CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Jack O’Connell, State Superintendent of Public Instruction Results of the 2005 National Assessment of Educational Progress.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Jamesville-DeWitt School Report Card Presented to the Board of Education May 10, 2010.
Advertisements

NYC ACHIEVEMENT GAINS COMPARED TO OTHER LARGE CITIES SINCE 2003 Changes in NAEP scores Leonie Haimson & Elli Marcus Class Size Matters January.
Dianne Chadwick Iowa NAEP Coordinator Iowa Department of Education November 8, 2011.
Lodi Unified School District Accountability Progress Report (APR) & CAHSEE Results Update Prepared for the September 21, 2010 Board of Education.
Stephanie Aberger, Expeditionary Learning
N O C HILD L EFT B EHIND Testing Requirements of NCLB test annually in reading and mathematics in grades 3-8 test at least once in reading and mathematics.
Testing Students with Disabilities Special Education Administrators Spring Conference March 24, 2011.
1 NAEP th Grade Economics Assessment. 2 ► First NAEP assessment of economics ► Content areas: market economy, national economy, and international.
NAEP 2008 Trends in Academic Progress in Reading and Mathematics.
The Nation’s Report Card Mathematics National Assessment of Educational Progress 1.
Mark DeCandia Kentucky NAEP State Coordinator
Grade 3-8 English Language Arts and Mathematics Results August 8, 2011.
Montana’s statewide longitudinal data system Project Montana’s Statewide Longitudinal Data System (SLDS)
Jack Buckley Commissioner National Center for Education Statistics December 7, 2011.
NYC ACHIEVEMENT GAINS COMPARED TO OTHER LARGE CITIES SINCE 2003 Changes in NAEP scores Class Size Matters August
Michigan’s Accountability Scorecards A Brief Introduction.
Student Achievement in Chicago Public Schools
District Assessment & Accountability Data Board of Education Report September 6, 2011 Marsha A. Brown, Director III – Student Services State Testing and.
Department of Research and Evaluation Santa Ana Unified School District 2011 CST API and AYP Elementary Presentation Version: Elementary.
Highlights from PIRLS and TIMSS 2011 Jack Buckley National Center for Education Statistics Washington, DC December 11, 2012.
State and Federal Testing Accountability: Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) Academic Performance Index (API) SAIT Training September 27, 2007.
Jack Buckley Commissioner National Center for Education Statistics February 24, 2011.
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.
0 Michele Sonnenfeld NAEP State Coordinator Florida Department of Education October 2006 Florida Association of Science Supervisors.
Grade 3-8 English Language Arts English Language Arts Grades 3, 4, and 5 Total Public.
Mark DeCandia Kentucky NAEP State Coordinator
NAEP 2011 Mathematics and Reading Results Challis Breithaupt November 1, 2011.
NAEP 2011 Mathematics and Reading Results NAEP State Coordinator Mark DeCandia.
The Nation’s Report Card: U.S. History National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP)
The Nation’s Report Card Science National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP)
United to Make a Difference: Improving the Achievement of Young Men of Color Council of the Great City Schools Fall 2014.
35th Annual National Conference on Large-Scale Assessment June 18, 2005 How to compare NAEP and State Assessment Results NAEP State Analysis Project Don.
THE 2005 NAEP HIGH SCHOOL TRANSCRIPT STUDY. THE 2005 HIGH SCHOOL TRANSCRIPT STUDY Today ’ s Presentations.
Lodi Unified School District Accountability Progress Report (APR) Results Update Prepared by the LUSD Assessment, Research & Evaluation Department.
Jack Buckley Commissioner National Center for Education Statistics February 21, 2013.
United to Make a Difference: Improving the Achievement of Young Men of Color Council of the Great City Schools Fall 2014.
1. 2 Overview of the 2006 NAEP Assessments Administered in January–March 2006 National results for grades 4, 8, and 12 Results by scale scores and achievement.
MMSD Value-Added Results January 3, Attainment versus Growth Grade 3Grade 4Grade 5Grade 6Grade 7Grade 8 2.
Future Ready Schools National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) in North Carolina Wednesday, February 13, 2008 Auditorium III 8:30 – 9:30 a.m.
Michigan School Report Card Update Michigan Department of Education.
The Nation’s Report Card 4th-Grade Reading SOURCE: National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP),
N ATIONAL ASSESSMENT OF EDUCATIONAL PROGRESS BPS 2015 NAEP RESULTS Office of Data and Accountability OCTOBER 26, 2015.
Cambrian School District September 17, 2015
N ATIONAL ASSESSMENT OF EDUCATIONAL PROGRESS BPS 2015 NAEP RESULTS Nicole Wagner Lam, Office of Data and Accountability Presentation to Boston School Committee.
ESEA Federal Accountability System Overview 1. Federal Accountability System Adequate Yearly Progress – AYP defined by the Elementary and Secondary Education.
How did Idaho students perform in the NCLB years when compared with their peers nationwide? All Students – White Students - Hispanic Students NAEP Reading.
Stuart Kerachsky Deputy Commissioner National Center for Education Statistics May 20, 2010.
The Nation’s Report Card: Trial Urban District Assessment: Science 2005.
The Nation’s Report Card: 2005 Reading and Mathematics Trial Urban District Assessments.
University of Colorado at Boulder National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing Challenges for States and Schools in the No.
C R E S S T / CU University of Colorado at Boulder National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing Measuring Adequate Yearly.
NAEP 2005 Reading and Mathematics Results. Overview of the 2005 Reading and Mathematics Assessment 1.
1 Grade 3-8 English Language Arts Results Student Growth Tracked Over Time: 2006 – 2009 Grade-by-grade testing began in The tests and data.
2009 Grade 3-8 Math Additional Slides 1. Math Percentage of Students Statewide Scoring at Levels 3 and 4, Grades The percentage of students.
Measuring College and Career Readiness PARCC RESULTS: YEAR ONE Somerset Hills School District ____________.
School Improvement Plan Review Galloping to Success Minneola Elementary Presented by Mrs. Watts.
1. 2 National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) Survey of academic achievement for the nation and the states Assesses various subjects at grades.
NAEP Grade 12 Results.
Sustaining and building on the excellence of LCPS
Using NAEP Results to Examine State Trends in Mathematics Achievement
What is API? The Academic Performance Index (API) is the cornerstone of California's Public Schools Accountability Act of 1999 (PSAA). It is required.
2017 TUDA NAEP Results for Miami-Dade
National Conference on Student Assessment June 2016
2017 NAEP RESULTS: DC PUBLIC CHARTER SCHOOLS
New Statewide Accountability System
2009 California Standards Test (CST) Results
Analysis and Reporting, Accountability Services
Starting Community Conversations
Mississippi Succeeds Unprecedented Achievement, Unlimited Potential
Presentation transcript:

CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Jack O’Connell, State Superintendent of Public Instruction Results of the 2005 National Assessment of Educational Progress for California and the Nation Presented to the California State Board of Education November, 2005

JACK O’CONNELL State Superintendent of Public Instruction 2 NAEP Design NAEP collects data from a sample of schools in each jurisdiction. In many schools, only a random sample of students in a given grade may be assessed. Samples are stratified by geographic location, ethnic mix, school size, and STAR scores. Parents may opt their students out of NAEP. Learning disabled and English learner students may be excluded from the assessment if NAEP does not offer the appropriate accommodation or if the student does not normally take state tests. The NAEP assessments are matrix tests: No student answers every question. Scores are only reported at the state and national level.

JACK O’CONNELL State Superintendent of Public Instruction 3 Interpreting NAEP Results Comparisons should be focused on specific sub-groups of interest. –Whole state population comparisons are problematic. –For example, English learners have substantial impacts on California results. NAEP scores contain variability due to sampling and measurement error. –Statistical tests must be conducted to determine if observed differences are larger than would occur simply by chance. Changes in populations over time can impact statewide trends. –For example, the change in the proportion of economically disadvantaged students between 2003 and 2005.

JACK O’CONNELL State Superintendent of Public Instruction 4 California Participation in NAEP Grade 4 and 8 Reading

* * * *Change from 1992 is statistically significant 5

*Change from 1990 is statistically significant * * * * 6

Changes in California NAEP Grade 4 Math and Reading Scores 1992 to Not significantly different from

California NAEP Grade 4 Reading Average Scale Scores and Sample Population Percentages for Major Ethnic Groups 1992 to 2005 All Changes from 1992 are statistically significant Bubbles are centered on group average, area of bubble is proportional to population proportion 8

California NAEP Grade 4 Math Average Scale Scores and Sample Population Percentages for Major Ethnic Groups 1992 to 2005 Bubbles are centered on group average, area of bubble is proportional to population proportion 9

JACK O’CONNELL State Superintendent of Public Instruction 10 Notes on Comparing Performance Among States Because of sampling and measurement error in NAEP, small differences in scores may not be significantly different. –Therefore, a ranking of states by average scale score is inappropriate. Differences in population composition can greatly affect scores. Differences in exclusion rates for various groups can potentially confound results.

English Learner Proportions and Exclusion Rates on NAEP 2005 Grade 4 Reading for Selected States. StatePercent of All Students Identified as EL Percent of All Students Excluded for EL Percent of English Learners Excluded California % Texas % New York7228.6% Florida8225.0% Illinois % Source: NAEP 2005 Reading Report for California. Appendix A: Overview of Procedures Used for the NAEP 2005 Reading Assessment, page 27. U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP). 11

Grade 4 Math - Overall 12

Grade 4 Math - White 13

Grade 4 Math - Black 14

NAEP Grade 8 Reading 2005 Results for Selected States – All Students * Average scale score significantly different from California + Average scale score of the 90 th percentile is significantly different from California

NAEP Grade 8 Reading 2005 Results for Selected States - White Students * Average scale score significantly different from California + Average scale score of the 90 th percentile is significantly different from California 16

NAEP Grade 8 Reading 2005 Results for Selected States - Black Students * Average scale score significantly different from California + Average scale score of the 90 th percentile is significantly different from California 17

JACK O’CONNELL State Superintendent of Public Instruction 18 Summary California student’s NAEP scores in reading and mathematics parallel the national trend. Progress in reading is slower than in mathematics. Hispanic students that are not English learners have made the greatest gains on NAEP in recent years.