1 The Nation’s Report Card: 2007 Writing

2 Overview of the 2007 Writing Assessment Given January – March 2007 – 139,900 eighth-graders – 27,900 twelfth-graders Writing tasks focus on three purposes – Narrative – Informative – Persuasive 2

3 Scoring Students’ Writing Students’ responses rated as first drafts and not as polished pieces of writing Six performance ratings – Excellent – Skillful – Sufficient – Uneven – Insufficient – Unsatisfactory 3

4 Writing Results National results for both grades 8 and 12 Additional results available for grade 8 – 45 states and Department of Defense schools – 10 urban districts Results reported as – Average scale scores (on a 0 – 300 scale) – Achievement levels ( Basic, Proficient, Advanced )

5 Grade 8 Results

6 National Scale Score Results Average score up 3 points since 2002 and up 6 points since 1998 * Significantly different ( p <.05) from SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 1998, 2002, and 2007 Writing Assessments.

7 National Achievement-Level Results Higher percentage of students performing at or above Basic than in both previous assessments Percentage at or above Proficient shows no significant change since 2002, but higher than in 1998 * Significantly different ( p <.05) from SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 1998, 2002, and 2007 Writing Assessments.

8 National Results by Race/Ethnicity White – Up 3 points from 2002 – Up 7 points from 1998 Black – Up 6 points from 2002 – Up 10 points from 1998 Hispanic – Up 5 points from 2002 – Up 10 points from 1998 Asian/Pacific Islander – Up 6 points from 2002 – Comparable to 1998 American Indian/Alaska Native – Comparable to 2002 and 1998 SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 1998, 2002, and 2007 Writing Assessments. ↑ Indicates the score was higher in ↔ Indicates there was no significant change in the score in 2007.

9 White – Black score gap narrows in 2007 compared with both previous assessments White – Hispanic gap shows no significant change * Significantly different ( p <.05) from NOTE: Black includes African American, and Hispanic includes Latino. Race categories exclude Hispanic origin. Score gaps are calculated based on differences between unrounded average scores. SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 1998, 2002, and 2007 Writing Assessments.

10 Scores increase for both female and male students No significant change in gender score gap * Significantly different ( p <.05) from NOTE: Score gaps are calculated based on differences between unrounded average scores. SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 1998, 2002, and 2007 Writing Assessments. National Results by Gender

11 National Results by Eligibility for National School Lunch Program Students eligible for free lunch score lower than students eligible for reduced-price lunch Both groups score lower on average than students who were not eligible SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2007 Writing Assessment.

12 State Results State participation in the writing assessment is voluntary – 46 jurisdictions participated in 2007 Results reported for public school students only

13 Changes in Average Scores Compared With 2002 Scores increase in 20 out of 39 jurisdictions One state decreased 1 Department of Defense Education Activity (overseas and domestic schools). SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2002 and 2007 Writing Assessments.

14 Changes in Average Scores Compared With Department of Defense Education Activity (overseas and domestic schools). SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 1998 and 2007 Writing Assessments. Scores increase in 29 out of 34 jurisdictions No states decreased

15 Writing Trial Urban District Assessment

16 Writing Trial Urban District Assessment Ten participating districts in 2007 Representative samples of between 900 and 2,000 students in each district Trend results available for four districts

17 Changes in Urban District Scores Compared With 2002 Three urban districts gain since 2002 Score increases for large central cities SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2002 and 2007 Trial Urban District Writing Assessments. ↑ Indicates the score was higher in ↔ Indicates there was no significant change in the score in 2007.

18 Urban District Average Scores in 2007 Most districts perform comparably to or higher than large central cities, but below the nation * Significantly different ( p <.05) from large central city public schools. ** Significantly different ( p <.05) from nation (public schools). SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2007 Trial Urban District Writing Assessment.

19 Urban Districts Compared With Home States Gains since 2002 in Atlanta and Los Angeles greater than their home states * Significantly different ( p <.05) from SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2002 and 2007 Trial Urban District Writing Assessments.

20 Urban District Achievement-Level Results Most districts surpass or are comparable to large central cities in percentage at or above Proficient # Rounds to zero. NOTE: The shaded bars are graphed 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 (NAEP), 2007 Writing Assessment.

21 Sample Eighth-Grade Informative Writing Task Description of a Backpack 67% of eighth-graders received a rating of “Sufficient” or higher on their essays about a backpack, showing at least – information developed with some details – some organization with related ideas – control over sentence structure – minimal errors in grammar, spelling, and punctuation

22 Grade 12 Results

23 National Scale Score Results Average score up 5 points since 2002 and 3 points since 1998 * Significantly different ( p <.05) from SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 1998, 2002, and 2007 Writing Assessments.

24 National Achievement-Level Results Higher percentage of students performing at or above Basic than in both previous assessments Percentage at or above Proficient shows no significant change since 2002, but higher than in 1998 * Significantly different ( p <.05) from SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 1998, 2002, and 2007 Writing Assessments.

25 National Results by Race/Ethnicity White – Up 6 points from 2002 – Up 4 points from 1998 Black – Up 7 points from 2002 – Comparable to 1998 Hispanic – Comparable to 2002 and 1998 Asian/Pacific Islander – Up 9 points from 2002 – Comparable to 1998 American Indian/Alaska Native – Comparable to 1998 SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 1998, 2002, and 2007 Writing Assessments. ↑ Indicates the score was higher in ↔ Indicates there was no significant change in the score in ‡ Reporting standards not met. Sample size is insufficient to permit a reliable estimate.

26 No significant changes in White – Black or White – Hispanic score gaps * Significantly different ( p <.05) from NOTE: Black includes African American, and Hispanic includes Latino. Race categories exclude Hispanic origin. Score gaps are calculated based on differences between unrounded average scores. SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 1998, 2002, and 2007 Writing Assessments.

27 * Significantly different ( p <.05) from NOTE: Score gaps are calculated based on differences between unrounded average scores. SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 1998, 2002, and 2007 Writing Assessments. Score for male students up since 2002, and scores for both groups higher than in 1998 Gender score gap narrows since 2002, but shows no significant change compared to 1998 National Results by Gender

28 Sample Twelfth-Grade Persuasive Writing Task Big or Small Inventions 60% of twelfth-graders received a rating of “Sufficient” or higher on their essays about the importance of big inventions or small inventions, showing at least – a clear position supported with examples – some development and general organization – simple sentence structure – minimal errors in grammar, spelling, and punctuation

29 For More Information