Issuu on Google+

Mathematics & Reading The National Assessment of Educational Progress 2011 Developed by Mark O’Malley

INDIANA DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION NATIONAL CENTER FOR EDUCATIONAL STATISTICS


Overview “Since NAEP assessments are administered informingly using the same set of test booklets across the nation, NAEP results serve as a common metric for all states and selected urban districts. The assessment stays essentially the same form year to year, with only carefully documented changes. This permits NAEP to provide a clear picture of student academic progress over time. “ - National Center for Education Statistics


Overview- What is NAEP? The National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) is the largest nationally representative assessment of what America’s students know and can do. NAEP was developed in 1969 to measure student achievement nationally. Teachers, principals, parents, policy makers, and researchers all use NAEP results to assess progress and develop ways to improve education across America and in the state of Indiana.

NAEP IS NOT ONLY AN INTEGRAL PART OF EDUCATION IN THE UNITED STATES, BUT ALSO A FRIEND IN THE FIELD WHO IS MINDFUL OF INDIANA SCHOOL PROTOCOLS Your team did a wonderful job and was very informative. I found that meeting right after winter break was a great time because my schedule has not filled up as much. - Dr. Val Scott Anderson Comm Schools The ladies that came this morning were prompt, friendly, and understanding when I had to verify a few bits of information for them. Overall, it was an easy process. - Rebecca Staats Glenns Valley Elementary Everything went very well. Jane and her colleagues were very well prepared, helpful, and gracious. I enjoyed working with them. - Lisa Jones North Harrison Elementary NAEP is a congressionally mandated project administered by the National Center for Educational Statistics, within the U.S. Department of Education and the Institute of Education Sciences.

What subjects does NAEP cover? NAEP has two types of assessments: Main NAEP and Long-Term trend NAEP. Main NAEP assessments are conducted in a range of subjects with 4th, 8th, and 12th graders across the country. Assessments are given more frequently in mathematics, reading, science, and writing. Other subjects, such as the arts, civics, economics, geography, and U.S. History, are assessed periodically. Long-Term Trend NAEP measures student performance in mathematics and reading using some previously administered questions in mathematics and reading. These previously administered questions ensure comparability across the years. The LongTerm Trend assessment is given every four years to 9-, 13-, and 17-year olds whose performance can be compared to data from 30 years ago. Below is a table that outlines the past, present, and future NAEP assessments. Year

Assessment Type

Year

Assessment Type

2011

Reading (4, 8), Mathematics (4, 8), Science (8), Writing (8, 12)

2014

Science (8, 12), Technology & Engineering Literacy (8)

2012

Economics (12), Long-Term Trend (ages 9, 13, & 17), Technology & Engineering Literacy (8)

2015

Reading (4, 8), Mathematics (4, 8), Science (8), Writing

2013

Reading (4, 8), Mathematics (4, 8), Writing (8, 12), Technology & Engineering Literacy (8)

2016

Arts (8), Long-Term Trend (ages 9, 13, & 17)

NAEP 2013 reading and mathematics assessment results are scheduled to be released in the fall of 2013. The assessments were administered to students at grades 4, 8, and 12 in the winter of 2013. In the fall of 2013, the IDOE Communications Office will receive an embargoed report one week prior to the release of the results to the national public.


What makes NAEP different? NAEP’s unique assessment allows each state and each participating urban district to be compared to national results and to evaluate progress over time. Samples of students in all states take NAEP and are measured in the same way, providing a common measure of achievement across the states based on NAEP frameworks. NAEP reports can include data by gender, socio-status, and race/ ethnicity. Although there are no results for individual students, classrooms, or schools, one Indiana school participated in the NAEP-Sample book assessment in 2013, which allowed the school to compare their student performance data with national student performance data.

NAEP Accommodations NAEP assessment accommodations are provided for students with disabilities and English language learners who cannot fairly and accurately demonstrate their abilities under normal administration procedures. In Indiana, only students who take the ISTAR assessment are allowed to be exempt from participation in the NAEP assessment. The most frequent accommodations used in NAEP are: Extended time > small group > reading questions aloud > breaks during assessment. However, even with accommodations, there are still some students who cannot participate in NAEP. The percentage of students that are excluded from NAEP varies by state and by district. These variations should be considered when comparing student performance among states and across the nation.

State Comparisons and Profiles After the assessment is completed, the results are posted on the Institute of Education Sciences website (IES). This is public information that allows users to sort and compare state results. Select groups of students can be chosen to compare performance between two assessment years or to discover trends over several years. There is also a state profile tool that allows users to explore key data about a state’s performance on NAEP. NAEP is conducted in partnership with states and provides funding for a full-time NAEP State Coordinator (NSC) in each state. It is the job of the NSC to be fully trained in how to read and interpret the NAEP results by using this tool. He or she also serves as the liaison for NAEP, the state education agency, and the schools selected to participate.

Structure of NAEP U.S. Department of Education

National Assessment Governing Board

Institute of Educational Sciences National Center for Education Statistics National Assessment of Educational Progress

Contractors: ETS, Westat, Pearson, Fulcrum, IT, Hager Sharp, HUMRRO


Assessment Design NAEP has introduced matrix sampling so that a large pool of items can be administered to a student-sample without overburdening the students. To be more precise, it is called BIB spiraling. A "balanced incomplete block (BIB) spiraling" design ensures that students receive different interlocking sections of the assessment, enabling NAEP to check for any unusual interactions that may occur among different samples of students and different sets of assessment questions. This procedure assigns blocks of questions in a manner that the positioning of blocks across booklets is “balanced,” and the pairing of blocks within booklets are “balanced” according to content. The booklets are "incomplete" because not all blocks are matched to all other blocks. The "spiraling" aspect of this procedure cycles the booklets for administration so that, typically, only a few students in any assessment session receive the same booklet. Below is a diagram that shows the distribution of the test booklet within a typical classroom. In 2011, NAEP had the following items in the item bank: 

Grade 4 math - 158 questions

Grade 8 math - 155 questions

Grade 4 reading - 100 questions

Grade 8 reading - 130 questions

Grade 8 science - 130 questions

nce Scie C7

d Rea B2

d Rea B6

th Ma A1

nce Scie C2

th Ma A1

nce Scie C2

d Rea B4

th Ma A6

d Rea B1

th Ma A3

nce Scie 4 C

nce Scie 1 C

d Rea B3

th Ma A5

nce Scie C6

d Rea B1

th Ma A3

th Ma A2

nce Scie 3 C

d Rea B5

th Ma A7

nce Scie C1

d Rea B3

th Ma A4

nce Scie C5

d Rea B7

th Ma A2

d Rea B2

nce Scie C3

NAEP Says Thank You NAEP is very excited to be working with Indiana in 2014. Indiana has had the best state inclusion rate in state history in the past 3 years. Indiana continues to be the leader in student involvement, setting the standard for other states to follow. NAEP says thank you and have a great school year!


Indiana Mathematics Performance in Grade 4 & 8 Nationally representative samples of 209,000 fourth-graders and 175,000 eight graders participated in the 2011 National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) in mathematics. In grade 4, Indiana had a sample of 2,800 fourth-grade students to participate in the Math Assessment and 2,800 eighth-graders to participate in the math assessment. Students responded to questions designed to measure what they can do and what they know across five mathematic content areas: number properties and operations, measurement, geometry, data analysis, statistics, and probability. Both fourth and eighth graders in Indiana score higher in 2011 than previous years. In grade 4, the average mathematics score in 2011 was 1 point higher than in 2009, and 23 points higher than in 1992. Scale score

500

Indiana Nation

0 ยน Accommodations were not permitted for this assessment. NOTE: The NAEP Mathematics scale ranges from 0 to 500. Some apparent differences between estimates may not be statistically significant. SOURCE: National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP)

In grade 8 the average mathematics score in 2011 was 2 points lower than in 2009, and 15 points higher than in 1992. Scale score

500

Indiana Nation

0


Indiana Mathematics Performance at Grade 4 NAEP State results make it possible to examine the progress of students in each participating state over time. The national and state results presented here are for public schools only. All 50 states, the District of Columbia, and Department of Defense schools, participated in 2011 mathematics assessment. NAEP mathematics results for grades 4 and 8 are reported as average scores on a 0-500 scale. In the mathematics assessment, there are accommodations for students with disabilities and English language learners, however differences between state and NAEP policies and accommodations allowed can vary between NAEP and state assessments. The goal for the National Assessment Governing Board was to have all 52 states include at least 85% of both SD & ELL students during the administration of the NAEP assessment in 2011. Even with the availability of accommodations, some states should be examined more closely due to high exclusion rates. The effects of exclusion are not precisely known. Performance results by states with high exclusion rates could greatly affect statistical gain while comparing state scale scores and should be more closely examined.

Indiana Has higher average scale score than Indiana– MA, NH, MN, NJ, MD, VT Average scale score is not significantly different from Indiana Average scale score is lower than Indiana States who did not meet the SD and/or ELL student inclusion policy set by the National Assessment Governing Board. Reporting standards not met for SD & ELL students. Sample size insufficient to permit a reliable estimate. Accommodations were not permitted for this assessment. NOTE: The NAEP Mathematics scale ranges from 0 to 500. Some apparent differences between estimates may not be statistically significant. SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 1992, 1996, 2000, 2003, 2005, 2007, 2009 and 2011 Mathematics Assessments.


Indiana Mathematics Performance at Grade 8

Indiana Has higher average scale score than Indiana– MA, MN, NJ, VT, MT, NH, ND, CO, SD, TX, KS, VA, ME, WI, OH, WA, MD, WY, CT Average scale score is not significantly different from Indiana Average scale score is lower than Indiana States who did not meet the SD and/or ELL student inclusion policy set by the National Assessment Governing Board. Reporting standards not met for SD & ELL students. SD & ELL scores will not have the same effect on state-student average scale scores as states with reportable SD & ELL data that will have an effect on state-student average scale scores.

Grade 4 Massachusetts New Hampshire

253 252

Minnesota

249

New Jersey

248

Maryland

247

Vermont

247

Kansas

246

Pennsylvania

246

Virginia

245

North Dakota

245

Wisconsin

245

North Carolina

245

Colorado

244

Maine

244

Ohio

244

Wyoming

244

Indiana

244

Montana

244

Washington

243

Iowa

243

Utah

243

Connecticut

242

Rhode Island

242

Texas

241

South Dakota Kentucky DoDEA Missouri Delaware Idaho Florida Nebraska Illinois Hawaii Georgia Arkansas New York Oklahoma South Carolina Nevada Oregon Michigan Alaska Arizona West Virginia California Tennessee New Mexico Louisiana Alabama Mississippi Dist. Of Col.

Grade 8 241 241 241 240 240 240 240 240 239 239 238 238 238 237 237 237 237 236 236 235 235 234 233 233 231 231 230 222

Massachusetts Minnesota New Jersey Vermont Montana New Hampshire North Dakota Colorado South Dakota Texas Kansas Virginia Maine Wisconsin Ohio Washington Maryland DoDEA Wyoming Connecticut Idaho North Carolina Pennsylvania Indiana Iowa

299 295 294 294 293 292 292 292 291 290 290 289 289 289 289 288 288 288 288 287 287 286 286 285 285

Utah Alaska Illinois Nebraska Rhode Island Delaware Oregon Missouri Kentucky South Carolina New York Michigan Oklahoma Arkansas Arizona Georgia Nevada Florida Hawaii New Mexico Tennessee West Virginia Louisiana California Mississippi Alabama Dist of Col.

283 283 283 283 283 283 283 282 282 281 280 280 279 279 279 278 278 278 278 274 274 273 273 273 269 269 260


Higher percentage of Indiana 4th graders perform at or above Proficient in 2011 than in 2009 in mathematics At grade 4, there was no significant change in Indiana students performing At or Above Basic . Indiana students performing at or above proficient and advanced were higher in 2011 than 2009. All Indiana fourth-grade achievement levels were significantly higher in 2011 than 1992.

4th Grade Indiana Achievement Level Percentages Trend from 1992-2011– mathematics At or Above Proficient

At Advanced

Percentage of students

At or Above Basic

1

1

š Accommodations were not permitted for this assessment. NOTE: The NAEP Mathematics scale ranges from 0 to 500. Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Some apparent differences between estimates may not be statistically significant. SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 1992, 1996, 2000, 2003, 2005, 2007, 2009 and 2011 Mathematics Assessments.

Examples of knowledge and skills demonstrated by students performing at each achievement level NAEP mathematics achievement-level descriptions outline expectations of student performance at each grade level. The specific descriptions of what fourth graders should know and be able to do at the Basic, Proficient, and Advanced mathematic achievement levels are presented below. (Not that the shaded text is a short, general summary to describe performance at each achievement level.) NAEP achievement levels are cumulative and the cut score indicating the lower end of the score range for each level is noted in parentheses.

Basic (214) 4th graders performing at the basic level should be able to estimate and use basic facts to perform simple computations with whole numbers; show some understanding of fractions and decimals; and solving some simple real-world problems in all NAEP content areas. Students at this level should be able to use-although not always accurately- four-function calculators, rulers, and geometric shapes. Their written responses are often minimal and presented without supporting information.

Proficient (249) 4th graders performing at the proficient level should be able to use whole numbers to estimate, compute, and determine whether results are reasonable. They should have a conceptual understanding of fractions and decimals; be able to solve real world problems in all NAEP content areas; and use four-function calculators, rulers, and geometric shapes appropriately. Students performing at the Proficient level should employ problem solving strategies such as identifying and using appropriate information.

Advanced (282) 4th graders performing at the Advanced level should be able to solve complex non-routine real-world problems in all NAEP Content areas. They should display mastery in the use of four-function calculators, rulers, and geometric shapes. These students are expected to draw logical conclusions and justify answers and solution processes by explaining why, as well as how, they were achieved. They should go above and beyond the obvious in their interpretations and be able to communicate their thoughts clearly and concisely.


Higher percentage of Indiana 8th graders perform at or above Proficient in 2011 than in 2009 in mathematics. At grade 8, the percentage of Indiana students at or above basic and at or above proficient was lower in 2011 than 2009. There was no change in the percentage of students who were at advanced. All three achievements levels were higher in 2011 than 1992.

8th Grade Indiana Achievement Level Percentages Trend from 1992-2011– mathematics At or Above Proficient

At Advanced

Percentage of students

At or Above Basic

1 1

1

Accommodations not permitted

NOTE: The NAEP Mathematics scale ranges from 0 to 500. Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Some apparent differences between estimates may not be statistically significant. SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 1992, 1996, 2000, 2003, 2005, 2007, 2009 and 2011 Mathematics Assessments.

Examples of knowledge and skills demonstrated by students performing at each achievement level Basic (262) 8th graders performing at the proficient level should complete problems correctly with the help of structural prompts such as diagrams, charts, and graphs. They should be able to solve problems in all content areas. Students at this level also should be able to use fundamental algebraic and informal geometric concepts in problem solving. As they approach the proficient level, students at the basic level should be able to determine which of the available data are necessary and sufficient for correct solutions and use them in problem solving. However, these 8th graders show limited skill in communicating mathematically.

Proficient (299) 8th graders performing at the proficient level should be able to conjecture, defend their ideas and give supporting examples. They should understand the connections among fractions, percents, decimals, and the mathematical topics such as algebra and functions. Quantity and spatial relationship problem solving and reasoning should be familiar to them. They should be able to compare and contrast mathematical ideas and generate their own examples. These students should make inferences from data graphs, apply properties of informal geometry. They should understand the process of gathering and organizing data in order to calculate, evaluate, and communicate results within the domain of statistics and probability.

Advanced (333) 8th graders performing at the advanced level should be able to probe examples in order to shape generalizations from which they can develop models. 8th graders performing at the Advanced level should use number sense and geometric awareness to consider the reasonableness of an answer. They are expected to use abstract thinking to create unique problem-solving techniques and explain the reasoning processes underlying their conclusions.


Free and Reduced Lunch Students In fourth grade there were 37 states that improved on their mathematic score from 2009 to 2011. 12 states improved their score by 3 or 4 points. 25 states, including Indiana, had 4th grade students improve their average scale score by 1 or 2 points. There were some states who improved but did not assess all of the students with disabilities and English language learners. This must be taken into account when considering improvement. 4th Grade Average Student Scale Score improvements for student qualified for Free and Reduced Lunch from 2009 to 2011 * states that did not meet National Inclusion Policy– students with disabilities and English language learners

NOTE: The NAEP Mathematics scale ranges from 0 to 500. Some apparent differences between estimates may not be statistically significant. SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2009 and 2011 Mathematics Assessments.

Indiana’s 8th grade students had the 7th highest mathematics score. There were 18 states that had the same or higher scale score than Indiana, however, 6 of those states did not meet student inclusion guidelines set by the National Assessment Governing Board. The expectation is to have each state have at least 85% of their students with disabilities and English language leaner population who were selected to participate. The indicated states with asterisks fell below 85% in either one or both areas.

8th Grade Average Student Scale Score improvements for student qualified for Free and Reduced Lunch from 2009 to 2011 * states that did not meet National Inclusion Policy– students with disabilities and English language learners


At grade 4, the states below assessed 85% of the English language learner (ELL) students that were selected to take the NAEP assessment in order to create a reliable, state-representative sample. The results from this sample cannot be generalized to the total population of such students. Mathematics Achievement Level Percentages Below Basic

Basic

Proficient

Highlights

Advanced

Scale scores 3

Dist of Colmb.

0 Percent

Out of the states that had 85% of the ELL students that were selected to take the NAEP assessment participate, Indiana’s ELL students had the 3rd highest average student scale score.

Out of the states that had 85% of the ELL students that were selected to take the NAEP assessment participate, Indiana’s ELL students had the 6th lowest percentage to score below basic.

Indiana’s ELL students was among only three states who had 3% of their ELL students score at Advanced.

100

NOTE: The shaded bars are gaped using unrounded numbers. Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEO), 2011 Mathematical Assessment.


At grade 4, the states below assessed 85% of the student with disabilities (SD) students that were selected to take the NAEP assessment in order to create a reliable, state-representative sample. The results from this sample cannot be generalized to the total population of such students. Mathematics Achievement Level Percentages Below Basic

Basic

Proficient

Highlights

Advanced

Scale scores

3

Out of the states that had 85% of the SD students that were selected to take the NAEP assessment participate, Indiana’s SD students had the 4th highest average student scale score.

Out of the states that had 85% of the SD students that were selected to take the NAEP assessment participate, Indiana’s SD students had the 5th lowest percentage to score below basic.

100

Percent NOTE: The shaded bars are gaped using unrounded numbers. Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEO), 2011 Mathematical Assessment.


At grade 8, the states below assessed 85% of the English language learner (ELL) that were selected to take the NAEP assessment in order to create a reliable, state-representative sample. The results from this sample cannot be generalized to the total population of such students. Mathematics Achievement Level Percentages Below Basic

Basic

Proficient

Highlights

Advanced

Scale scores

Out of the states that had 85% of the ELL students that were selected to take the NAEP assessment participate, Indiana’s ELL students had the 3rd highest average student scale score.

Indiana’s ELL students had the 2nd highest percentage of students to perform at Basic with respect to having the second lowest percentage of students performing below basic.

Percent NOTE: The shaded bars are gaped using unrounded numbers. Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEO), 2011 Mathematical Assessment.


Scores for fourth grade students were higher in 2011 in the 25th, 50th, 75th, and 90th percentiles from 2009 in mathematics Even though the nation did not see any significant change from 2009 for lower-, middle-, or higher-performing students, Indiana had increases in each percentile categories except the 10th percentile. Scale score Percentile 300

90th

75th

50th

25th

10th

¹ Accommodations were not permitted for this assessment. NOTE: The NAEP Mathematics scale ranges from 0 to 500. Some apparent differences between estimates may not be statistically significant. SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress

Indiana’s fourth-grade highlight is with the 25th percentile. Their scale score was below the national average’s scale score in 2000 but now is above the national average by 30 points. Indiana’s fourth grade 10th percentile had a scale score that was one point lower than 2009 but still remains 10 points above the national average. Scale score 500

Scale score

Indiana 10th percentile

National 10th percentile

500

¹ Accommodations were not permitted for this assessment. NOTE: The NAEP Mathematics scale ranges from 0 to 500. Some apparent differences between estimates may not be statistically significant. SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress

Indiana 25th percentile

National 25th percentile


Scores for eighth grade students were higher in 2011 in the 10th, 25th, and 50th, percentiles from 2009 in mathematics Even though the nation did not see any significant change from 2009 for lower-, middle-, or higher-performing students, Indiana had increases in each percentile categories except the 10th percentile. Scale score

Percentile

500

90th

75th

50th

25th

10th

¹ Accommodations were not permitted for this assessment. NOTE: The NAEP Mathematics scale ranges from 0 to 500. Some apparent differences between estimates may not be statistically significant. SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress

Indiana’s eighth-grade highlight is with the 10th percentile. Their scale has gone from 7 points above the national average in 1992 to 17 points above the national average in 2011. Indiana’s eighth-grade 25th percentile has gone from 6 points above the national average in 1992 to 16 points above the national average in 2011. Scale score 500

Scale score

Indiana 25th percentile

National 25th percentile

500

¹ Accommodations were not permitted for this assessment. NOTE: The NAEP Mathematics scale ranges from 0 to 500. Some apparent differences between estimates may not be statistically significant. SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress

Indiana 10th percentile

National 10th percentile


Indiana 4th Grade Hispanic Students Score Higher than the Nation in Mathematics Indiana’s 4th grade Hispanic students’ was the only Indiana ethnical group to score above their National counterpart average score. Indiana’s Hispanic students’ average scale score (234) is 4 points above the National Hispanic student average scale score (229). Overall, Indiana’s average 4th grade student scale score (244) was still higher than the National average student scale score (240). Scale score 500

Nation

Indiana

±

±

0

± Reporting standards not met. NOTE: Black includes African American, and Hispanic includes Latino. Race categories exclude Hispanic origin.

Indiana’s 4th grade Hispanic students have consistently remained 5 points ahead of the national average since 2003 to 6 points higher than the national average in 2011. Scale score 500

0

Nation

Indiana

4th grade– Indiana Compared to the Nation– 2003-2011– Hispanic Students


Indiana Black and Hispanic 4th grade students have made the biggest gain from 2000 which is the first year that NAEP allowed accommodations to allow the collection of data over all four reportable races within Indiana. Indiana Black and Hispanic students made an 8 point gain from the year 2000 to 2011 in mathematics. Indiana ethnic/racial group Trends– 1992– 2011– 4th grade

Scale score

White Two or More Races Hispanic Black

0 ¹ Accommodations were not permitted for this assessment. NOTE: Black includes African American, Hispanic includes Latino, and Pacific Islander includes Native Hawaiian. Race categories exclude Hispanic origin. Prior to 2011, students in the "two or more races" category were categorized as "unclassified." SOURCE: National Center for Education Statistics,

Indiana Black and Hispanic 4th grade students make the biggest gains from 2003 to 2011. 2003 2011 Average scale score Average scale score White 242 249 Black 215 223 Hispanic 226 234 Two or more races 235 238

Score Improvement 6 8 8 3

Top 15 States that had the highest Hispanic 4th grade student average scale scores Maryland

245

Alaska

239

North Carolina

238

Montana

237

Virginia

237

Hawaii

237

Massachusetts

236

Kentucky

236

Florida

236

DoDEA

236

Wyoming

235

Texas

235

Kansas

235

New Hampshire

235

Indiana

234

In 2011, Hispanic students in the U.S took the NAEP 2011 Mathematics assessment. Fourteen states had a Hispanic student average scale score that was above Indiana’s Hispanic student average scale score however, Maryland was the only state whose Hispanic student sample’s score was statistically higher than Indiana Hispanic students while the remaining thirteen states were considered not statistically different from Indiana’s 4th grade Hispanic students’ average scale score. Out of all fourteen states, Kansas was the only state whose English language learner students inclusion rate that matched Indiana’s 98% student inclusion rate.

NOTE: All comparisons are independent tests with an alpha level of 0.05 adjusted for multiple pairwise comparisons according to the False Discovery Rate procedure. For comparisons between two jurisdictions, a dependent test is performed for cases where one jurisdiction is contained in the other. Black includes African American, Hispanic includes Latino, and Pacific Islander includes Native Hawaiian. Race categories exclude Hispanic origin. Prior to 2011, students in the "two or more races" category were categorized as "unclassified." SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2011 Mathematics Assessment.


Indiana 8th Grade Black and Hispanic Student Average Scale Scores are Higher Than the Nation in Mathematics Indiana’s 8th grade Black and Hispanic students were the only two races that were above their National counterpart average scores. Indiana’s Black students were 2 points higher than the National Black students and Indiana’s Hispanic students were 6 points higher than the national Hispanic students. Overall, Indiana’s average student scale score (285) was still higher than the National average student scale score (283). Scale score 500

Nation

Indiana

0

± Reporting standards not met. NOTE: Black includes African American, and Hispanic includes Latino. Race categories exclude Hispanic origin.

Indiana Hispanic students have scored higher than the National Hispanic students in 2003, 2007, 2009, and the 2011 mathematics assessment. Scale score

500

Nation

Indiana

0

¹ Accommodations were not permitted for this assessment. NOTE: Black includes African American, Hispanic includes Latino, and Pacific Islander includes Native Hawaiian. Race categories exclude Hispanic origin. Prior to 2011, students in the "two or more races" category were categorized as "unclassified." The NAEP Mathematics scale ranges from 0 to 500. Some apparent differences between estimates may not be statistically significant. SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 1990, 1992, 1996, 2000, 2003, 2005, 2007, 2009 and 2011 Mathematics Assessments.


Indiana 8th grade Hispanic students have made the biggest gain from 2003 which is the first year that Indiana had enough of a Hispanic population to make a statistically reliable estimate of a racial scale sore. Indiana Hispanic students made a 14 point gain from 2003 to 2011 in mathematics. Indiana ethnic/racial group Trends– 1992– 2011– 8th grade

Scale score 500

White Two or More Races Hispanic Black

0

¹ Accommodations were not permitted for this assessment. NOTE: Black includes African American, Hispanic includes Latino, and Pacific Islander includes Native Hawaiian. Race categories exclude Hispanic origin. Prior to 2011, students in the "two or more races" category were categorized as "unclassified."

Indiana was among 10 other states that had their Hispanic students make the biggest gains from 2003 to 2011 with the average scale scores. Arkansas, Massachusetts *, Delaware, Nevada, Rhode Island, Idaho, Pennsylvania, New Mexico, Georgia, and the District of Columbia were among the states with gains as big as Indiana’s. * States with asterisks did not meet the National Governing Board inclusion policy of 85% of all English language learners selected to take the 2011 NAEP mathematics assessment.

Indiana Black and Hispanic 8th grade students make the biggest gains from 2003– 2011 2003

2011

Score Improvement

White

286

290

3

Black

251

264

13

Hispanic

261

275

14

Top 8 states that had the highest Hispanic 8th student average scale scores Montana Texas DoDEA Virginia Georgia Alaska North Carolina Indiana

285 (highest score) 283 282 279 277 277 275 275

In 2011, Hispanic students in the U.S. took the NAEP 2011 Mathematics assessment. Only seven states had a Hispanic student average scale score that was above Indiana’s Hispanic student average scale score however, Texas was the only state whose Hispanic student’s score was statistically higher than Indiana Hispanic students. Out of all 8 states, North Carolina English language learner student inclusion rate (96%) was the only state that was above Indiana’s English language learner student inclusion rate (94%). NOTE: All comparisons are independent tests with an alpha level of 0.05 adjusted for multiple pairwise comparisons according to the False Discovery Rate procedure. For comparisons between two jurisdictions, a dependent test is performed for cases where one jurisdiction is contained in the other. For more detailed information about the procedures and family sizes please see the Help document. Black includes African American, Hispanic includes Latino, and Pacific Islander includes Native Hawaiian. Race categories exclude Hispanic origin. Prior to 2011, students in the "two or more races" category were categorized as "unclassified." SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2011 Mathematics Assessment.


Indiana Reading Performance in Grade 4 & 8 Nationally representative samples of 222,200 fourth graders and 174,700 eighth graders participated in the 2011 National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) in reading. In grade 4, Indiana has a sample of 3,600 fourth-grade students to participate in the reading assessment and 2,700 eighth graders to participate in the reading assessment. Students respond to questions designed to measure what they can do and what they know across two types of texts: literary and informational. There has been no significant change in fourth grade scores since 1994. Indiana student inclusion has improved. Indiana has gone from only including 60% of selected ELL students and under 75% of SD students to more than 90% for both groups in 2011.

Scale score 500

0

ยน Accommodations were not permitted for this assessment. NOTE: The NAEP Mathematics scale ranges from 0 to 500. Some apparent differences between estimates may not be statistically significant. SOURCE: National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP)

There has been no significant change in eighth grade scores since 1994. Indiana student inclusion has improved. Indiana has gone from only including under 65% of selected ELL students and under 65% of SD students to more than 90% for ELL and more than 85% for SD students in 2011.

Scale score 500

0


Indiana Reading Performance at Grade 4 NAEP State results make it possible to examine the progress of students in each participating state over time. The national and state results presented here are for public schools only. All 50 states participated in the 2011 reading assessment. NAEP reading results for grades 4 and 8 are reported as average scale scores on a 0-500 scale. In the reading assessment there are accommodations for students with disabilities and English Language Learners, however differences between state and NAEP policies, accommodations allowed can vary between NAEP and state assessments. The goal for the National Assessment Governing Board was to have all 52 states include at least 85% of both SD & ELL students during the 2011 administration. Even with the availability of accommodations, some states should be examined more closely due to high exclusion rates. The effects of exclusion is not precisely known, Performance results by states with high exclusion rates could greatly affect statistical gain while comparing state scale scores and should be closely examined. Especially with reading, you will see that numerous states had difficulty including all SD & ELL students.

Indiana Has a higher average scale score than Indiana-VT, NH, RI, FL, WY Average Scale score is not significantly different from IndianaAverage scale score is lower than Indiana States who did not meet the SD and/or ELL student inclusion policy set by the National Assessment Governing Board Reporting standards not met for SD and ELL students. Sample size insufficient to permit a reliable estimate. Accommodations were not permitted for this assessment. NOTE: The NAEP Mathematics scale ranges from 0 to 500. Some apparent differences between estimates may not be statistically significant. SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 1992, 1996, 2000, 2003, 2005, 2007, 2009 and 2011 Mathematics Assessments.


Indiana Reading Performance at Grade 8

Accommodations were not permitted for this assessment. NOTE: The NAEP Mathematics scale ranges from 0 to 500. Some apparent differences between estimates may not be statistically significant. SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 1992, 1996, 2000, 2003, 2005, 2007, 2009 and 2011 Mathematics Assessments.

Indiana Has a higher average scale score than Indiana-ID, CO, SD, CO Average Scale score is not significantly different from Indiana Average scale score is lower than Indiana States who did not meet the SD and/or ELL student inclusion policy set by the National Assessment Governing Board Reporting standards not met for SD and ELL students. Sample size insufficient to permit a reliable estimate. Grade 4 Massachusetts New Jersey Maryland New Hampshire DoDEA Connecticut Pennsylvania Vermont Virginia North Dakota Montana Kentucky Delaware Florida Wyoming Ohio Kansas Colorado Nebraska New York Rhode Island Minnesota Maine North Carolina Wisconsin Idaho Georgia

237 231 231 230 229 227 227 227 226 226 225 225 225 225 224 224 224 223 223 222 222 222 222 221 221 221 221

Grade 8

Indiana Iowa Washington Alabama Utah Missouri

221 221 221 220 220 220

South Dakota Illinois Michigan Texas Arkansas Oregon Oklahoma South Carolina Tennessee West Virginia Hawaii Nevada Arizona California Louisiana Mississippi New Mexico Alaska Dist of Col

220 219 219 218 217 216 215 215 215 214 214 213 212 211 210 209 208 208 201

Massachusetts

275

New York

266

New Jersey

275

Illinois

266

Connecticut

275

Michigan

265

Vermont

274

Rhode Island

265

Montana

273

Indiana

265

DoDEA

272

Iowa

265

New Hampshire

272

Oregon

264

Maryland

271

North Carolina

263

Colorado

271

Georgia

262

Minnesota

270

Florida

262

Maine

270

Texas

261

Wyoming

270

Alaska

261

South Dakota

269

South Carolina

260

Kentucky

269

Arizona

260

North Dakota

269

Oklahoma

260

Ohio

268

Tennessee

259

Idaho

268

Arkansas

259

Pennsylvania

268

Alabama

258

Nebraska

268

Nevada

258

Washington

268

Hawaii

257

Kansas

267

West Virginia

256

Virginia

267

New Mexico

256

Wisconsin

267

California

255

Utah

267

Louisiana

255

Missouri

267

Mississippi

254

Delaware

266

Dist of Colum

242


Indiana students with achievement levels of below basic and at or above basic are performing better over a 19-year period and closing the Gap on the National Average. The percentage of Indiana 4th grade students who scored below basic was lower than the Nation’s percentage in 1992, 1994, 2002, 2003, 2007, and 2009. On the average, less Indiana students are performing at a lower level than the average national student in those years.

Nation

Indiana

* indicates statistical significant difference from the National average

% percent

100

Achievement Level Percentages– students Below Basic

*

*

*

*

*

*

The percentage of Indiana 4th grade students who scored at or above basic was higher than the Nation’s percentage in 1992, 1994, 2002, 2003, and 2007. On the average, more Indiana students are performing at a higher level than the average national student in those years.

% percent

Achievement Level Percentages– students At or Above Basic

*

*

*

*

*

*

¹ Accommodations were not permitted for this assessment. NOTE: The NAEP Reading scale ranges from 0 to 500. Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Some apparent differences between estimates may not be statistically significant. SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 1992, 1994, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2007, 2009 and 2011 Reading Assessments.

Average scale scores and achievement levels for reading, grade4 by all national and Indiana students All students Year 1992¹ 1994¹ 2002 2003 2005 2007 2009 2011

Nation Indiana Nation Indiana Nation Indiana Nation Indiana Nation Indiana Nation Indiana Nation Indiana Nation Indiana

Avg score

SE

below Basic

SE

at or above Basic

SE

at or above Profi-

SE

at Advanced

SE

215 221 212 220 217 222 216 220 217 218 220 222 220 223 220 221

(1.0) (1.3) (1.1) (1.3) (0.5) (1.4) (0.3) (1.0) (0.2) (1.1) (0.3) (0.9) (0.3) (1.1) (0.3) (0.9)

40 32 41 34 38 32 38 34 38 36 34 32 34 30 34 32

(1.1) (1.6) (1.1) (1.6) (0.5) (1.9) (0.3) (1.2) (0.3) (1.3) (0.3) (1.2) (0.3) (1.4) (0.4) (1.2)

60 68 59 66 62 68 62 66 62 64 66 68 66 70 66 68

(1.1) (1.6) (1.1) (1.6) (0.5) (1.9) (0.3) (1.2) (0.3) (1.3) (0.3) (1.2) (0.3) (1.4) (0.4) (1.2)

27 30 28 33 30 33 30 33 30 30 32 33 32 34 32 33

(1.3) (1.5) (1.2) (1.5) (0.5) (1.5) (0.3) (1.2) (0.2) (1.4) (0.3) (1.3) (0.4) (1.5) (0.4) (1.0)

6 6 7 7 6 7 7 8 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 6

(0.6) (0.9) (0.7) (0.8) (0.2) (0.7) (0.1) (0.6) (0.1) (0.7) (0.1) (0.7) (0.2) (0.9) (0.2) (0.6)


Indiana 8th grade students Free and Reduced gap Scores in Reading Indiana is among 13 other states that have the 6-lowest gap closing scores between students who qualify for free and reduced lunch and students who do not qualify for free and reduced lunch. No state had a closing gap score lower than 14 points and Indiana has a closing gap score of 19 points. Improvements in Indiana 8th grade reading scores in the NAEP assessment have proved to be consistent with both groups. States that have closing gap scores as low as Indiana are: Oklahoma, Montana, Wyoming, Idaho, Delaware, North Dakota, Kentucky, New Mexico, South Dakota, West Virginia, Iowa, and New Hampshire. Average scale scores for reading, grade 8 for National School Lunch Program eligibility from 2002 to 2011. 500 Not eligible for Free and Reduced Lunch

Eligible for Free and reduced lunch

0

Reading Achievement-Level Descriptions at Grade 8 Basic (243) 8th grade students performing at the basic level should be able to locate information; identify statement of a main idea, theme, or author’s purpose; and simple inferences from texts. They should be able to interpret the meaning of a word as it is used in the text. Students performing at this level should also be able to state judgments and give some support about content and presentation of content.

Eligible

Not eligible

2011

avg score

avg score

Gap

Oklahoma

254

268

14

Montana

263

279

15

Wyoming

260

275

15

Idaho

259

275

16

Proficient (281)

Delaware

256

273

17

8th grade students performing at the proficient level should be able to provide relevant information and summarize main ideas and themes. They should be able to make and support inferences about a text, connect parts of a text, and analyze text features. Students performing at this level should also be able to fully substantiate judgments about content and presentation of content.

North Dakota

257

274

17

Advanced (323) 8th grade students performing at the advanced level should be able to make connection within and across texts and to explain casual relations. They should be able to evaluate and justify the strength of supporting evidence and the quality of an author’s presentation. Students performing at the advanced level also should be able to manage the processing demands of analysis and evaluation by stating, explaining, and justifying.

2011

Eligible

Not Gap eligible

Tennessee

250

270

21

Texas

253

274

21

Utah

254

274

21

Vermont

260

281

21

Washington

255

276

21

Alabama

248

270

22

Arizona

249

271

22

Arkansas

250

272

22

Georgia

253

274

22

New York

255

277

22

North Carolina

252

274

22

Kentucky

260

278

18

New Mexico

249

267

18

South Dakota

257

275

18

California

244

268

23

West Virginia

246

264

18

Dist of Colm.

235

259

23

Florida

254

273

19

Ohio

255

278

23

Indiana

254

273

19

Illinois

253

277

24

Iowa

253

272

19

Oregon

253

276

24

251

275

24

New Hampshire

257

276

19

Rhode Island

Kansas

256

276

20

Wisconsin

251

275

24

Maine

258

278

20

Mississippi

246

271

26

Michigan

253

274

20

Virginia

250

276

26

Colorado

254

281

27

Connecticut

257

283

27

Maryland

253

280

27

Massachusetts

257

284

27

Pennsylvania

252

278

27

Nevada

248

267

20

Hawaii

246

267

21

Louisiana

247

268

21

Minnesota

255

277

21

Missouri

255

276

21

Alaska

245

273

28

Nebraska

255

276

21

New Jersey

255

283

28

South Carolina

250

271

21

DoDEA

x


Indiana’s Free and Reduced Lunch Students Among the Top 10 Scores in Reading 4th Grade Free and Reduced Lunch Students score 7th highest score amongst other states The scale score for the NAEP reading assessment is 0-500. The following states scored the average student scale score indicated by all students. The states with asterisks are states that did not meet the 85% inclusion rate for selected students with disabilities and/or English language learners set by the National Assessment Governing Board. For example; Kentucky excluded 53% of all students with disabilities and 63% of all English language learners from the 2011 NAEP reading assessment. The effects of exclusion is not precisely known so while comparing state scale scores exclusion rates should be more closely examined. Indiana only excluded 7% of students with disabilities and only 2% of English language learners which marks an all time high inclusion rate for the state of Indiana in the 2011 reading assessment. * states that did not meet National Inclusion Policy– students with disabilities and English language learners

4th Grade Free and Reduced Lunch Student Average Scale Scores– by states

NOTE: The NAEP Reading scale ranges from 0 to 500. Some apparent differences between estimates may not be statistically significant. SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) 2011 Reading Assessment.

8th Grade Free and Reduced Lunch Students score 8th highest score amongst other states There are more states that are excluding 8th grade students in the reading 2011 assessment than 4th graders. Maryland is the state with the leading exclusion rate. Maryland excluded 62% of selected students with disabilities and 55% of selected English language learners in the 2011 reading assessment. Indiana only excluded 13% of students with disabilities and only 10% of English language learners which marks an all-time high inclusion rate for the state of Indiana in the 2011 reading assessment.

8th Grade Free and Reduced Lunch Student Average Scale Scores– by states * states that did not meet National Inclusion Policy– students with disabilities and English language learners

NOTE: The NAEP Reading scale ranges from 0 to 500. Some apparent differences between estimates may not be statistically significant. SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) 2011 Reading Assessment.


Indiana had only 54% of their 4th grade ELL students score below basic on the NAEP 2011 reading assessment. Indiana was among the top 10 states to have their ELL students who were selected to take the NAEP reading assessment in 2011 to have such a small percentage of 4th grade ELL students score below basic. The results from this sample cannot be generalized to the total population of such students. Below

Basic

Proficient

Advanced

Scale scores

100

0

NOTE: The NAEP Reading scale ranges from 0 to 500. Some apparent differences between estimates may not be statistically significant. SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2009 and 2011 Reading Assessments.

States with Highest 4th Grade ELL Student Achievement Levels– at Proficient 2011 Indiana was also the state with the 5th highest percentage of 4th grade ELL students selected to take the NAEP 2011 reading assessment to score at proficient. Among the top 10 states that had the highest percentage of ELL students scoring at proficient, five of those states did not meet student inclusion guidelines set by the National Assessment Governing Board. The expectation is to have each state have at least 85% of their English language leaner population who were selected to participate in NAEP 2011. The indicated states with asterisks fell below 85% in ELL student inclusion.

* did not meet inclusion rate guidelines

at Proficient

at Advanced

ELL student inclusion rate

South Carolina

18 %

4%

91%

Kansas

16 %

1%

94%

Ohio *

13 %

0%

83%

DoDEA *

13 %

3%

79%

Indiana

13 %

2%

98%

Arkansas

13 %

2%

98%

Maryland *

12 %

3%

52%

Pennsylvania *

11 %

1%

74%

Massachusetts *

11 %

1%

82%

Nevada

10 %

1%

99%

States with Highest 4th Grade ELL Average Scale Score Improvement from 2009 to 2011

Among the 52 states that had a sample of different ELL students participate in the NAEP 2009 and 2011 reading assessment, Indiana’s 4th grade students had the second highest improvement score in the country from 2009 to 2011. Indiana’s 4th grade ELL students’ 2011 average scale score (203) was 11 points higher than their score in 2009 (193). Among the top ten states to have the highest improvement scores from 2009 to 2011, four of those states did not meet student inclusion guidelines set by the National Assessment Governing Board. This must be taken into account when considering improvement.

* did not meet inclusion rate guidelines

2009 ELL average scale score

2011 ELL average scale score

score improvement

Ohio *

195

208

13

Indiana

193

203

11

Wisconsin

192

202

10

Nevada

188

197

9

Pennsylvania *

181

190

9

DoDEA *

203

212

9

Nebraska

189

196

6

Arkansas

195

201

6

Massachusetts *

201

206

5


Indiana had only 55% of their 8th grade ELL students score below basic on the NAEP 2011 reading assessment. Indiana was among 9 of the states who had the lowest percentage of selected ELL students scoring below basic in 2011. The results from this sample cannot be generalized to the total population of such students. Indiana 8th grade achievement level percentages– English language learners Below Basic

Basic

Proficient

Advanced

Scale scores

0

100

NOTE: The NAEP Reading scale ranges from 0 to 500. Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Some apparent differences between estimates may not be statistically significant. SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2011 Reading Assessment. * did not meet inclusion rate guidelines

at Proficient

at Advanced

South Carolina * Kansas

18 % 10 %

0% 0%

ELL Student Inclusion Rate 80% 98%

Wisconsin

9%

0%

92%

Michigan *

8%

0%

79%

Virginia *

7%

0%

78%

Arkansas

7%

1%

97%

Iowa

6%

0%

99%

Minnesota

6%

0%

94%

Indiana

6%

0%

90%

Indiana was among nine states that had the highest percentage of 8th grade ELL students selected to take the NAEP 2011 reading assessment to score at proficient. Among the top 9 states that had the highest percentage of ELL students scoring at proficient, 3 of those states did not meet inclusion guidelines set by the National Governing Board. The expectation is to have each state have at least 85% of their English language learner population who were selected to participate in the NAEP 2011. The indicated states with asterisks fell below 85% in ELL student inclusion.

Differences in Average Scale Scores between States for English Language Learners– Grade 8 Since 1992 when NAEP began producing state specific results, Indiana has never had an ELL population big enough to report a reliable statistical estimate. 2011 marked the first year that Indiana had enough 8 th grade ELL students participating in the NAEP assessment to report reliable ELL estimate scores. Indiana 8th grade ELL students scored among those states who have had a high performing 8th grade ELL student population for years. In Indiana’s first year for having reportable ELL 8th grade reading data, South Carolina was the only state to have their sample of 8th grade ELL students have a statistically higher score than Indiana’s 8th grade ELL students. All other ELL sample students state scores were either statistically the same or lower.

Has statistically higher scale score than Indiana Is not statistically different from than Indiana Has lower average scale score than Indiana.

Data not available.


Indiana 4th grade students with disabilities (SD) have scored higher than the nation in 2002, 2003, and 2009. In 2011, Indiana’s SD students average scale score was not statistically different than the national student with disability average. In 2011, Indiana had the best state inclusion rate in NAEP history. Indiana was the state with the 2nd highest inclusion rate of 4th grade SD students. This should be taken into consideration when evaluating improvement within the state with this population.

Indiana’s 4th grade Students with Disabilities Compared to the Nation- 2002-2011– Reading Nation

500

Indiana

0

NOTE: The NAEP Reading scale ranges from 0 to 500. Some apparent differences between estimates may not be statistically significant. SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2002, 2003, 2005, 2007, 2009 and 2011 Reading Assessments.

Indiana 4th Grade Students With Disabilities Inclusion Rate for NAEP Reading Assessment – 2003– 2011– Reading

Percentage

%

%

%

% %

Excluded Included

% %

%

%

%

In the NAEP 2011 reading assessment, Indiana included 93% of selected 4th grade students with disabilities to take the reading assessment. The National Assessment Governing Board set an inclusion policy of 85% of all SD students. Indiana has never made this inclusion goal since NAEP started reporting state specific results in 1992. In 2011, Indiana had the best representation of what Indiana 4th grade SD students know and can do in reading.

NOTE: The NAEP Reading scale ranges from 0 to 500. Some apparent differences between estimates may not be statistically significant. SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2002, 2003, 2005, 2007, 2009 and 2011 Reading Assessments.

Most states have made an effort to include all students with disabilities selected to take the NAEP assessment. When comparing variations in inclusion you can see the trend with states with high inclusion rates to states with the lowest inclusion rate. The effect of Inclusion rate on scale scores is Students with Disabilities 4th Grade Inclusion Rates- for reading not precisely known but the pattern of higher scores with states with the lower inclusion rate seems to appear and lower scale scores for states with the highest inclusion rate.


Indiana 8th grade students with disabilities (SD) have scored higher than the nation in 2002, 2005, 2007, and 2009. Indiana’s SD students average scale score (230) was not statistically different than the national student with disability average (232). In 2011, Indiana had the best state inclusion rate in NAEP history. This should be taken into consideration when evaluating improvement within the state with this population.

Indiana’s 8th grade Students with Disabilities Compared to the Nation- 2002-2011– Reading 500

Nation

Indiana

0 NOTE: The NAEP Reading scale ranges from 0 to 500. Some apparent differences between estimates may not be statistically significant. SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2002, 2003, 2005, 2007, 2009 and 2011 Reading Assessments.

Percentage

Indiana 8th Grade Students With Disabilities Inclusion Rate for NAEP Reading Assessment – 2002 %

%

%

%

%

%

%

%

%

%

% %

In the NAEP 2011 reading assessment, Indiana included 87% of selected 8th grade students with disabilities to Excluded take the reading assessment. The National Assessment Included Governing Board set an inclusion policy of 85% of all SD students. Indiana has never made this inclusion goal since NAEP started reporting state specific results in 1992. In 2011, Indiana had the best representation of what Indiana SD students know and can do in reading.

NOTE: The NAEP Reading scale ranges from 0 to 500. Some apparent differences between estimates may not be statistically significant. SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2002, 2003, 2005, 2007, 2009 and 2011 Reading Assessments.


Indiana 4th Grade Black and Hispanic Students Indiana’s 4th grade Black student's average score (203) and Hispanic average score (203) were not statistically different than their national racial group counterpart’s score in the 2011 NAEP reading assessment.

Indiana 4th Grade Average Student Scale Scores compared to the nation- Ethnical/ Racial Groups 500

Nation

*

Indiana

*

0 NOTE: Black includes African American, Hispanic includes Latino, and Pacific Islander includes Native Hawaiian. Race categories exclude Hispanic origin. Prior to 2011, students in the "two or more races" category were categorized as "unclassified." The NAEP Reading scale ranges from 0 to 500. Some apparent differences between estimates may not be statistically significant. SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2011 Reading Assessment.

Indiana’s 8th grade Black students’ average score (247), Hispanic students’ average score (255), and Two or More Race students’ average score (263) were not statistically different from their national racial group counterpart’s score In the 2011 NAEP reading assessment.

Indiana 8th Grade Average Student Scale Scores compared to the nation- Ethnical/ Racial Groups 500

*

0 NOTE: Black includes African American, Hispanic includes Latino, and Pacific Islander includes Native Hawaiian. Race categories exclude Hispanic origin. Prior to 2011, students in the "two or more races" category were categorized as "unclassified." The NAEP Reading scale ranges from 0 to 500. Some apparent differences between estimates may not be statistically significant. SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2011 Reading Assessment.


U.S. Department of Education The National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) is a congressionally authorized project sponsored by the U.S. Department of Education. The National Center for Education Statistics, within the Institute of Educational Sciences administers NAEP. The commissioner of Education Statistics is responsible by law for carrying out the NAEP project.

Arne Duncan Secretary U.S. Department of Education

John Q. Easton Director Institute of Education Sciences

Jack Buckley Commissioner National Center for Educational Statistics

Peggy Carr Associate Commissioner For Assessment National Center for Educational Statistics

The National Assessment Governing Board In 1988, congress created the National Assessment Governing Board to set policy for the National Assessment of Educational Progress, commonly known as the Nations Report Card. The governing board is an independent bipartisan group whose members include governors, state legislators, local and state officials, educators, business representatives, and members of the general public. Honorable Driscoll, Chair Former Commissioner of Education Melrose, MA

Andrew Dean Ho Assistant Professor Harvard University

Honorable Terry Holliday Commissioner of Education Kentucky Department of Education

W. James Popham Professor Emeritus Univ. of California, L.A.

B. Fielding Rolston Chairman Tennessee State Board of Education

Honorable Tom Luna Idaho Superintendent of Public Instruction

Joseph O’Keefe Professor Boston College

Louis M. Fabrizio Data, Research and Federal Policy Director North Carolina Department of Public Instruction

Susan Pimentel , Vice Chair Educational Consultant Hanover, NH

Andres Alonso Chief Executive Officer Baltimore Public Schools

Rebecca Gagnon School Board Member Minneapolis Public Schools

Tonya Miles Public Representative Mitchellville, MD

Hector Ibarra 8th Grade Teacher Belin Blank International Center, IA

Dale Nowlin 12th Grade Teacher Columbus North High School Columbus, Indiana

Doris Hicks Principal & Chief Executive Officer Dr. Martin Luther King Charter School New Orleans, LA

Honorable Anitere Flores Senator Florida State Senate

Blair Taylor Chief Community Officer Starbucks Coffee Company

Richard Brent Houston Principal Shawnee Middle School, OK

Honorable Leticia Van de Putte Senator Texas State Senate

Alan J. Friedman Consultant Museum Development & Science Communication, New York, NY

Cornelia Orr Executive Director Washington D.C.

Shannon Garrison 4th Grade Teacher Solano Elementary School Los Angeles, CA

Terry Mazany President and CEO Chicago Community Trust

The Indiana Department of Education In 2001, State Board of Education and Indiana General Assembly passed state law 511 IAC 5-4-1 which requires all Indiana public and accredited non-public schools to participate in NAEP if selected. The state of Indiana depends upon the IDOE to communicate all NAEP policy and requires the full cooperation of its offices to administer all directions from the National Center for Educational Statistics, the Institute of Education Sciences, the National Assessment of Educational Progress, and the U.S. Department of Education. Wes Bruce

Michele Walker

Mark O’Malley

Chief Assessment & Accountability Officer

Director of Student Assessment

Indiana NAEP State Coordinator

Indiana Department of Education

Indiana Department of Education

Indiana Department of Education


Math and reading 2011 naep indiana assessment executive report