Search

This report discusses the outcomes of a study that investigated the effects of modifications to the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) 1996 assessment designed to encourage the participation of more students with disabilities. Modifications included revising the inclusion criteria with the intention of making them clearer, more inclusive, and more likely to be applied consistently across jurisdictions participating in the state assessment program, offering a variety of assessment accommodations to students with disabilities whose Individualized Education Programs (IEP) specified such accommodations for testing, and offering accommodations for Limited English-Proficient students who required an accommodation in order to take the assessment in English. Results indicated: (1) increases in the percentage of students with disabilities participating in NAEP did not seem to be a sole result of revisions to inclusion criteria; (2) most exclusion decisions were made on the basis of what is stated in the IEP and relatively few exclusion decisions were made on the basis of a judgment of severe cognitive impairments, absent corroborating directions from the IEP; and (3) some students who do not regularly receive accommodations or adaptations were offered them in NAEP and others who should not have been tested were included. Appendices include evaluation data. (CR)

This report presents the results of the 1998 NAEP (National Assessment of Educational Progress) reading assessment of 4th-, 8th-, and 12th-grade students for the nation and for participating states or jurisdictions. Results in 1998 are compared to those in 1994 and 1992. It provides results for subgroups of students defined by various background and contextual characteristics. After an introduction, chapter 1 presents overall national results in terms of average scores on the NAEP composite scale and in terms of the three reading achievement levels. Chapter 2 presents average scale scores for regions of the country and for demographic subgroups of the population. Achievement level results for the regions and subgroups are presented in chapter 3. In chapter 4, school and home contextual factors related to literacy development are the focus for presenting results of the 1998 NAEP assessment. Chapter 5 looks at public school results of the state-by-state assessments at grades 4 and 8. Major findings are: (1) average reading scores increased for students in grades 4, 8, and 12; (2) at all 3 grades in 1998, female students had higher average reading scale scores than their male peers; (3) at all 3 grades in 1998, the average reading score for White students was higher than that for Black, Hispanic, and American Indian students; (4) students in 1998 who reported higher levels of parental education had higher average reading scale scores; (5) students attending nonpublic schools had higher average scale scores than their counterparts attending public schools; and (6) students who reported watching 3 or fewer hours of television each day had higher average reading scores than students who reported watching more television. Appendixes contain an overview of the procedural aspects the standard errors for all data presented; sample texts for the released questions; 1998 state level results for additional subgroups not discussed in Chapter 5; and characteristics of individual states and jurisdictions that are drawn from non-NAEP sources. (RS)

An important feature of the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) is its ability to document trends in academic achievement on core curriculum areas over an extended period of time. This report presents the major results of the NAEP 1996 science, mathematics, reading, and writing long-term assessments. These results chart trends going back to the first year in which each NAEP assessment was given: 1969-70 in science, 1973 in mathematics, 1971 in reading, and 1984 in writing. Trends in average performance differences between White and Black students, White and Hispanic students, and male and female students are also discussed. In general, the trends in science and mathematics show early declines or relative stability followed by improved performance. Because it represents educational objectives that were established in 1969 for 17-year-olds and 1970 for 9- and 13-year-olds, the long-term science trend assessment may represent a more constrained view than the 1996 main science assessment, as this revision clarifies. In reading and writing the results are somewhat mixed; although some modest improvement is evident in the trend for reading assessments, few indications of positive trends were evident in the writing results. More in-depth understanding is achieved by examining the types of abilities associated with different levels on the NAEP scale and the percentages of students who have gained these levels across the trend assessment. This information is summarized. (Contains four figures and nine tables.) (SLD)

The National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) has measured students' progress toward higher achievement since 1969, assessing students in public and nonpublic schools in various subject areas on a regular basis. The NAEP has also collected background information about students to provide a context for interpreting assessment results and documenting the implementation of educational reform. This addendum is a revision and full reprint of sections of the report: (1) the Executive Summary; (2) Chapter 1; (3) Chapter 2; and (4) Appendix A of "NAEP 1996 Trends in Academic Progress" (NCES 97-985). It contains revisions to the text, tables, and figures of the Long Term Trend Science results. The material in this addendum replaces the corresponding sections of the original report. The original report presented the results of science, mathematics, reading, and writing trend assessment, charting them back to the year in which the assessment was first given. Trends are discussed for students at ages 9, 13, and 17, in grades 4, 8, and 11. Trends in average performance differences between White and Black, White and Hispanic, and male and female students are also discussed. The overall pattern of science performance has been one of decline followed by recent improved performance. The long-term science trend assessment contains a content dimension and a cognitive dimension. Because it represents educational objectives that were established in 1969 for 17-year-olds and 1970 for 9- and 13-year-olds, the long-term science trend assessment may represent a more constrained view than the 1996 main science assessment, as this addendum clarifies. (Contains 9 figures and 18 tables.) (SLD)