Introduction

Today I am releasing the results of the 2007 reading and mathematics assessments from the National Assessment of Educational Progress-the NAEP Report Cards in these subjects for 2007. These assessments were given earlier this year to 4th- and 8th-grade students across the country.

The Nation's Report Card: Reading 2007
The Nation’s Report Card: Mathematics 2007

Overview of the 2007 Mathematics and Reading Assessments

About 700,000 students participated in the two assessments. We have results for the nation and for all 50 states, the District of Columbia, and the Department of Defense school system.

NAEP reports student performance in two ways: scale scores and achievement levels. NAEP scale scores indicate what students know and can do, using separate scales for reading and mathematics that range from zero to five hundred. Achievement levels, developed by the National Assessment Governing Board, set standards for what students should know and be able to do. For each subject and for each grade, the Governing Board has established standards for Basic, Proficient, and Advanced performance. Ultimately, the goal is to have all students performing at or above the Proficient level. Today I will be reporting on the percentages of students who performed at or above Basic, those who performed at or above Proficient, and those who performed at the Advanced level.

In comparing results based on either scale scores or achievement level percentages, it is important to keep in mind that NAEP results are based on samples. For this reason, there is a margin of error associated with each score. When comparing scores and other NAEP results we only discuss differences that are larger than the margin of error-those that are statistically significant. In the tables and figures in the Report Cards, an asterisk is placed next to a score or percentage from a previous assessment when the difference with 2007 is statistically significant. I will mainly compare student performance in 2007 with performance on the last assessment, in 2005, and the first assessment for a given subject and grade, which ranges from 1990 to 1998.

First I will present a brief overview, then describe the findings for each subject in more detail.

Overall Findings from 2005 to 2007 - Grade 4

Both reading and mathematics scores increased since 2005.

In both subjects, there was an increase in the percentage of students performing at or above Basic and at or above Proficient.

Again, in both subjects, White, Black, Hispanic, and Asian and Pacific Islander fourth-grade students attained higher scores than their peers in 2005.

The gap in scores between White and Black students narrowed in reading, but not in mathematics.

Overall Findings from 2005 to 2007 - Grade 8

At grade 8, there was also an increase in scores for both subjects.

In both subjects, a higher percentage of students performed at or above Basic.

The percentage of students performing at or above Proficient increased in mathematics only.

Scores rose for White and Black students in both subjects and for Hispanics in mathematics.

The White-Black score gap narrowed in mathematics.

2007 Reading Results

I will now present reading results for the fourth and eighth grades in more detail.

National Results, Grade 4

The 2007 average reading scale score at the fourth grade increased 2 points since 2005 and increased 4 points since the first reading assessment in 1992. The 2007 score was higher than in any previous assessment. Students at almost all levels of performance (through the 75th percentile) showed increases, while students at the 90th percentile remained at the same level.

In terms of achievement levels, higher percentages of students scored at or above Basic and at or above Proficient in 2007 than in any previous assessment. In addition, 8 percent of 4th-graders scored at I. The 2007 percentage at Advanced was higher than in 1992 but not significantly different from 2005.

In our trend graphs, we use dotted lines for the early assessments to indicate that we did not allow accommodations for special needs students¾those with disabilities and English language learners. The 1998 assessment was the first reading assessment to offer accommodations to students who needed them to participate. In that year we conducted the assessment with two samples to determine the effect of allowing accommodations. Thus, the graph of trend results shows two scores for 1998. We continue to permit accommodations, which allows NAEP to include more disabled students and English language learners, thereby resulting in a sample more representative of all students.

National Results by Race/Ethnicity, Grade 4

Reading scores for the major racial/ethnic groups show increases for all groups for both comparison years, except for American Indian and Alaska Native students, whose average score in 2007 was not significantly different from 2005. (We could not compare their performance in 2007 with 1992 because the sample size in 1992 was too small.)

Scores increased for White, Black, Hispanic, and Asian and Pacific Islander students from 1992 by at least 7 points. But the overall increase was only 4 points. Given the greater increases for each of the racial/ethnic groups, why wasn't the overall increase larger?

The answer is that the groups had differing average scores and the relative size of the groups has been changing. For example, the percentage of Hispanic students has increased substantially since 1992, while that of White students has declined. The average score for Hispanic students tends to be lower than the overall average, while the average score for White students tends to be higher. Thus, the increased percentage of students who, on average, had lower scores offsets the fact that all the groups were improving their performance.

The average reading score gap between White and Black students in 2007 was 27 points, narrower than in any previous assessment. The average scores of both groups in 2007 were higher than ever before, but Black students made greater gains than White students since 1992.

Scores for both White and Hispanic students were also higher than ever before in 2007. However, the gap between their scores did not show a significant change compared to either 1992 or 2005.

National Results by Family Income, Grade 4

NAEP reports student results according to their eligibility for the National School Lunch Program. We report on three groups, ranked according to family income level: those students eligible for free lunches, those eligible for reduced price lunches, and those whose family income is too high to make them eligible for any assistance. Because of changes in the availability of data, we can only make comparisons back to 2003. Scores increased for all three groups.

Trends in Average Scores of States, Grade 4

We have results for all 50 states and two additional jurisdictions-the District of Columbia and the Department of Defense school system. To simplify the discussion, I will refer to all 52 jurisdictions as "states."