Search

This guide to evaluation of home economics instruction covers five major topic areas: (1) Purposes for evaluating pupil learning; (2) steps to take in developing the needed evaluation techniques; (3) suggested means to achieving purposes related to evaluation; (4) tips on improving evaluative practices, and (5) notes on enlisting student help in the evaluation process and making it a learning experience for them. Specific techniques are enumerated and explained in each section. Sample assignments, guided response items, filing suggestions, survey and test ideas are also provided. The four appendixes contain information on classification of cognitive objectives and suggested types of behaviors, classification of affective objectives and suggested types of behaviors, classification of psychomotor objectives and suggested types of behaviors, and generalizations basic to test items. (LAS)

Over the past decade, RTI International has pursued the goal of quality, inclusive, differentiated early grade literacy instruction in nearly 30 early grade reading or early grade literacy programs in low- and middle-income (LMI) countries. Across our diverse portfolio, we have supported Ministries of Education (Ministries) in diverse contexts in their development and implementation of research-based early grade literacy programs and have learned important lessons based on our experience working with Ministries to design, develop, and implement early grade literacy programs. This paper describes the core elements that we have found to improve early grade literacy instruction and learner outcomes: the approach to teaching (Teach), the availability of quality, relevant learner materials (Text), the effective use of instructional time (Time), the use of formative assessment to guide instruction (Test), and provision of instruction in the most effective language (Tongue). This paper focuses on the acquisition of literacy in alphabetic and alphasyllabic languages in the early primary years (most typically, academic levels 1 through 3) and the kinds of exposures, instruction, and support learners need to become fully literate. These are the elements of a literacy program that can be taught, that should be present in teaching and learning materials and in teacher trainings, and that relate specifically to what happens in a classroom. Many more factors contribute to literacy acquisition. However, we focus on the core elements in this paper to delve deeper and facilitate a richer discussion about these components. No one-size-fits-all approach to the development and implementation of literacy programs exists; the local context and constraints of any implementation can require adaptation and adjustments. In many cases, the fully diversified approach to early grade literacy instruction described in the classroom scenario has not yet been achieved. However, we hope that this compilation of lessons learned and best practices achieved through our experiences will help to further the efforts of all to provide high-quality, effective literacy instruction to all learners, particularly those in LMI countries.

This report provides a portrait of children who entered Head Start for the first time in fall 2009 and completed a year in the program in spring 2010. It also describes their family backgrounds and the classrooms and programs that serve them. Data are drawn from the 2009 cohort of the Head Start Family and Child Experiences Survey (FACES), a periodic, longitudinal study of program performance. Successive samples of Head Start children, their families, classrooms, and programs provide descriptive information at the national level on the population served; staff qualifications, credentials, and opinions; Head Start classroom practices and quality; and child and family outcomes. Previous FACES cohorts were initiated in 1997, 2000, 2003 and 2006. (Contains 17 figures, 6 tables, and 82 notes.)

The Milwaukee Parental Choice Program (MPCP) is the nation's oldest and largest urban school choice program, offering private-school scholarships to low-income students in the city of Milwaukee since 1990. In the early years of the program, voucher schools were not required to test their students, though many of them did so using nationally normed standardized tests. That changed on March 10, 2006, when Wisconsin Governor Jim Doyle signed Wisconsin Act 125 into law. The Act required participating private schools to administer either the state test, the Wisconsin Knowledge and Concepts Examination (WKCE), or a nationally normed test annually in reading, mathematics and science to MPCP (aka "Choice") students enrolled in 4th, 8th, and 10th grades. Beginning in 2006 and extending through 2011, the law required that the individual student results of the tests be provided to the School Choice Demonstration Project (SCDP), an independent research organization. This report describes the results of student testing conducted by MPCP schools during the 2010-11 academic year. Participating MPCP schools sent the WKCE scores from their test administration to the Department of Public Instruction, which shared the resulting scores with the School Choice Demonstration Project in the spring of 2011. Participating schools that opted to continue administering additional nationally normed tests reported those results directly to the SCDP, with most of them arriving in the summer of 2011. The SCDP staff carefully entered these scores into a single database and delivered the data to the Legislative Audit Bureau on December 16, 2011. Appended are: (1) Schools with MPCP students in tested grades in operation through May 2011 (N= 102); (2) Correspondence with Schools; and (3) DPI News Release--March 2011. (Contains 8 tables, 22 figures and 11 footnotes.) [For the "Milwaukee Longitudinal School Choice Evaluation: Annual School Testing Summary Report 2009-10. SCDP Milwaukee Evaluation. Report # 26", see ED518592. Additional support for this report was provided by the Robertson Foundation.]

In this technical report, we present the results of a reliability study of the third-grade multiple choice reading comprehension measures available on the easyCBM learning system conducted in the spring of 2011. Analyses include split-half reliability, alternate form reliability, person and item reliability as derived from Rasch analysis, top/bottom reliability, and repeated measures analysis of variance (ANOVA). Results suggest adequate reliability for the third grade multiple choice reading comprehension measures. Tables are appended.

In this technical report, we present the results of a reliability study of the fifth-grade multiple choice reading comprehension measures available on the easyCBM learning system conducted in the spring of 2011. Analyses include split-half reliability, alternate form reliability, person and item reliability as derived from Rasch analysis, top/bottom reliability, and repeated measures analysis of variance (ANOVA). Results suggest adequate reliability for the fifth grade multiple choice reading comprehension measures. Tables are appended.

In this technical report, we present the results of a reliability study of the sixth-grade multiple choice reading comprehension measures available on the easyCBM learning system conducted in the spring of 2011. Analyses include split-half reliability, alternate form reliability, person and item reliability as derived from Rasch analysis, top/bottom reliability, and repeated measures analysis of variance (ANOVA). Results suggest adequate reliability for the sixth-grade multiple choice reading comprehension measures. Tables are appended.

In this technical report, we present the results of a reliability study of the fourth-grade multiple choice reading comprehension measures available on the easyCBM learning system conducted in the spring of 2011. Analyses include split-half reliability, alternate form reliability, person and item reliability as derived from Rasch analysis, top/bottom reliability, and repeated measures analysis of variance (ANOVA). Results suggest adequate reliability for the fourth-grade multiple choice reading comprehension measures. Tables are appended.

The Government is committed to ensuring that the new National Curriculum compares favourably with the curricula in the highest performing jurisdictions, and sets rigorous requirements for pupil attainment which measure up to the highest standards set internationally. The Government is also committed to slimming the National Curriculum so that it properly reflects the body of essential knowledge which all pupils should learn. The purpose of this report is to explore and present initial findings on what can be learned from the analysis of curricula of high-performing jurisdictions, in order to inform the development of the new National Curriculum for English, mathematics and science. In particular, issues of breadth, specificity and challenge within each subject are examined in detail to assess what this may tell everyone in devising a new National Curriculum which measures up to the highest international standards. This report forms part of a suite of evidence documents gathered as part of the National Curriculum review, including the Expert Panel report and summary report of responses to the call for evidence. Further analysis is underway to examine the education systems and cultural contexts of high-performing jurisdictions, in order to assess what other factors need to be taken into account when comparing the relative achievement of pupils from different jurisdictions. The first two sections of the report focus on the methodology and the achievement of pupils in England compared to other jurisdictions in reading, mathematics and science. The remaining three sections focus on English, mathematics and science respectively--including the analysis of breadth, specificity and challenge of the curricula in high-performing jurisdictions in comparison to the National Curriculum in England. Appended are: (1) Background on PISA, PIRLS and TIMSS studies; (2) Curriculum document references; (3) English curriculum comparison tables; (4) Mathematics curriculum comparison tables; and (5) Science curriculum comparison tables. (Contains 7 figures, 61 tables and 142 footnotes.) [For related report, "Review of the National Curriculum in England: Report on Subject Breadth in International Jurisdictions. Research Report. DFE-RR178a," see ED528792.]

This report examines the differences in impact estimates and standard errors that arise when these are derived using state achievement tests only (as pre-tests and post-tests), study-administered tests only, or some combination of state- and study-administered tests. State tests may yield different evaluation results relative to a test that is selected, and administered, by the research team for several reasons. For instance, (1) because state tests vary in content and emphasis, they also can vary in their coverage of the types of knowledge and skills targeted by any given intervention. In contrast, a study-administered test will correspond to the intervention being evaluated. In addition to differences in alignment with treatment, state tests may yield divergent evaluation results due to differences in (2) the stakes associated with the test, (3) missing data, (4) the timing of the tests, (5) reliability or measurement error, and (6) alignment between pre-test and post-test. Olsen, Unlu, Jaciw, and Price (2011) discuss how these six factors may differ between state- and study-administered tests to influence the findings from an impact evaluation. Specifically, Olsen et al. use data from three single-state, small-scale evaluations of reading interventions that collected outcomes data using both study-administered and state achievement tests to examine this and other issues. The authors found that (1) impact estimates based on study-administered tests had smaller standard errors than impact estimates based on state tests, (2) impacts estimates from models with "mismatched" pre-tests (e.g., a state pre-test used in combination with a study-administered post-test) had larger standard errors than impact estimates from models with matched pre-tests, and (3) impact estimates from models that included a second pre-test covariate had smaller standard errors than impact estimates from models that included a single pre-test covariate. Study authors caution that their results may not generalize to evaluations conducted in other states, with different study-administered tests, or with other student samples. Appended are: (1) Description of the Three Experiments; (2) Scatter Plots of Student Test Scores; (3) Quartiles of the Test Score Distribution; (4) Estimates from Other Evaluations; (5) Estimates from the Full Sample; (6) Hypothesis Tests and Minimum Detectable Differences; (7) Conceptual Approach to Generating Correlated Residuals for the Parametric Bootstrap; (8) Results from Bootstrapping and Hypothesis Testing; (9) Differences in Sample Size Requirements; (10) Correlations between Scores on State and Study-Administered Tests; and (11) Estimates of Key Statistical Power Parameters. (Contains 37 tables, 3 figures and 45 footnotes.)

This presentation was presented at the 2011 National Conference on Student Assessment (CCSSO). The focus of this presentation is how to validate the common core state standards (CCSS) in math and ELA and the subsequent assessments that will be developed by state consortia. The CCSS specify the skills students need to be ready for post-secondary career training or college credit courses, yet much of the evidence has been based on professional judgments and reviews of standards and assessment frameworks specified by states and international assessments. A comprehensive validation strategy requires multiple sources of convergent evidence. This presentations reviews the sources of such evidence, the weight that should be attributed to such evidence and some preliminary thinking about how to proceed in developing a validation framework. The College Board's college readiness benchmarks, and how they have been empirically developed, are also discussed.

First introduced in 1965, the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) has evolved over time, emphasizing education reform priorities that mirror the changing national education policy conversation. The most recent iteration of ESEA, as amended by the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB), was enacted in 2001. It emphasized improving outcomes for all students regardless of their race, language, or disability, with a strong focus on accountability for teachers, schools, and districts. A decade later, ESEA is again due for reauthorization. This Pocket Guide will assist policymakers and educators as they consider changes to this law--particularly changes related to ensuring a highly effective teacher in every classroom. (Contains 3 figures.) [For related reports, see "School Turnaround: A Pocket Guide. Reauthorizing ESEA: Making Research Relevant" (ED530797) and "Students with Disabilities: A Pocket Guide. Reauthorizing ESEA: Making Research Relevant" (ED530795).]

Choosing whether to test via computer is the most difficult and consequential decision the designers of a testing program can make. The decision is difficult because of the wide range of choices available. Designers can choose where and how often the test is made available, how the test items look and function, how those items are combined into test forms, and how those forms produce scores. The decision is consequential because it can impact every aspect of the testing process, from item development and test assembly, through test delivery and response collection, to the scoring and reporting of results. This paper is intended to assist in some small way those practitioners who are struggling with the decision of whether to test on computer and how they might best go about doing so. It is not intended to provide an introduction to the important methods and to the considerations that dictate use of those methods. To make truly informed decisions, one would need to be at least conversant--if not quite familiar--with most of the references listed in this paper. In short, this is not a roadmap intended to precisely direct practitioners on their journey to computerized delivery, but rather more a guidebook highlighting some of the landmarks they will likely visit along the way. (Contains 6 tables, 2 figures and 2 footnotes.)

The Center on Education Policy (CEP) analyzed trends over four years in the number of schools and school districts that did not make adequate yearly progress (AYP) in raising student achievement under the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB). Using data from the Consolidated State Performance Reports submitted to the U.S. Department of Education by all 50 states and the District of Columbia, CEP calculated the percentage of schools and districts in the nation and in each state that did not make AYP based on testing in school years 2005-06 through 2008-09. Three key findings emerged from the analysis: (1) One-third (33%) of the nation's schools did not make AYP in 2009. This marks an increase from 29% in 2006 but a decrease from 35% in 2008; (2) More than one-third (36%) of the nation's school districts did not make AYP in 2009, up from 29% in 2006; and (3) The percentages of schools and districts that did not make AYP often fluctuated from year to year within the same state and varied greatly across states. (Contains 2 figures, 2 tables and 5 footnotes.)

States and other educational entities receiving Part B funding under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) submitted their Annual Performance Reports (APRs) and Section 618 Table 6 data together to the U.S. Secretary of Education on or before February 1, 2009. These reports may have been modified during the following few months, and so the National Center on Educational Outcomes (NCEO) waited until June to pull final data from these sources. These reports contained information on a variety of indicators, including large-scale assessment participation and performance data for the 2007-2008 school year. This document is a summary of the assessment data contained in those reports. Appendices include: (1) State-by-State Participation Data; (2) State-by-State Performance Data; (3) State-by-State Participation Raw Data; (4) State-by-State Performance Raw Data; and (5) State-by-State Performance Raw Data by Specific Assessment. (Contains 34 figures and 42 tables.)

Some states are developing alternate assessments based on modified achievement standards (AA-MAS) to measure the academic achievement of some students with disabilities (Albus, Lazarus, Thurlow, & Cormier, 2009; Lazarus, Thurlow, Christensen, & Cormier, 2007). These assessments measure the same content as the general assessment for a given grade-level, but the AA-MAS may have different expectations of content mastery than the general assessment, according to federal regulations and guidance. The purpose of this paper is to provide a rationale, procedures, and tools to develop and continuously improve AA-MAS ALDs. As states make decisions on whether and how to develop an AA-MAS, they will also be developing a defense of the choices they make. Filben (2008) documented the early peer review process and outcomes and it is clear that choices made must be built on a complex educational logic reflecting content coverage, complexity, and the characteristics of the potential participants. In this paper, the authors propose a process to guide state work so that stakeholders and policymakers can articulate, from the very beginning, the educational rationale for their choices and the implications of this rationale for the specific design choices they make related to their ALDs. By building on this rationale, involving key policymakers and stakeholders through a systematic process to articulate the underlying logic, and documenting how this logic has influenced state choices using the tools and templates provided, states will have compelling evidence for peer review defense. More importantly, they will have confidence in the educational implications of the choices for students and schools in their state. Appendices include: (1) Side-By-Side Tables of Achievement Level Descriptors for Grade-Level and Modified Assessments; (2) Achievement Level Descriptor Analysis Decision Rules; and (3) Procedures and Tools to Evaluate or Develop AA-MAS ALDs. (Contains 28 tables.)

This report summarizes the twelfth survey of states by the National Center on Educational Outcomes (NCEO) at the University of Minnesota. Results are presented for all 50 states and 8 of the 11 unique states. The purpose of this report is to provide a snapshot of the new initiatives, trends, accomplishments, and emerging issues during this important period of standards-based education reform as states documented the academic achievement of students with disabilities. Key findings include: (1) States identified several successes and challenges in implementing large scale assessment to a wide and varied population of students; (2) Nearly half of the states did not disaggregate assessment results for English language learners with disabilities; (3) Most states monitored the participation of students on their regular assessment with accommodations. This was most frequently accomplished by directly observing test administration; (4) Three in four states examined the validity of the accommodations used in their state by reviewing research literature or completing an analysis of data; (5) Four in five states used or were considering a growth model for reporting or accountability purposes; (6) Almost half of the states had a formal policy on the use of formative assessments by districts and schools; (7) More than a quarter of the states had decided not to develop an alternate assessment based on modified achievement standards (AA-MAS); and (8) Many states that had developed or were developing an AA-MAS changed an existing grade-level test rather than designing an entirely new test. The most frequently made changes included simplifying vocabulary, reducing the length of the test, and shortening reading passages. States widely recognized the benefits of inclusive assessment and accountability systems, and continued to improve assessment design, participation and accommodations policies, monitoring practices, and data reporting. In addition states identified key areas of need for technical assistance moving forward. Appendices include: (1) Successes and Challenges Reported by Unique States; (2) States' Web Addresses; and (3) Contextual Comments Related to Assessment Data Trends. (Contains 23 figures and 3 tables.

The gold standard in making causal inference on program effects is a randomized trial. Most randomization designs in education randomize classrooms or schools rather than individual students. Such "clustered randomization" designs have one principal drawback: They tend to have limited statistical power or precision. This study aims to provide empirical information needed to design adequately powered studies that randomize schools using data from Florida and North Carolina. The authors assess how different covariates contribute to improving the statistical power of a randomization design and examine differences between math and reading tests; differences between test types (curriculum-referenced tests versus norm-referenced tests); and differences between elementary school and secondary school, to see if the test subject, test type, or grade level makes a large difference in the crucial design parameters. Finally they assess bias in 2-level models that ignore the clustering of students in classrooms. (Contains 5 figures, 46 tables and 2 footnotes.)

States have made tremendous progress in developing longitudinal data systems that can track student progress and answer critical policy questions. However, more work is needed, particularly on certain elements. Data on course-taking and grades (element 6), college readiness test scores (element 7), and other feedback from post-secondary institutions (element 9) can help determine whether high school courses and graduation standards are aligned with college and workplace expectations. However, states have made the least progress on implementing these three elements since 2005. This compendium provides a national overview on state progress towards implementing each of the 10 Elements and answering critical policy questions.

This handbook describes the responsibilities of district and school assessment coordinators in the administration of the Pennsylvania System of School Assessment (PSSA). This updated guidebook contains the following sections: (1) General Assessment Guidelines for All Assessments; (2) Writing Specific Guidelines; (3) Reading and Mathematics Specific Guidelines; and (4) Science Specific Guidelines. Appended are: (1) Sample Parent/Guardian Flyers; (2) PSSA General Description of Scoring Guidelines; (3) Additional Materials Request Forms; and (4) Index.

This report describes results from field-testing of POWERSOURCE[C] formative assessment alongside professional development and instructional resources. The researchers at the National Center for Research, on Evaluation, Standards, & Student Testing (CRESST) employed a randomized, controlled design to address the following question: Does the use of POWERSOURCE[C] strategies improve 6th-grade student performance on assessments of the key mathematical ideas relative to the performance of a comparison group? Sixth-grade teachers were recruited from 7 districts and 25 middle schools. A total of 49 POWERSOURCE[C] and 36 comparison group teachers and their students (2,338 POWERSOURCE[C], 1,753 comparison group students) were included in the study analyses. All students took a pretest of prerequisite knowledge and a transfer measure of tasks drawn from international tests at the end of the study year. Students in the POWERSOURCE[C] group used sets of formative assessment tasks. POWERSOURCE[C] teachers had exposure to professional development and instructional resources. Results indicated that students with higher pretest scores tended to benefit more from the treatment as compared to students with lower pretest scores. In addition, students in the POWERSOURCE[C] group significantly outperformed control group students on distributive property items and the effect was larger as pretest scores increased. Results, limitations and future directions are discussed. Four appendices are included: (1) Item Analysis Results of POWERSOURCE[C] pretest; (2) POWERSOURCE[C] Pretest questionnaire; (3) POWERSOURCE[C] Pretest questionnaire; and (4) Descriptive Statistics of Posttest scores by District and Treatment, School, Teacher in Between-School Design and Teacher in within-School (W-S) Design. (Contains 12 figures and 29 tables.)

This year the Center on Education Policy (CEP) analyzed data on the achievement of different groups of students in two distinct ways. First, it looked at grade 4 test results to determine whether the performance of various groups improved at three achievement levels--basic and above, proficient and above, and advanced. Second, it looked at gaps between these groups at the proficient level across three grades (grade 4, grade 8 in most cases, and a high school grade). These two types of analyses show whether elementary school achievement has generally gone up for different groups of students and whether achievement gaps at different grade levels have narrowed, widened, or stayed the same. This paper profiles the student subgroup achievement and gap trends in Iowa. Achievement trends were mostly upward in Iowa, at least at the proficient achievement level. Gains were shown at the proficient level for all subgroups, but there were declines at the advanced level in reading. Achievement gaps have narrowed almost across the board. (Contains 9 tables.) [For the main report, "State Test Score Trends through 2007-08, Part 3: Are Achievement Gaps Closing and Is Achievement Rising for All?", see ED507909.]

This year the Center on Education Policy analyzed data on the achievement of different groups of students in two distinct ways. First, it looked at grade 4 test results to determine whether the performance of various groups improved at three achievement levels--basic and above, proficient and above, and advanced. Second, it looked at gaps between these groups at the proficient level across three grades (grade 4, grade 8 in most cases, and a high school grade). These two types of analyses show whether elementary school achievement has generally gone up for different groups of students and whether achievement gaps at different grade levels have narrowed, widened, or stayed the same. This paper profiles the student subgroup achievement and gap trends in South Dakota. Overall, student achievement has gone in an upward direction in South Dakota. Most achievement gaps between groups of students are narrowing. (Contains 9 tables.) [For the main report, "State Test Score Trends through 2007-08, Part 3: Are Achievement Gaps Closing and Is Achievement Rising for All?", see ED507909.]

This year the Center on Education Policy analyzed data on the achievement of different groups of students in two distinct ways. First, it looked at grade 4 test results to determine whether the performance of various groups improved at three achievement levels--basic and above, proficient and above, and advanced. Second, it looked at gaps between these groups at the proficient level across three grades (grade 4, grade 8 in most cases, and a high school grade). These two types of analyses show whether elementary school achievement has generally gone up for different groups of students and whether achievement gaps at different grade levels have narrowed, widened, or stayed the same. This paper profiles the student subgroup achievement and gap trends in Tennessee. Student achievement trends in Tennessee have gone in an upward direction, and progress has been made in narrowing achievement gaps between groups of students. (Contains 9 tables.) [For the main report, "State Test Score Trends through 2007-08, Part 3: Are Achievement Gaps Closing and Is Achievement Rising for All?", see ED507909.]

This year the Center on Education Policy analyzed data on the achievement of different groups of students in two distinct ways. First, it looked at grade 4 test results to determine whether the performance of various groups improved at three achievement levels--basic and above, proficient and above, and advanced. Second, it looked at gaps between these groups at the proficient level across three grades (grade 4, grade 8 in most cases, and a high school grade). These two types of analyses show whether elementary school achievement has generally gone up for different groups of students and whether achievement gaps at different grade levels have narrowed, widened, or stayed the same. This paper profiles the student subgroup achievement and gap trends in West Virginia. West Virginia had positive trends in student achievement, and progress was made in closing achievement gaps for African American and low income students. (Contains 9 tables.) [For the main report, "State Test Score Trends through 2007-08, Part 3: Are Achievement Gaps Closing and Is Achievement Rising for All?", see ED507909.]

This year the Center on Education Policy analyzed data on the achievement of different groups of students in two distinct ways. First, it looked at grade 4 test results to determine whether the performance of various groups improved at three achievement levels--basic and above, proficient and above, and advanced. Second, it looked at gaps between these groups at the proficient level across three grades (grade 4, grade 8 in most cases, and a high school grade). These two types of analyses show whether elementary school achievement has generally gone up for different groups of students and whether achievement gaps at different grade levels have narrowed, widened, or stayed the same. This paper profiles the student subgroup achievement and gap trends in Vermont. Overall, achievement trends in Vermont have shown a mixed picture in reading and declines in math. There is also a mixed picture on achievement gaps. (Contains 9 tables.) [For the main report, "State Test Score Trends through 2007-08, Part 3: Are Achievement Gaps Closing and Is Achievement Rising for All?", see ED507909.]

This year the Center on Education Policy analyzed data on the achievement of different groups of students in two distinct ways. First, it looked at grade 4 test results to determine whether the performance of various groups improved at three achievement levels--basic and above, proficient and above, and advanced. Second, it looked at gaps between these groups at the proficient level across three grades (grade 4, grade 8 in most cases, and a high school grade). These two types of analyses show whether elementary school achievement has generally gone up for different groups of students and whether achievement gaps at different grade levels have narrowed, widened, or stayed the same. This paper profiles the student subgroup achievement and gap trends in New Hampshire. The three subgroups that were large enough to analyze in New Hampshire (white, Latino, and low-income students) showed a clear trend of gains in grade 4 reading and math at all three achievement levels--basic-and-above, proficient-and-above, and advanced. Achievement gaps narrowed for the Latino and low-income subgroups. (Contains 9 tables.) [For the main report, "State Test Score Trends through 2007-08, Part 3: Are Achievement Gaps Closing and Is Achievement Rising for All?", see ED507909.]

This year the Center on Education Policy analyzed data on the achievement of different groups of students in two distinct ways. First, it looked at grade 4 test results to determine whether the performance of various groups improved at three achievement levels--basic and above, proficient and above, and advanced. Second, it looked at gaps between these groups at the proficient level across three grades (grade 4, grade 8 in most cases, and a high school grade). These two types of analyses show whether elementary school achievement has generally gone up for different groups of students and whether achievement gaps at different grade levels have narrowed, widened, or stayed the same. This paper profiles the student subgroup achievement and gap trends in Utah. Overall, there was a mixed picture of student achievement in Utah. Although student achievement overall increased, there were some declines in percentages proficient for some subgroups. There was also a mixed picture in terms of progress on achievement gaps. (Contains 9 tables.) [For the main report, "State Test Score Trends through 2007-08, Part 3: Are Achievement Gaps Closing and Is Achievement Rising for All?", see ED507909.]

This year the Center on Education Policy analyzed data on the achievement of different groups of students in two distinct ways. First, it looked at grade 4 test results to determine whether the performance of various groups improved at three achievement levels--basic and above, proficient and above, and advanced. Second, it looked at gaps between these groups at the proficient level across three grades (grade 4, grade 8 in most cases, and a high school grade). These two types of analyses show whether elementary school achievement has generally gone up for different groups of students and whether achievement gaps at different grade levels have narrowed, widened, or stayed the same. This paper profiles the student subgroup achievement and gap trends in Massachusetts. All major student groups showed a clear trend of gains at three achievement levels in grade 4 math, but trends in grade 4 reading were mixed. Achievement gaps narrowed more often than they widened, although gap trends in math were somewhat mixed. (Contains 7 tables.) [For the main report, "State Test Score Trends through 2007-08, Part 3: Are Achievement Gaps Closing and Is Achievement Rising for All?", see ED507909.]

This year the Center on Education Policy analyzed data on the achievement of different groups of students in two distinct ways. First, it looked at grade 4 test results to determine whether the performance of various groups improved at three achievement levels--basic and above, proficient and above, and advanced. Second, it looked at gaps between these groups at the proficient level across three grades (grade 4, grade 8 in most cases, and a high school grade). These two types of analyses show whether elementary school achievement has generally gone up for different groups of students and whether achievement gaps at different grade levels have narrowed, widened, or stayed the same. This paper profiles the student subgroup achievement and gap trends in Alabama. Overall, Alabama showed upward trends on achievement and progress in closing achievement gaps on state tests. (Contains 9 tables.) [For the main report, "State Test Score Trends through 2007-08, Part 3: Are Achievement Gaps Closing and Is Achievement Rising for All?", see ED507909.]

This year the Center on Education Policy analyzed data on the achievement of different groups of students in two distinct ways. First, it looked at grade 4 test results to determine whether the performance of various groups improved at three achievement levels--basic and above, proficient and above, and advanced. Second, it looked at gaps between these groups at the proficient level across three grades (grade 4, grade 8 in most cases, and a high school grade). These two types of analyses show whether elementary school achievement has generally gone up for different groups of students and whether achievement gaps at different grade levels have narrowed, widened, or stayed the same. This paper profiles the student subgroup achievement and gap trends in New Jersey. At grade 4, all the major student groups in New Jersey showed clear trend of gains in math at the proficient and advanced achievement levels, but subgroup trends in reading were mixed. A clear trend of narrowing gaps was evident for all major subgroups at the elementary and high school levels. (Contains 9 tables.) [For the main report, "State Test Score Trends through 2007-08, Part 3: Are Achievement Gaps Closing and Is Achievement Rising for All?", see ED507909.]

This year the Center on Education Policy (CEP) analyzed data on the achievement of different groups of students in two distinct ways. First, it looked at grade 4 test results to determine whether the performance of various groups improved at three achievement levels--basic and above, proficient and above, and advanced. Second, it looked at gaps between these groups at the proficient level across three grades (grade 4, grade 8 in most cases, and a high school grade). These two types of analyses show whether elementary school achievement has generally gone up for different groups of students and whether achievement gaps at different grade levels have narrowed, widened, or stayed the same. This paper profiles the student subgroup achievement and gap trends in Colorado. Overall, Colorado showed clear trends upward at the proficient level. Most achievement gaps are narrowing according to the percentage proficient measure; mean scale scores showed less positive results for math achievement gaps. (Contains 9 tables.) [For the main report, "State Test Score Trends through 2007-08, Part 3: Are Achievement Gaps Closing and Is Achievement Rising for All?", see ED507909.]

This year the Center on Education Policy (CEP) analyzed data on the achievement of different groups of students in two distinct ways. First, it looked at grade 4 test results to determine whether the performance of various groups improved at three achievement levels--basic and above, proficient and above, and advanced. Second, it looked at gaps between these groups at the proficient level across three grades (grade 4, grade 8 in most cases, and a high school grade). These two types of analyses show whether elementary school achievement has generally gone up for different groups of students and whether achievement gaps at different grade levels have narrowed, widened, or stayed the same. This paper profiles the student subgroup achievement and gap trends in Oregon. Because Oregon changed its test, too few years of data were available to determine trends at three achievement levels, including gap trends in terms of the percentage of students scoring proficient. Gaps in average test scores narrowed more often than they widened for all major student groups, but with clear differences by grade level--gaps narrowed for nearly all subgroups in middle and high school but widened for all in elementary school. (Contains 9 tables.) [For the main report, "State Test Score Trends through 2007-08, Part 3: Are Achievement Gaps Closing and Is Achievement Rising for All?", see ED507909.]

This year the Center on Education Policy (CEP) analyzed data on the achievement of different groups of students in two distinct ways. First, it looked at grade 4 test results to determine whether the performance of various groups improved at three achievement levels--basic and above, proficient and above, and advanced. Second, it looked at gaps between these groups at the proficient level across three grades (grade 4, grade 8 in most cases, and a high school grade). These two types of analyses show whether elementary school achievement has generally gone up for different groups of students and whether achievement gaps at different grade levels have narrowed, widened, or stayed the same. This paper profiles the student subgroup achievement and gap trends in New Mexico. Grade 4 achievement trends at the proficient level showed a mixed picture for New Mexico's major student groups. Declines were more prevalent than gains in reading, while gains were more common than declines in math. Trends in achievement gaps were also mixed. In reading, gaps narrowed in nearly all cases, but in math the two indicators of achievement used in this study showed contradictory trends. (Contains 9 tables.) [For the main report, "State Test Score Trends through 2007-08, Part 3: Are Achievement Gaps Closing and Is Achievement Rising for All?", see ED507909.]

This year the Center on Education Policy (CEP) analyzed data on the achievement of different groups of students in two distinct ways. First, it looked at grade 4 test results to determine whether the performance of various groups improved at three achievement levels--basic and above, proficient and above, and advanced. Second, it looked at gaps between these groups at the proficient level across three grades (grade 4, grade 8 in most cases, and a high school grade). These two types of analyses show whether elementary school achievement has generally gone up for different groups of students and whether achievement gaps at different grade levels have narrowed, widened, or stayed the same. This paper profiles the student subgroup achievement and gap trends in North Dakota. Trends at three achievement levels for white, Native American, and low-income students were mixed in grade 4 reading and showed a clear pattern of declines in grade 4 math. Trends in achievement gaps for the Native American and low-income subgroups showed a mixed picture and varied somewhat depending on which indicator of achievement was used. (Contains 9 tables.) [For the main report, "State Test Score Trends through 2007-08, Part 3: Are Achievement Gaps Closing and Is Achievement Rising for All?", see ED507909.]

This year the Center on Education Policy (CEP) analyzed data on the achievement of different groups of students in two distinct ways. First, it looked at grade 4 test results to determine whether the performance of various groups improved at three achievement levels--basic and above, proficient and above, and advanced. Second, it looked at gaps between these groups at the proficient level across three grades (grade 4, grade 8 in most cases, and a high school grade). These two types of analyses show whether elementary school achievement has generally gone up for different groups of students and whether achievement gaps at different grade levels have narrowed, widened, or stayed the same. This paper profiles the student subgroup achievement and gap trends in New York. In grade 4 math, a clear trend of rising performance was apparent for subgroups at three achievement levels, but in reading, trends were mixed. Progress in narrowing gaps was more evident in math than in reading. (Contains 9 tables.) [For the main report, "State Test Score Trends through 2007-08, Part 3: Are Achievement Gaps Closing and Is Achievement Rising for All?", see ED507909.]

This year the Center on Education Policy (CEP) analyzed data on the achievement of different groups of students in two distinct ways. First, it looked at grade 4 test results to determine whether the performance of various groups improved at three achievement levels--basic and above, proficient and above, and advanced. Second, it looked at gaps between these groups at the proficient level across three grades (grade 4, grade 8 in most cases, and a high school grade). These two types of analyses show whether elementary school achievement has generally gone up for different groups of students and whether achievement gaps at different grade levels have narrowed, widened, or stayed the same. This paper profiles the student subgroup achievement and gap trends in North Carolina. All major student groups showed a clear trend of gains in grade 4 math at three achievement levels. A clear trend of narrowing gaps at the proficient level was also evident in math at grades 4 and 8 for all major subgroups. (Contains 9 tables.) [For the main report, "State Test Score Trends through 2007-08, Part 3: Are Achievement Gaps Closing and Is Achievement Rising for All?", see ED507909.]

This year the Center on Education Policy (CEP) analyzed data on the achievement of different groups of students in two distinct ways. First, it looked at grade 4 test results to determine whether the performance of various groups improved at three achievement levels--basic and above, proficient and above, and advanced. Second, it looked at gaps between these groups at the proficient level across three grades (grade 4, grade 8 in most cases, and a high school grade). These two types of analyses show whether elementary school achievement has generally gone up for different groups of students and whether achievement gaps at different grade levels have narrowed, widened, or stayed the same. This paper profiles the student subgroup achievement and gap trends in Pennsylvania. Pennsylvania showed upward trends on test scores. Progress on achievement gaps was either positive or mixed, depending on the measure used. (Contains 9 tables.) [For the main report, "State Test Score Trends through 2007-08, Part 3: Are Achievement Gaps Closing and Is Achievement Rising for All?", see ED507909.]

This year the Center on Education Policy analyzed data on the achievement of different groups of students in two distinct ways. First, it looked at grade 4 test results to determine whether the performance of various groups improved at three achievement levels--basic and above, proficient and above, and advanced. Second, it looked at gaps between these groups at the proficient level across three grades (grade 4, grade 8 in most cases, and a high school grade). These two types of analyses show whether elementary school achievement has generally gone up for different groups of students and whether achievement gaps at different grade levels have narrowed, widened, or stayed the same. This paper profiles the student subgroup achievement and gap trends in South Carolina. Overall, test score trends in South Carolina have gone in an upward direction, at all three achievement levels. There is a mixed picture on achievement gaps--they have tended to narrow at the high school grade but widen at the elementary school grade analyzed. (Contains 9 tables.) [For the main report, "State Test Score Trends through 2007-08, Part 3: Are Achievement Gaps Closing and Is Achievement Rising for All?", see ED507909.]

This year the Center on Education Policy analyzed data on the achievement of different groups of students in two distinct ways. First, it looked at grade 4 test results to determine whether the performance of various groups improved at three achievement levels--basic and above, proficient and above, and advanced. Second, it looked at gaps between these groups at the proficient level across three grades (grade 4, grade 8 in most cases, and a high school grade). These two types of analyses show whether elementary school achievement has generally gone up for different groups of students and whether achievement gaps at different grade levels have narrowed, widened, or stayed the same. This paper profiles the student subgroup achievement and gap trends in Rhode Island. Overall, test score trends in Rhode Island were in an upward direction, and progress has been made in closing achievement gaps. (Contains 9 tables.) [For the main report, "State Test Score Trends through 2007-08, Part 3: Are Achievement Gaps Closing and Is Achievement Rising for All?", see ED507909.]

This year the Center on Education Policy analyzed data on the achievement of different groups of students in two distinct ways. First, it looked at grade 4 test results to determine whether the performance of various groups improved at three achievement levels--basic and above, proficient and above, and advanced. Second, it looked at gaps between these groups at the proficient level across three grades (grade 4, grade 8 in most cases, and a high school grade). These two types of analyses show whether elementary school achievement has generally gone up for different groups of students and whether achievement gaps at different grade levels have narrowed, widened, or stayed the same. This paper profiles the student subgroup achievement and gap trends in Louisiana. Louisiana test scores show a clear upward trend at all achievement levels. Most achievement gaps are narrowing, with some instances of gaps widening. (Contains 9 tables.) [For the main report, "State Test Score Trends through 2007-08, Part 3: Are Achievement Gaps Closing and Is Achievement Rising for All?", see ED507909.]

This year the Center on Education Policy (CEP) analyzed data on the achievement of different groups of students in two distinct ways. First, it looked at grade 4 test results to determine whether the performance of various groups improved at three achievement levels--basic and above, proficient and above, and advanced. Second, it looked at gaps between these groups at the proficient level across three grades (grade 4, grade 8 in most cases, and a high school grade). These two types of analyses show whether elementary school achievement has generally gone up for different groups of students and whether achievement gaps at different grade levels have narrowed, widened, or stayed the same. This paper profiles the student subgroup achievement and gap trends in Delaware. Delaware showed upward trends in test scores and achievement gaps closing in reading. The picture was more mixed for math. (Contains 9 tables.) [For the main report, "State Test Score Trends through 2007-08, Part 3: Are Achievement Gaps Closing and Is Achievement Rising for All?", see ED507909.]

This year the Center on Education Policy analyzed data on the achievement of different groups of students in two distinct ways. First, it looked at grade 4 test results to determine whether the performance of various groups improved at three achievement levels--basic and above, proficient and above, and advanced. Second, it looked at gaps between these groups at the proficient level across three grades (grade 4, grade 8 in most cases, and a high school grade). These two types of analyses show whether elementary school achievement has generally gone up for different groups of students and whether achievement gaps at different grade levels have narrowed, widened, or stayed the same. This paper profiles the student subgroup achievement and gap trends in Kentucky. (Contains 9 tables.) [For the main report, "State Test Score Trends through 2007-08, Part 3: Are Achievement Gaps Closing and Is Achievement Rising for All?", see ED507909.]

This year the Center on Education Policy (CEP) analyzed data on the achievement of different groups of students in two distinct ways. First, it looked at grade 4 test results to determine whether the performance of various groups improved at three achievement levels--basic and above, proficient and above, and advanced. Second, it looked at gaps between these groups at the proficient level across three grades (grade 4, grade 8 in most cases, and a high school grade). These two types of analyses show whether elementary school achievement has generally gone up for different groups of students and whether achievement gaps at different grade levels have narrowed, widened, or stayed the same. This paper profiles the student subgroup achievement and gap trends in Hawaii. (Contains 9 tables.) [For the main report, "State Test Score Trends through 2007-08, Part 3: Are Achievement Gaps Closing and Is Achievement Rising for All?", see ED507909.]

This year the Center on Education Policy (CEP) analyzed data on the achievement of different groups of students in two distinct ways. First, it looked at grade 4 test results to determine whether the performance of various groups improved at three achievement levels--basic and above, proficient and above, and advanced. Second, it looked at gaps between these groups at the proficient level across three grades (grade 4, grade 8 in most cases, and a high school grade). These two types of analyses show whether elementary school achievement has generally gone up for different groups of students and whether achievement gaps at different grade levels have narrowed, widened, or stayed the same. This paper profiles the student subgroup achievement and gap trends in Florida. There were upward trends in Florida in terms of achievement and progress on narrowing of achievement gaps. (Contains 9 tables.) [For the main report, "State Test Score Trends through 2007-08, Part 3: Are Achievement Gaps Closing and Is Achievement Rising for All?", see ED507909.]

This year the Center on Education Policy (CEP) analyzed data on the achievement of different groups of students in two distinct ways. First, it looked at grade 4 test results to determine whether the performance of various groups improved at three achievement levels--basic and above, proficient and above, and advanced. Second, it looked at gaps between these groups at the proficient level across three grades (grade 4, grade 8 in most cases, and a high school grade). These two types of analyses show whether elementary school achievement has generally gone up for different groups of students and whether achievement gaps at different grade levels have narrowed, widened, or stayed the same. This paper profiles the student subgroup achievement and gap trends in Georgia. Data is somewhat limited for Georgia, but the state did show upward general trends and progress on achievement gaps in reading. (Contains 9 tables.) [For the main report, "State Test Score Trends through 2007-08, Part 3: Are Achievement Gaps Closing and Is Achievement Rising for All?", see ED507909.]

A main goal of the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) is to close gaps in test scores between different groups of students while raising achievement for all groups. Of particular concern are the persistent achievement gaps between African American, Latino, and Native American students and their white and Asian counterparts, and between students from low-income families and those who are not low-income. For these gaps to narrow and eventually close, not only must achievement for lower-scoring subgroups increase, but it must go up at a faster rate than for the higher-scoring comparison group. A related question is whether achievement for all subgroups has improved across the scoring scale--at the "advanced" and "basic" levels as well as at the "proficient" level, which receives the most scrutiny under NCLB. In 2009, the third year of a multi-year study of student achievement, the Center on Education Policy (CEP) did three types of analyses of data broken out by subgroups from the state tests used for NCLB accountability. First, it examined grade 4 state test results at three achievement levels--basic-and-above, proficient-and-above, and advanced. The goal was to see whether students from various racial/ethnic groups and low-income students have made gains at all three achievement levels and whether progress is lagging at any level for specific subgroups. Second, it looked at gaps between subgroups in the percentages of students scoring at or above the proficient level at three grade levels (grade 4, grade 8 in most cases, and a high school grade). Third, it analyzed gaps between subgroups in average test scores at three grade levels. CEP did these last two analyses to see whether achievement gaps at the elementary, middle, and high school grades have narrowed, widened, or stayed the same since 2002, when NCLB took effect and required states and school districts to pay greater attention to the achievement of subgroups. This report describes the trends found for African American, Latino, Native American, Asian, and white students, and for low-income and non-low-income students. Achievement trends for students with disabilities, English language learners, and male and female students will be discussed in future reports in this series. (Contains 17 tables, 2 boxes, 3 figures and 5 footnotes.) [For "State Test Score Trends through 2007-08, Part I: "Is the Emphasis on "Proficiency" Shortchanging Higher- and Lower-Achieving Students?," see ED506121. For "State Test Score Trends through 2007-08. Part II: Is There a Plateau Effect in Test Scores?," see ED506122.]

During the past 25 years, the country witnessed a dramatic transformation of the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP). Actions by the Educational Testing Service (ETS), Congress, and the National Assessment Governing Board fundamentally changed NAEP's role in federal educational policy and the nation's schools. Developed in the 1960s through a privately funded initiative, NAEP began as a voluntary program run by a state consortium with financial support from the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare. It later became a congressionally legislated program administered by one of the country's premier testing organizations and overseen by a federally mandated public board. Over time, NAEP's focus and scope changed substantially, expanding to grade and state testing, reporting by achievement levels, and, as part of No Child Left Behind (NCLB), requiring participation to receive Title 1 funds. NAEP was no longer a program whose results were reported in passing, but had become central to monitoring the nation's progress in achievement and equity. One major change was splitting NAEP into two separate programs: (1) the main assessment that tested students in grades 4, 8, and 12 in diverse subjects and (2) the long-term trend assessment that tracked performance in reading, writing, math, and science at ages 9, 13, and 17 as NAEP had done since 1969. This paper describes how NAEP's trend assessment changed, its use in national educational discussions, and its major findings. From the earliest days, NAEP trends have figured prominently in debates over the decline of excellence, and extra attention is devoted to that issue. The paper also discusses the way in which NAEP trends have been used in evaluations of NCLB and the minority-majority achievement gap. A final section addresses the future of the long-term trend assessment. Its utility has been sufficiently questioned that the Board has considered eliminating it. (Contains 7 tables, 5 figures, 23 endnotes, and an appendix entitled "Establishing Trends."A bibliography is also included.)

This report presents the findings from the second National Assessment Program--Civics and Citizenship, conducted under the auspices of the national council of education ministers, the Ministerial Council on Education, Employment, Training and Youth Affairs (MCEETYA). The National Assessment Program--Civics and Citizenship measures Year 6 and Year 10 students' understanding and appreciation of Australia's system of government and civic life. The report compares results by State and Territory. It also compares the most recent achievements of students against those from the first national assessment of Civics and Citizenship, conducted in 2004. Chapter 2 describes the development and substance of the assessment instrument and parts of the Student Background Survey and the administration of the National Assessment Program--Civics and Citizenship. It describes the achieved participation rates, as well as the personal characteristics of Year 6 and Year 10 student population, using data collected by the Student Background Survey. Chapter 3 provides a more detailed analysis of the Assessment Domain, through the description of the achievement scale, and an analysis of examples of many of the items used to construct it. The items analysed and used to describe and illustrate student achievement on the Civics and Citizenship Literacy Scale are all release items. (The School Release Materials, a suite of documentation developed for schools, comprise an outcome of this assessment program and will be available from the MCEETYA website on the release of this report.) A profile of student achievement at Year 6 and Year 10, as represented by the proficiency levels which form the Civics and Citizenship Literacy Scale, is developed. Some comparisons of 2007 with 2004 data and findings are also provided. Chapter 4 examines the relationship between students' performance in the National Assessment Program--Civics and Citizenship (NAP-CC) and their personal and family backgrounds an civic experiences. Chapter 5 explores the findings, including the relationships between the personal student background variables and student participation in civics and citizenship activities introduced in Chapter 2, and the achievement data described in Chapters 3. Chapter 6 discusses some implications of the findings. A separate Technical Report provides more detailed information about the developmental and analytical procedures that provide the basis for this report. Appended are: (1) Assessment Domain; (2) Student Background Survey (including Assessment of Civics and Citizenship Opportunities); (3) Sample Characteristics by State; (4) Percentage Correct by Score Code for Sample Items in Chapter 3; (5) Percentage Distributions "At and above" Proficiency Levels (for Year 6 and Year 10); (6) Year 6 Achievement on the Civics and Citizenship Literacy Scale by Background Characteristics; (7) Regression Analysis Methodology; and (8) Correlations and Factor Analysis for Civics and Citizenship-related Activities. (Contains 60 tables, 43 figures, 6 boxes and 13 footnotes.) [For related reports, see "National Assessment Program--Civics and Citizenship Year 6 School Assessment, 2007" (ED534716) and "National Assessment Program--Civics and Citizenship Year 10 School Assessment, 2007" (ED534717).]

This edition of "Beating the Odds" presents student achievement from 2008 to 2009. Individual district profiles of student achievement are presented. [For a related report, "Beating the Odds: Analysis of Student Performance on State Assessments and NAEP. Results from the 2008-09 School Year," see ED508975.]