 1996, 1999, and 2004 for use in the analysis of NAEP data by secondary researchers. A Data Companion is provided in electronic portable document format (PDF). This document contains information on the contents and use of the data files as well as the assessment design and its implications for analysis. Your organization must apply for and be granted a restricted-use data license in order to obtain these data. |
5/21/2008 |
| NCES 2008457 | National Indian Education Study 2007 Part I: Performance of American Indian and Alaska Native Students at Grades 4 and 8 on NAEP 2007 Reading and Mathematics Assessments
The 2007 National Indian Education Study (NIES) was conducted by the National Center for Education Statistics on behalf of the U.S. Department of Education, Office of Indian Education. This report presents the results for Part I of the study focusing on the performance of American Indian and Alaska Native (AI/AN) fourth- and eighth-graders on the 2007 National Assessment of Educational Progress in reading and mathematics. A national sample of approximately 10,100 AI/AN students at grades 4 and 8 participated in the 2007 reading assessment and 10,300 in the mathematics assessment. Results from this study are compared to those from the first NIES conducted in 2005. The results for 11 states with relatively large populations of AI/AN students are presented in addition to the national results.Overall, the average reading scores for AI/AN fourth- and eighth-graders showed no significant change since 2005 and were lower than the scores for non-AI/AN students in 2007. In 2007 at both grades, AI/AN students attending schools in which less than 25 percent of the students were AI/AN scored higher than their peers attending schools with higher concentrations of AI/AN students, and those attending public schools scored higher than their peers in Bureau of Indian Education schools.Overall, the average mathematics scores for AI/AN fourth- and eighth-graders showed no significant change since 2005 and were lower than the scores for non-AI/AN students in 2007. There was, however, an increase in the percentage of AI/AN fourth-graders performing at or above the Proficient level from 21 percent in 2005 to 25 percent in 2007. In 2007 at both grades, AI/AN students attending schools in which less than 25 percent of the students were AI/AN scored higher than their peers attending schools with higher concentrations of AI/AN students, and those attending public schools scored higher than their peers in Bureau of Indian Education schools. |
5/14/2008 |
| NCES 2008468 | The Nation’s Report Card: Writing 2007
This report presents the results of the 2007 National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) writing assessment. It was administered to a nationally representative sample of more than 165,000 eighth- and twelfth-graders from public and private schools. In addition to national results, the report includes state and urban district results for grade 8 public school students. Forty-five states, the Department of Defense schools, and 10 urban districts voluntarily participated. To measure their writing skills, the assessment engaged students in narrative, informative, and persuasive writing tasks. NAEP presents the writing results as scale scores and achievement-level percentages. Results are also reported for student performance by various demographic characteristics such as race/ethnicity, gender, and eligibility for the National School Lunch Program. The 2007 national results are compared with results from the 2002 and 1998 assessments. At grades 8 and 12, average writing scores and the percentages of students performing at or above Basic were higher than in both previous assessments. The White -- Black score gap narrowed at grade 8 compared to 1998 and 2002 but showed no significant change at grade 12. The gender score gap showed no significant change at grade 8 compared with previous assessments but narrowed at grade 12 since 2002. Eighth-graders eligible for free or reduced-price school lunch scored lower on average than students who were not eligible. Compared with 2002, average writing scores for eighth-graders increased in 19 states and the Department of Defense schools, and scores decreased in one state. Compared with 1998, scores increased in 28 states and the Department of Defense Schools, and no states showed a decrease. Scores for most urban districts at grade 8 were comparable to or higher than scores for large central cities but were below the national average. Trend results are available for 4 of the 10 urban districts. |
4/3/2008 |
| NCES 2008470 | NAEP Writing 2007 State Snapshot Reports
Each state and jurisdiction that participated in the NAEP 2007 writing assessment receives a one-page snapshot report that presents key findings and trends in a condensed format. The reports in this series present bulleted text describing overall student results, bar charts showing NAEP achievement levels for each year in which the state participated, and tables displaying results by gender, race/ethnicity, and eligibility for free/reduced-price lunch. In addition, bulleted text describes the trends in average scale score gaps for gender, race/ethnicity, eligibility for free/reduced-price lunch, and the 25th compared to the 75th percentile score. Trends in scale scores at selected percentiles are also displayed. |
4/3/2008 |
| NCES 2008471 | NAEP Writing 2007 District Snapshot Reports
Each district that participated in the NAEP 2007 Trial Urban District Assessment in writing receives a one-page snapshot report that presents key findings and trends in a condensed format. The reports in this series present bulleted text describing overall student results, bar charts showing NAEP achievement levels for each year in which the district participated, and tables displaying results by gender, race/ethnicity, and eligibility for free/reduced-price lunch. In addition, bulleted text describes the trends in average scale score gaps for gender, race/ethnicity, eligibility for free/reduced-price lunch, and the 25th compared to the 75th percentile score. Trends in scale scores at selected percentiles are also displayed. |
4/3/2008 |
| NCES 2008474 | Comparison Between NAEP and State Reading Assessment Results: 2003
In late January through early March of 2003, the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) grade 4 and 8 reading and mathematics assessments were administered to representative samples of students in approximately 100 public schools in each state. The results of these assessments were announced in November 2003. Each state also carried out its own reading and mathematics assessments in the 2002-2003 school year, most including grades 4 and 8. This report addresses the question of whether the results published by NAEP are comparable to the results published by individual state testing programs. OBJECTIVES: Comparisons to address the following four questions are based purely on results of testing and do not compare the content of NAEP and state assessments. How do states’ achievement standards compare with each other and with NAEP? Are NAEP and state assessment results correlated across schools? Do NAEP and state assessments agree on achievement trends over time? Do NAEP and state assessments agree on achievement gaps between subgroups? How do states’ achievement standards compare with each other and with NAEP? Both NAEP and State Education Agencies have set achievement, or performance, standards for reading and have identified test score criteria for determining the percentages of students who meet the standards. Most states have multiple performance standards, and these can be categorized into a primary standard, which, since the passage of No Child Left Behind, is generally the standard used for reporting adequate yearly progress (AYP), and standards that are above or below the primary standard. Most states refer to their primary standard as proficient or meets the standard. By matching percentages of students reported to be meeting state standards in schools participating in NAEP with the distribution of performance of students in those schools on NAEP, cutpoints on the NAEP scale can be identified that are equivalent to the scores required to meet a state’s standards. |
4/2/2008 |
| NCES 2008475 | Comparison Between NAEP and State Mathematics Assessment Results: 2003
In late January through early March of 2003, the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) grade 4 and 8 reading and mathematics assessments were administered to representative samples of students in approximately 100 public schools in each state. The results of these assessments were announced in November 2003. Each state also carried out its own reading and mathematics assessments in the 2002-2003 school year, most including grades 4 and 8. This report addresses the question of whether the results published by NAEP are comparable to the results published by individual state testing programs. OBJECTIVES: Comparisons to address the following four questions are based purely on results of testing and do not compare the content of NAEP and state assessments. How do states’ achievement standards compare with each other and with NAEP? Are NAEP and state assessment results correlated across schools? Do NAEP and state assessments agree on achievement trends over time? Do NAEP and state assessments agree on achievement gaps between subgroups? How do states’ achievement standards compare with each other and with NAEP? Both NAEP and State Education Agencies have set achievement, or performance, standards for mathematics and have identified test score criteria for determining the percentages of students who meet the standards. Most states have multiple performance standards, and these can be categorized into a primary standard, which, since the passage of No Child Left Behind, is generally the standard used for reporting adequate yearly progress (AYP), and standards that are above or below the primary standard. Most states refer to their primary standard as proficient or meets the standard. By matching percentages of students reported to be meeting state standards in schools participating in NAEP with the distribution of performance of students in those schools on NAEP, cutpoints on the NAEP scale can be identified that are equivalent to the scores required to meet a state’s standards. |
4/2/2008 |
| NCES 2008022 | Digest of Education Statistics, 2007
The 43rd in a series of publications initiated in 1962, the Digest’s primary purpose is to provide a compilation of statistical information covering the broad field of American education from prekindergarten through graduate school. The Digest contains data on a variety of topics, including the number of schools and colleges, teachers, enrollments, and graduates, in addition to educational attainment, finances, and federal funds for education, libraries, and international comparisons. |
3/25/2008 |
| NCES 2008472 | NAEP 2006 National Civics, Economics, and U.S. History Restricted Use Data File
This CD-ROM contains data and documentation files for the NAEP 2006 national assessments in civics and U.S. history at grades 4, 8, and 12, and economics at grade 12, for use in the analysis of NAEP data by secondary researchers. A Data Companion is provided in electronic portable document format (PDF). This document contains information on the contents and use of the data files as well as the assessment design and its implications for analysis. NAEP datasets from 2002 onward require a Tool Kit with the updated NAEPEX. Your organization must apply for and be granted a restricted-use data license in order to obtain these data. |
2/20/2008 |
| NCES 2008452 | The Nation’s Report Card: 2007 Trial Urban District Assessment in Mathematics
This report presents trial school-district-level results of the NAEP mathematics 2003, 2005, and 2007 assessments at grades 4 and 8 for 10 urban public-school districts: Atlanta City, Boston School District, Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools, City of Chicago School District 299, Cleveland Municipal School District, Houston ISD, Los Angeles Unified, New York City Public Schools, and San Diego City Unified. In 2005, Austin ISD was added and also participated in 2007. These districts participated voluntarily in the trial assessment. Data for the District of Columbia, which regularly participates in NAEP, are also included. Student performance is reported in terms of average scale scores on the NAEP mathematics scale and the percentages of students who attained the achievement levels set by the National Assessment Governing Board. Comparisons are made to results for public schools in large central cities. Student performance is reported by race/ethnicity, eligibility for free/reduced-price school lunch, and for students with disabilities and English language learners. At grade 4, between 2003 and 2007, mathematics performance improved in 8 of the 10 districts that participated in both years. Between 2007 and 2005, four districts scored higher and one scored lower. At grade 8, eight districts had higher scores in 2007 than in 2003, and six had higher scores when 2007 was compared with 2005. |
11/15/2007 |
| NCES 2008455 | The Nation’s Report Card: 2007 Trial Urban District Assessment in Reading
This report presents results for four years of trial school-district-level reading assessments in NAEP at grades 4 and 8. Five urban public-school districts voluntarily participated in NAEP in 2002 and 2003: Atlanta City, City of Chicago School District 299, Houston ISD, Los Angeles Unified, and New York City Public Schools. In 2003, four additional districts participated: Boston School District, Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools, Cleveland Municipal School District, and San Diego City Unified. In 2005 and 2007, Austin ISD also participated. Results are reported for these 10 districts and for the District of Columbia, which regularly participates in NAEP. Student performance is reported in terms of average scale scores on the NAEP reading scale and percentages of students who attained the achievement levels set by the National Assessment Governing Board. Comparisons are made to results in large central cities. Student performance is reported by race/ethnicity, eligibility for free/reduced-price school lunch, and for students with disabilities and English language learners. At grade 4, average reading scores increased between 2002 and 2007 in four districts and in two districts between 2005 and 2007. One district had a lower average score when 2007 was compared with 2005. At grade 8, increases were noted in two districts when comparing 2007 to 2002 and in four districts when comparing 2007 with 2005. |
11/15/2007 |
| NCES 2008464 | NAEP Mathematics 2007 District Snapshot Reports
Each district that participated in the NAEP 2007 Trial Urban District Assessment in mathematics receives a one-page snapshot report that presents key findings and trends in a condensed format. The reports in this series present bulleted text describing overall student results, bar charts showing NAEP achievement levels for each year in which the district participated, and tables displaying results by gender, race/ethnicity, and eligibility for free/reduced-price lunch. In addition, bulleted text describes the trends in average scale score gaps for gender, race/ethnicity, eligibility for free/reduced-price lunch, and the 25th compared to the 75th percentile score. Trends in scale scores at selected percentiles are also displayed. |
11/15/2007 |
| NCES 2008465 | NAEP Reading 2007 District Snapshot Reports
Each district that participated in the NAEP 2007 Trial Urban District Assessment in reading receives a one-page snapshot report that presents key findings and trends in a condensed format. The reports in this series present bulleted text describing overall student results, bar charts showing NAEP achievement levels for each year in which the district participated, and tables displaying results by gender, race/ethnicity, and eligibility for free/reduced-price lunch. In addition, bulleted text describes the trends in average scale score gaps for gender, race/ethnicity, eligibility for free/reduced-price lunch, and the 25th compared to the 75th percentile score. Trends in scale scores at selected percentiles are also displayed. |
11/15/2007 |
| NCER 20072003 | Encouraging Girls in Math and Science: IES Practice Guide
This NCER Practice Guide is the second in a series of IES guides in education. Developed by a panel of experts, this guide brings together the best available evidence and expertise to provide educators with specific and coherent evidence-based recommendations on how to encourage girls in the fields of math and science. The objective is to provide teachers with specific recommendations that can be carried out in the classroom without requiring systemic change. Other school personnel having direct contact with students, such as coaches, counselors, and principals may also find the guide useful. The guide offers five recommendations and indicates the quality of the evidence that supports the recommendations. Together, the recommendations make a coherent statement: To encourage girls in math and science, educators need to strengthen girls' beliefs about their abilities in math and science, spark and maintain greater interest in these subject areas, and build associated skills. |
9/28/2007 |
| NCES 2007494 | The Nation’s Report Card: Mathematics 2007
This report presents results of the 2007 National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) in mathematics at grades 4 and 8. Results for students in the nation and in 50 states, the District of Columbia, and Department of Defense schools are reported as average scores and as percentages of students performing at or above three achievement levels: Basic, Proficient, and Advanced. Scores are also reported at selected percentiles, showing changes in the performance of lower-, middle-, and higher-performing students. Results for groups of students defined by various background characteristics (e.g., gender, race/ethnicity, and students’ eligibility for free or reduced-price school lunch) are included, as well as sample assessment questions with examples of student responses. Additional technical notes and appendix tables provide information on NAEP samples, school and student participation rates, exclusion and accommodation of students with disabilities and English language learners, and additional state-level results.Highlights of the national results show that both fourth- and eighth-graders reached a higher level of performance in 2007 in comparison to all earlier assessment years. The average score for fourth-graders increased 27 points over the past 17 years, and the score for eighth-graders increased 19 points. Students at all levels of performance made gains, resulting in higher percentages of students at or above the Basic and Proficient achievement levels.State results show gains since 2005 for both fourth- and eighth-graders in 15 states and jurisdictions. An additional 8 states showed gains for grade 4 only, and 11 states showed gains for grade 8 only. All of the 42 states and jurisdictions that participated in both the 1992 and 2007 fourth-grade mathematics assessments showed higher average scores in 2007, and all 38 states and jurisdictions that participated in the 1990 and 2007 eighth-grade mathematics assessments showed higher average scores in 2007. |
9/25/2007 |
Publications & Products