TESTING BRIEF National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) - Mathematics January 30 March 10, 2017

Similar documents
Shelters Elementary School

Cooper Upper Elementary School

Supply and Demand of Instructional School Personnel

Wisconsin 4 th Grade Reading Results on the 2015 National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP)

Cooper Upper Elementary School

Student Mobility Rates in Massachusetts Public Schools

ILLINOIS DISTRICT REPORT CARD

ILLINOIS DISTRICT REPORT CARD

File Print Created 11/17/2017 6:16 PM 1 of 10

Research Brief. Literacy across the High School Curriculum

Idaho Public Schools

Transportation Equity Analysis

Sunnyvale Middle School School Accountability Report Card Reported Using Data from the School Year Published During

Enrollment Trends. Past, Present, and. Future. Presentation Topics. NCCC enrollment down from peak levels

John F. Kennedy Middle School

Frank Phillips College. Accountability Report

Port Graham El/High. Report Card for

A Guide to Adequate Yearly Progress Analyses in Nevada 2007 Nevada Department of Education

Annual Report to the Public. Dr. Greg Murry, Superintendent

Iowa School District Profiles. Le Mars

Rural Education in Oregon

Demographic Survey for Focus and Discussion Groups

TRANSFER APPLICATION: Sophomore Junior Senior

5 Programmatic. The second component area of the equity audit is programmatic. Equity

Practices Worthy of Attention Step Up to High School Chicago Public Schools Chicago, Illinois

Kansas Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) Revised Guidance

World s Best Workforce Plan

Miami-Dade County Public Schools

SAT Results December, 2002 Authors: Chuck Dulaney and Roger Regan WCPSS SAT Scores Reach Historic High

Redirected Inbound Call Sampling An Example of Fit for Purpose Non-probability Sample Design

Updated: December Educational Attainment

READY OR NOT? CALIFORNIA'S EARLY ASSESSMENT PROGRAM AND THE TRANSITION TO COLLEGE

George A. Buljan Middle School School Accountability Report Card Reported Using Data from the School Year Published During

46 Children s Defense Fund

Psychometric Research Brief Office of Shared Accountability

Guide for Test Takers with Disabilities

Data Diskette & CD ROM

2012 ACT RESULTS BACKGROUND

EFFECTS OF MATHEMATICS ACCELERATION ON ACHIEVEMENT, PERCEPTION, AND BEHAVIOR IN LOW- PERFORMING SECONDARY STUDENTS

Status of Women of Color in Science, Engineering, and Medicine

Missouri 4-H University of Missouri 4-H Center for Youth Development

UW-Waukesha Pre-College Program. College Bound Take Charge of Your Future!

Evaluation of Teach For America:

YOUR FUTURE IN IB. Why is the International Baccalaureate a great choice for you? Mrs. Debbie Woolard IB Director Marietta High School

Peer Influence on Academic Achievement: Mean, Variance, and Network Effects under School Choice

Executive Summary. Lincoln Middle Academy of Excellence

BUILDING CAPACITY FOR COLLEGE AND CAREER READINESS: LESSONS LEARNED FROM NAEP ITEM ANALYSES. Council of the Great City Schools

Strategic Plan Dashboard Results. Office of Institutional Research and Assessment

The Achievement Gap in California: Context, Status, and Approaches for Improvement

Invest in CUNY Community Colleges

Longitudinal Analysis of the Effectiveness of DCPS Teachers

University of Utah. 1. Graduation-Rates Data a. All Students. b. Student-Athletes

Appendix K: Survey Instrument

New Jersey Institute of Technology Newark College of Engineering

African American Male Achievement Update

Kahului Elementary School

Raw Data Files Instructions

Statistical Peers for Benchmarking 2010 Supplement Grade 11 Including Charter Schools NMSBA Performance 2010

Institution of Higher Education Demographic Survey

School Accountability Report Card Published During the School Year

Fruitvale Station Shopping Center > Retail

HIGH SCHOOL PREP PROGRAM APPLICATION For students currently in 7th grade

NATIONAL CENTER FOR EDUCATION STATISTICS RESPONSE TO RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE NATIONAL ASSESSMENT GOVERNING BOARD AD HOC COMMITTEE ON.

The Condition of College & Career Readiness 2016

Elementary and Secondary Education Act ADEQUATE YEARLY PROGRESS (AYP) 1O1

Dyer-Kelly Elementary School School Accountability Report Card Reported Using Data from the School Year Published During

DUAL ENROLLMENT ADMISSIONS APPLICATION. You can get anywhere from here.

NC Education Oversight Committee Meeting

Coming in. Coming in. Coming in

For international students wishing to study Japanese language at the Japanese Language Education Center in Term 1 and/or Term 2, 2017

Bella Vista High School School Accountability Report Card Reported Using Data from the School Year Published During

Bellevue University Admission Application

Junior (61-90 semester hours or quarter hours) Two-year Colleges Number of Students Tested at Each Institution July 2008 through June 2013

NDPC-SD Data Probes Worksheet

Facts and Figures Office of Institutional Research and Planning

NCEO Technical Report 27

Educational Attainment

KENT STATE UNIVERSITY

NATIONAL ASSESSMENT OF EDUCATIONAL PROGRESS ACHIEVEMENT LEVELS

An Empirical Analysis of the Effects of Mexican American Studies Participation on Student Achievement within Tucson Unified School District

National Survey of Student Engagement Spring University of Kansas. Executive Summary

State of New Jersey

DO SOMETHING! Become a Youth Leader, Join ASAP. HAVE A VOICE MAKE A DIFFERENCE BE PART OF A GROUP WORKING TO CREATE CHANGE IN EDUCATION

Principal vacancies and appointments


National Collegiate Retention and. Persistence-to-Degree Rates

Race, Class, and the Selective College Experience

Status of Latino Education in Massachusetts: A Report

2013 TRIAL URBAN DISTRICT ASSESSMENT (TUDA) RESULTS

University of Arizona

Graduate Division Annual Report Key Findings

SMILE Noyce Scholars Program Application

An Introduction to School Finance in Texas

What is related to student retention in STEM for STEM majors? Abstract:

Legacy of NAACP Salary equalization suits.

Undergraduates Views of K-12 Teaching as a Career Choice

Excellence in Prevention descriptions of the prevention programs and strategies with the greatest evidence of success

IS FINANCIAL LITERACY IMPROVED BY PARTICIPATING IN A STOCK MARKET GAME?

International: Three-Year School Improvement Plan to September 2016 (Year 2)

EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT

Transcription:

TESTING BRIEF National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) - Mathematics January 3 March 1, 217 The Nation's Report Card, the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), is a nationally representative and continuing assessment of what America's students know and can do in various subject areas. Since 1969, assessments have been conducted periodically in reading, mathematics, science, writing, history, geography, and other fields. By making objective information on student performance available to policymakers at the national, state, and local levels, NAEP is an integral part of our nation's evaluation of the condition and progress of education. Only information related to academic achievement is collected under this program. NAEP guarantees the privacy of individual students and their families. This report provides selected NAEP results for Georgia's public school students in mathematics at grades 4 and 8. Student performance is reported as an average score based on the NAEP mathematics scale, which ranges from to 5. Beginning in 199, mathematics has been assessed in eleven different years at the state level (at grade 8 in 199, and at both grades 4 and 8 in 1992, 1996, 2, 23, 25, 27, 29, 211, 213, 215 and 217). This report presents results from 2 to 217. This is the first year for digitally based assessment (DBA) results for NAEP. Grade 4 KEY FINDINGS IN MATHEMATICS The average mathematics scale score for students in Georgia was 236. This was significantly different from the score in 213 (24), but not from the score in 215 (236). Georgia's average scale score in 217 (236) was significantly different than that of the nation's public schools (239). The average mathematics scale score for White students in Georgia increased two (2) points from 215 (245) to 217 (247). The average scale score for Black students decreased one (1) point from 215 (224) to 217 (223). The average scale score for Hispanic students decreased six (6) points from 215 (234) to 217 (228). Scale score changes for these race/ethnic groups were not statistically significant. The average mathematics scale score for students who were eligible for the National School Lunch (NSL) Program was 228 in 215 and 226 in 217, a two (2) point decrease. In 217, the percentage of students in Georgia who performed at or above Basic was 77 percent. This was not significantly different from 215 (78 percent). The percentage of students in Georgia who performed at or above Basic (77 percent) was not significantly different than that of students in the nation s public schools (79 percent). In 215, the percentage of students in Georgia who performed at or above Proficient was 35 percent. This was not significantly different from 215 (35 percent). The percentage of students in Georgia who performed at or above Proficient (35 percent) was significantly different than that of students in the nation s public schools (4 percent). In 215, the percentage of students in Georgia who performed at Advanced was 6 percent. This was not significantly different from 215 (5 percent). The percentage of students in Georgia who performed at Advanced was 6 percent while the percentage for the nation s public schools was 8 percent. April 12, 218 Page 1 of 8

KEY FINDINGS IN MATHEMATICS Grade 8 The average mathematics scale score for students in Georgia was 281, and was not significantly different from that in 215 (279) or 213 (279). Georgia's average scale score (281) was not significantly different than for the nation's public schools (282). The average mathematics scale score for White students in Georgia increased two (2) points from 215 (291) to 217 (293). The average scale score for Black students did not change from 215 (264) to 217 (264). The average scale score for Hispanic students increased five (5) points from 215 (27) to 217 (275). Scale score changes for these race/ethnic groups were not statistically significant. The average mathematics scale score for students who were eligible for the National School Lunch (NSL) Program in Georgia was unchanged at 267 from 215 to 217. In 217, the percentage of students in Georgia who performed at or above Basic was 68 percent. This was not significantly different from 215 (67 percent) or 213 (68 percent). The percentage of students in Georgia who performed at or above Basic (68 percent) was not significantly different than the percentage for the nation s public schools (69 percent). In 217, the percentage of students in Georgia who performed at or above Proficient was 31 percent. This was not significantly different from 215 (28 percent) or 213 (29 percent). The percentage of students in Georgia who performed at or above Proficient (31 percent) was not significantly different than the percentage for the nation s public schools (33 percent). In 217, the percentage of students in Georgia who performed at Advanced was 9 percent. This was not significantly different from 215 (7 percent). The percentage of students in Georgia who performed at Advanced was 9 percent while the percentage for the nation s public schools was 1 percent. April 12, 218 Page 2 of 8

Table 1: Average Scale Scores NAEP Grade 4 Mathematics 2-217 Average Scale Scores 2-217 All Students 219* 23* 234 235 236 238 24* 236 236 +17 White 23* 241* 243 246 247 249 25 245 247 +17 Black 24* 217* 221 222 221 224 226 224 223 +19 Hispanic 217* 219* 229 229 231 233 235 234 228 +11 Asian N/A 248* 255* 255* 256* 263 263 26 272 +24** Male 22* 231* 234 236 237 238 241 237 237 +17 Female 218* 229* 233 234 236 239 239 236 236 +18 FRL (NSL) 24* 219* 224 224 225 227 23* 228 226 +22 196* 29 218* 219* 215 214 216 214 21 +14 English Learner N/A 28 28 212 22* 219* 217* 216* 28 ** Figure 1: Average Scale Scores NAEP Grade 4 Mathematics 2-217 NAEP Grade 4: Math Average Scale Scores 27 26 25 24 Scale Score 23 22 21 2 19 18 17 2 219 23 24 217 N/A 22 218 24 196 N/A 23 23 241 217 219 248 231 229 219 29 28 25 234 243 221 229 255 234 233 224 218 28 27 235 246 222 229 255 236 234 224 219 212 29 236 247 221 231 256 237 236 225 215 22 211 238 249 224 233 263 238 239 227 214 219 213 24 25 226 235 263 241 239 23 216 217 215 236 245 224 234 26 237 236 228 214 216 217 236 247 223 228 272 237 236 226 21 28 April 12, 218 Page 3 of 8

Table 2: Achievement Level Percent At or Above Basic on NAEP Grade 4 Mathematics 2-217 Percent At or Above Basic 2 23 25 27 29 211 213 215 217 2-217 All Students 57* 72* 76 79 78 8 81* 78 77 +2 White 73* 84 87 9 9 91 91 88 88 +15 Black 36* 56* 61 64 62 65 68 64 65 +29 Hispanic 58* 6 73 75 75 76 77 76 69 +11 Asian N/A 87 95 9 93 94 95 94 97 +1** Male 59* 72* 76 79 77 78 81* 77 75 +16 Female 55* 71* 76 78 79 81 81 78 78 +23 FRL (NSL) 36* 59* 65 68 68 7 73 69 67 +31 32* 43 54 58* 53 49 53 49 43 +11 English Learner N/A 41 42 51 59 56 54 53 39-2** Figure 2: Percent At or Above Basic NAEP Grade 4 Mathematics 2-217 1 9 8 7 NAEP Grade 4 Math: Percent At or Above Basic Percentage 6 5 4 3 2 1 All Students White Black Hispanic Asian Male Female FRL (NSL) SD EL 2 57 73 36 58 N/A 59 55 36 32 N/A 23 72 84 56 6 87 72 71 59 43 41 25 76 87 61 73 95 76 76 65 54 42 27 79 9 64 75 9 79 78 68 58 51 29 78 9 62 75 93 77 79 68 53 59 211 8 91 65 76 94 78 81 7 49 56 213 81 91 68 77 95 81 81 73 53 54 215 78 88 64 76 94 77 78 69 49 53 217 77 88 65 69 97 75 78 67 43 39 April 12, 218 Page 4 of 8

Table 3: Achievement Level Percent At or Above Proficient on NAEP Grade 4 Mathematics 2-217 Percent At or Above Proficient 2-217 All Students 17* 27* 3* 32 34 37 39* 35 35 +18 White 27* 4 43 46 48 51 53 47 5 +23 Black 5* 11* 12 13 15 18 2 19 18 +13 Hispanic 12* 13* 22 2 26 29 33 28 25 +13 Asian N/A 53 57 63 6 7 71 65 81 +28** Male 19* 29* 3 33 35 37 4 36 37 +18 Female 16* 25* 29 3 32 37 38 33 34 +18 FRL (NSL) 5* 12* 16* 16* 19 21 25 23 21 +16 4* 11 15 18 13 14 16 14 14 +1 English Learner N/A 8 4 5 14 13 11 6 6-2** Figure 3: Percent At or Above Proficient NAEP Grade 4 Mathematics 2-217 NAEP Grade 4 Math: Percent At or Above Proficient 1 9 8 7 Percentage 6 5 4 3 2 1 2 17 27 5 12 N/A 19 16 5 4 N/A 23 27 4 11 13 53 29 25 12 11 8 25 3 43 12 22 57 3 29 16 15 4 27 32 46 13 2 63 33 3 16 18 5 29 34 48 15 26 6 35 32 19 13 14 211 37 51 18 29 7 37 37 21 14 13 213 39 53 2 33 71 4 38 25 16 11 215 35 47 19 28 65 36 33 23 14 6 217 35 5 18 25 81 37 34 21 14 6 April 12, 218 Page 5 of 8

Table 4: Average Scale Scores NAEP Grade 8 Mathematics 2-217 Average Scale Scores 2-217 All Students 265* 27* 272* 275* 278* 278 279 279 281 +16 White 279* 284* 284* 288* 289 291 292 291 293 +14 Black 244* 25* 255* 261 262 262 262 264 264 +2 Hispanic N/A 262* 258* 266 27 277 276 27 275 +13** Asian N/A 286* 31* N/A 3* 32 31 317 32 +34** Male 265* 27* 273* 275* 277* 279 279 279 282 +17 Female 265* 269* 272* 274* 278 278 279 279 28 +15 FRL (NSL) 246* 253* 257* 262* 265 267 267 267 267 +21 232* 234* 241* 246 245 244 244 245 251 +19 English Learner N/A 239 242 237 N/A 245 239 242 238-1** Figure 4: Average Scale Scores NAEP Grade 8 Mathematics 2-217 NAEP Grade 8 Math: Average Scale Scores 3 28 Scale Score 26 24 22 2 2 265 279 244 N/A N/A 265 265 246 232 N/A 23 27 284 25 262 286 27 269 253 234 239 25 272 284 255 258 31 273 272 257 241 242 27 275 288 261 266 N/A 275 274 262 246 237 29 278 289 262 27 3 277 278 265 245 N/A 211 278 291 262 277 32 279 278 267 244 245 213 279 292 262 276 31 279 279 267 244 239 215 279 291 264 27 317 279 279 267 245 242 217 281 293 264 275 32 282 28 267 251 238 April 12, 218 Page 6 of 8

Table 5: Achievement Level Percent At or Above Basic on NAEP Grade 8 Mathematics 2-217 Percent At or Above Basic 2-217 All Students 54* 59* 62* 64 67 68 68 67 68 +14 White 71* 77* 76* 8 8 82 81 81 81 +1 Black 28* 36* 43* 48 5 51 51 52 51 +23 Hispanic N/A 49* 48* 55 59 69 67 6 64 +15** Asian N/A 73* 84 N/A 86 88 86 9 93 +2** Male 55* 6* 62* 64 65 67 68 67 69 +14 Female 54* 59* 62* 64 68 7 68 67 68 +14 FRL (NSL) 3* 39* 44* 49* 53 58 57 57 56 +26 26 24* 29 34 28 3 3 29 36 +1 English Learner N/A 25 27 2 N/A 28 22 26 21-4** Figure 5: Percent At or Above Basic NAEP Grade 8 Mathematics 2-217 NAEP Grade 8 Math: Percent At or Above Basic 1 9 8 7 Percentage 6 5 4 3 2 1 2 54 71 28 N/A N/A 55 54 3 26 N/A 23 59 77 36 49 73 6 59 39 24 25 25 62 76 43 48 84 62 62 44 29 27 27 64 8 48 55 N/A 64 64 49 34 2 29 67 8 5 59 86 65 68 53 28 N/A 211 68 82 51 69 88 67 7 58 3 28 213 68 81 51 67 86 68 68 57 3 22 215 67 81 52 6 9 67 67 57 29 26 217 68 81 51 64 93 69 68 56 36 21 April 12, 218 Page 7 of 8

Table 6: Achievement Level Percent At or Above Proficient on NAEP Grade 8 Mathematics 2-217 Percent At or Above Proficient 2-217 All Students 19* 22* 23* 25* 27 28 29 28 31 +12 White 27* 32* 34* 37 39 4 42 41 44 +17 Black 4* 7* 8* 11 11 12 12 13 14 +1 Hispanic N/A 14 12 16 18 25 24 19 23 +9** Asian N/A 4* 52 N/A 49 52 62 68 7 +3** Male 19* 24* 24* 26 27 29 3 29 32 +13 Female 18* 2* 23* 23* 27 27 29 28 31 +13 FRL (NSL) 5* 8* 9* 12 13 16 17 15 17 +12 5 6 6 6 6 4 6 5 9 +4 English Learner N/A 4 1 1 N/A 6 4 4 4 ** Figure 6: Percent At or Above Proficient NAEP Grade 8 Mathematics 2-217 NAEP Grade 8 Math: Percent At or Above Proficient 1 9 8 7 Percentage 6 5 4 3 2 1 2 19 27 4 N/A N/A 19 18 5 5 N/A 23 22 32 7 14 4 24 2 8 6 4 25 23 34 8 12 52 24 23 9 6 1 27 25 37 11 16 N/A 26 23 12 6 1 29 27 39 11 18 49 27 27 13 6 N/A 211 28 4 12 25 52 29 27 16 4 6 213 29 42 12 24 62 3 29 17 6 4 215 28 41 13 19 68 29 28 15 5 4 217 31 44 14 23 7 32 31 17 9 4 April 12, 218 Page 8 of 8