NAEP 2008 Trends in Academic Progress

Home , Progress 11, Progress 13, Progress 15, Progress 19, Progress 21, Progress 25

Institute of Education Sciences U.S. Department of Education NCES 2009–479

READING 1971–2008 MATHEMATICS 1973–2008 CONTENTS Executive Summary 2 Executive Summary 6 Introduction This report presents the results of the NAEP long- 8 The Long-Term Trend Assessment term trend assessments in reading and mathemat- in Reading ics, which were most recently given in the 2007–08 28 The Long-Term Trend Assessment school year to students at ages 9, 13, and 17. Nationally representative samples of over 26,000 in Mathematics public and private school students were assessed 50 Technical Notes in each subject area. 53 Appendix Tables The long-term trend assessments make it possible to chart educational progress since the early 1970s. Results in reading are available for 12 assessments going back to the rst in 1971. The rst of 11 assessments in mathematics was administered in 1973. What is Throughout this report, the most recent results are compared to those from 2004 and from the rst year The Nation’s the assessment was conducted. ™ Report Card ? The original assessment format, content, and procedures were revised somewhat in 2004 to update content The Nation’s Report Card™ informs the public about and provide accommodations to students with disabili- the academacademicic achachievementievement ofof elementarelementaryy and ties and English language learners. The knowledge and secondary students in the United States. States Report skills assessed, however, remain essentially the same cards communicate the ﬁndings of the National since the rst assessment year. Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), a continuing and nationally representative measure Improvements seen in reading and of achievement in various subjects over time. mathematics Since 1969, NAEP assessments have been conducted periodically in reading, mathematics, science, writing, In reading, average scores increased at all three ages U.S. history, civics, geography, and other subjects. since 2004 ( gure A). Average scores were 12 points NAEP collects and reports information on student higher than in 1971 for 9-year-olds and 4 points1 higher performance at the national, state, and local levels, for 13-year-olds. The average reading score for 17-year- making the assessment an integral part of our nation’s olds was not signi cantly different from that in 1971. evaluation of the condition and progress of education. Only academic achievement data and related In mathematics, average scores for 9- and 13-year- background information are collected. The privacy of olds increased since 2004, while the average score for individual students and their families is protected. 17-year-olds did not change signi cantly ( gure B). NAEP is a congressionally authorized project of the Average scores were 24 points higher than in 1973 for National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) 9-year-olds and 15 points higher for 13-year-olds. The within the Institute of Education Sciences of the average mathematics score for 17-year-olds was not U.S. Department of Education. The Commissioner signi cantly different from that in 1973. of Education Statistics is responsible for carrying out the NAEP project. The National Assessment 1 The score-point change is based on the difference between unrounded Governing Board oversees and sets policy for NAEP. scores as opposed to the rounded scores shown in the gure.

2 THE NATION’S REPORT CARD Reading

FIGURE A. Trend in NAEP reading average scores for 9-, 13-, and 17-year-old students

Scale score 500

320 310 300 289* 290* 290* 290* 290 285 286 285 288 288 288 285 286 Age 17 280 283* 270 260 259 259 260 260 255* 256* 258 257* 257 257* 258 258 Age 13 250 257* 240 230 219 220 220 215* Age 9 208* 210* 211* 212* 209* 211* 211* 212* 212* 210 216* 200 Original assessment format Revised assessment format 0 1971 1975 1980 1984 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1999 2004 2008 Year

* Signiﬁcantly different (p < .05) from 2008. SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), various years, 1971–2008 Long-Term Trend Reading Assessments.

Mathematics

FIGURE B. Trend in NAEP mathematics average scores for 9-, 13-, and 17-year-old students

Scale score 500

320 310 304 305 307 306 307 308 307 306 300* 298* 302* Age 17 300 305 290 281 281 280 273* 274* 274* 276* Age 13 269* 269* 270* 279* 270 266* 264* 260 250 243 241 Age 9 240 232* 230* 230* 231* 231* 239* 230 222* 219* 219* 219* 220 210 200 Extrapolated data Original assessment format Revised assessment format 0 1973 1978 1982 1986 1990 1992 1994 1996 1999 2004 2008 Year * Signiﬁcantly different (p < .05) from 2008. SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), various years, 1973–2008 Long-Term Trend Mathematics Assessments.

TRENDS IN ACADEMIC PROGRESS 3 Black students make greater gains Reading Changes from 1971 from early 1970s than White students Age group White Black Hispanic1 Age 9 14 points 34 points 25 points Average reading scores were higher in 2008 than in the rst assessment year for White, Black, and Hispanic Age 13 7 points 25 points 10 points students. Across the three age groups, increases from Age 17 4 points 28 points 17 points 1971 to 2008 were larger for Black students than for Changes from 2004 White students. Increases from 1975 to 2008 were Age group White Black Hispanic greater for Hispanic than for White students at ages 9 Age 9 4 points 7 points 8 points and 17, but were not signi cantly different at age 13. Age 13 4 points 8 points In comparison to 2004, average reading scores were Age 17 7 points higher in 2008 for White students at all three ages, 1 Results for Hispanic students were first available in 1975. Therefore, the results shown in the 1971 for Black students at ages 9 and 13, and for Hispanic section for Hispanic students are from the 1975 assessment. students at age 9. Mathematics Across all three age groups, increases in average math- Changes from 1973 ematics scores from 1973 to 2008 were greater for both Age group White Black Hispanic Black and Hispanic students than for White students. Age 9 25 points 34 points 32 points In comparison to 2004, average mathematics scores Age 13 16 points 34 points 29 points were higher in 2008 for White students at age 9. There Age 17 4 points 17 points 16 points were no signi cant changes in scores for 9-, 13-, and Changes from 2004 17-year-old Black and Hispanic students or for 13- and Age group White Black Hispanic 17-year-old White students over the same period. Age 9 5 points Age 13 Most racial/ethnic score gaps narrow Age 17 compared to first assessment Indicates the score was higher in 2008. Indicates that there was no significant change in the score in 2008. While the reading score gaps between White and Black students at all three ages showed no signi cant change from 2004 to 2008, the gaps did narrow in 2008 compared to 1971. White – Hispanic gaps in reading scores also showed no signi cant change from 2004 to 2008 but were smaller in 2008 than in 1975 at ages 9 and 17.

Across all three age groups, neither the White – Black nor White – Hispanic gaps in mathematics changed signi cantly from 2004 to 2008, but both were smaller in 2008 than in 1973.

Changes in the student population over time show a decrease in the percentages of White students and an increase in the percentages of Hispanic students across all three age groups. For example, the percentage of 9-year-olds assessed in reading who were White decreased from 80 percent in 1975 to 56 percent in 2008, and the percentage of Hispanic students increased from 5 to 20 percent over the same period. The propor- tion of Black students has remained more stable over time, making up 14 percent of 9-year-olds assessed in reading in 1971 and 16 percent in 2008.

4 THE NATION’S REPORT CARD For students whose parents did not ﬁnish high school, mathematics scores increase compared to 1978

The average mathematics scores for 13- and 17-year- Scores for 13-year-olds whose parents had higher olds whose parents did not nish high school were levels of education were also higher in 2008 than higher than they were 30 years ago. At age 13, the score in 1978 but not signi cantly different compared to in 2008 for students whose parents did not nish high 2004. There were no signi cant changes in the scores school was not signi cantly different from the score for 17-year-olds whose parents had higher levels of in 2004 but was 23 points higher than in 1978. At age education in comparison to 2004 or 1978. 17, the average mathematics score for students whose parents did not nish high school was 5 points higher in 2008 than in 2004 and 12 points higher than in 1978.

Percentages of students taking higher-level mathematics increasing Taking higher-level mathematics courses was gener- of 13-year-olds who reported taking pre-algebra or ally associated with higher scores on the 2008 math- algebra in 2008 were higher than the percentages in 1986 ematics assessment at ages 13 and 17. For example, ( gure C). The percentage of 17-year-olds who reported 13-year-olds who were enrolled in algebra classes they had taken pre-calculus or calculus was higher in scored higher on average than those enrolled in 2008 than in 1978, as was the percentage who had taken pre-algebra or regular mathematics. The percentages second-year algebra or trigonometry ( gure D).

Percentage of 13-year-old students in NAEP Percentage of 17-year-old students in NAEP FIGURE C. mathematics, by type of mathematics course they FIGURE D. mathematics, by highest-level mathematics course have taken during the school year: 1986 and 2008 they have ever taken: 1978 and 2008

Age 13 Age 17 Percent Percent 5* 7 4* 1 100 100 6* 19 Other 90 16* Other 90 80 30 80 Pre-calculus 37* or calculus 70 19* Algebra 70 Second-year 60 60 algebra or 52 trigonometry 50 32 Pre-algebra 50 16 40 40 Geometry 61* Regular 30 mathematics 30 17* First-year algebra 20 31 20 17 Not taking Pre-algebra 10 mathematics 10 20* 7 or general #* 1 3 mathematics 0 0 1986 2008 Year 1978 2008 Year

# Rounds to zero. * Signiﬁcantly different (p < .05) from 2008. * Signiﬁcantly different (p < .05) from 2008. NOTE: The “pre-algebra or general mathematics” response category includes NOTE: Results for 1986 are from the original assessment format, and results “pre-algebra or introduction to algebra” and “general, business, or consumer for 2008 are from the revised assessment format. Detail may not sum to totals mathematics” and students who did not take any of the listed courses. The “other” because of rounding. response category includes students for whom the highest-level mathematics SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National course could not be determined due to missing or inconsistent responses. Results Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress for 1978 are from the original assessment format, and results for 2008 are from (NAEP), 1986 and 2008 Long-Term Trend Mathematics Assessments. the revised assessment format. 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), 1978 and 2008 Long-Term Trend Mathematics Assessments.

TRENDS IN ACADEMIC PROGRESS 5 Introduction

The reporting of fair and accurate trends in student academic achievement is the primary purpose of NAEP. In this report, results from NAEP’s long-term trend assessments provide an examination of student performance in reading and mathematics across four decades.

NAEP includes two components: the main assessments study, differences in 2004 results from the original and and the long-term trend assessments. Main NAEP revised versions could be attributed solely to the inclu- assessments are periodically updated or changed to sion of students who would have been excluded if accom- re:ect current curricula and standards. The long-term modations had not been offered in the revised version. trend assessments have measured essentially the same These differences were comparable to those seen when knowledge and skills since the 1970s. While both provide accommodations were rst introduced in the main NAEP valuable information, it is not possible to accurately com- assessments. Average scores from the 2004 revised format pare results from the two components because of differ- were lower than scores from the original format for ences in content and procedures. 9-year-olds overall in reading and for 9-year-old male students in reading and mathematics. This is consistent with Overview of the Long-Term Trend expectations, given the increased inclusion in the revised assessment results of students with disabilities and Eng- Assessments lish language learners who otherwise would have been This report presents results from the most recent NAEP excluded from the assessment. It was therefore concluded long-term trend assessments, which were administered that, bearing in mind the differences in the populations during the 2007–08 school year, as well as results from of students assessed (accommodated vs. not accom- previous administrations of the long-term trend assess- modated), future assessment results could be compared ments in reading and mathematics. The reading assess- to those from earlier assessments based on the original ment was rst administered in 1971, and the mathematics version. For a full discussion of the differences between assessment was rst administered in 1973. The long-term the two assessments and ndings, see the Technical Notes trend program has used essentially the same assessments of this report and refer to NAEP 2004 Trends in Academic in each administration year to provide data that can be Progress: Three Decades of Student Performance in used to evaluate changes in student performance over Reading and Mathematics, available at http://nces.ed.gov/ long periods of time. In 2004, a number of changes were pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=2005464. made to the long-term trend assessment to update the In the tables and gures of this report, results from 2004 assessment content and procedures while maintaining the are shown for both the original and revised versions of ability to report trends over the long term. Some of the the assessments. Results from 2004 that are based on the changes included replacing questions that were based on original version are labeled original assessment format outdated contexts; changing some administration proce- and are comparable to results from earlier assessment dures; and, most notably, providing accommodations for years in which accommodations were not available. The students with disabilities and for English language learn- revised assessment format instituted in 2004 provides ers. These revisions did not alter the knowledge and skills accommodations to students who otherwise would have that are assessed by the long-term trend assessments. been excluded from the assessment. In 2008, only the To ensure that results from the revised assessment format revised assessment format was administered. Therefore, could be validly compared to results from earlier assess- this report compares the 2008 results to the results of ments, a special bridge study was conducted in 2004. the 2004 revised assessment format because both used The study involved administering both the original and the same instruments and administration procedures revised versions to determine how the revisions may have and were administered to a more inclusive population of affected the results. Because of the rigorous design of the students.

6 THE NATION’S REPORT CARD Results Provided in This Report Interpreting the Results

The results presented in this report are based on nation- Changes in performance over time ally representative samples of students at ages 9, 13, and 17 (table 1). These samples included both public and private In discussing performance trends, this report focuses on school students. comparing results from 2008 with those from 2004 and from the rst year the assessment was conducted. Com- parisons between 2008 and 2004 are discussed based on Number of participating schools and students in TABLE 1. NAEP reading and mathematics assessments, by the results of the revised assessment, although the results student age group: 2008 for both original and revised assessments for 2004 are Reading Mathematics shown in the tables and gures. Age group Schools Students Schools Students Consistent with widely accepted statistical standards, Age 9 4408,6004308,600 only those ndings that are statistically signi cant at the Age 13 420 8,400 420 8,500 .05 level with appropriate adjustments for multiple com- Age 17 4409,6004409,600 parisons (using the False Discovery Rate procedure) are

NOTE: The numbers of schools are rounded to the nearest ten, and the numbers of students are reported. In the tables and gures of this report, the rounded to the nearest hundred. symbol (*) is used to indicate that an earlier year’s score SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2008 Long-Term Trend or percentage is signi cantly different from the 2008 Reading and Mathematics Assessments. results. Score differences or gaps cited in this report are Scale scores calculated based on differences between unrounded numbers. Consequently, they may not be identical to differ- The reading and mathematics results are reported as ences that would be obtained by subtracting the rounded scores on a 0–500 scale. Average scores are reported values in the tables and gures. overall for each age and for selected groups of students. Although the score ranges for both subjects are identical, Changes in performance results over time may re:ect not the reading and mathematics results cannot be compared only changes in students’ knowledge and skills but also in to each other because they were scaled separately. other factors, such as changes in student demographics, education programs and policies, and teacher quali cations. Percentiles To show trends in performance for lower-, middle-, and Accommodations and exclusions in NAEP higher-performing students, scores are also reported at Beginning in 2004, the long-term trend assessments ve percentiles (10th, 25th, 50th, 75th, and 90th). Percen- provided accommodations for students with disabilities tiles indicate the percentage of students whose scores fell and English language learners who could not otherwise below a particular point on the scale. For example, 75 per- be meaningfully assessed. Even with the availability of cent of students’ scores fell below the 75th percentile score. accommodations, however, some students may still be excluded. Variations in exclusion and accommodation Performance levels rates that may be due to changes in identi cation, inclu- For each subject area, this report provides descriptions of sion, and accommodation policies should be considered the knowledge and skills that are likely to be demonstrat- when comparing students’ performance over time. See ed by students at ve levels on the scale—150, 200, 250, the Technical Notes for more information on accommo- 300, and 350. Although the same ve levels are used for dations and exclusions. each age group, the likelihood of attaining higher performance levels is directly related to a student’s age because Differences between groups older students have had more educational experience. The reader is cautioned against making simple causal Therefore, only those performance levels that are most inferences about group differences, as a complex mix likely to show signi cant changes across the assessment of educational and socioeconomic factors may affect years are discussed for each age. student performance. See the Technical Notes for more information.

TRENDS IN ACADEMIC PROGRESS 7 The Long-Term Trend Assessment in Reading

The NAEP long-term trend reading assessment required assessment contained between 36 and 40 reading students to answer questions based on a variety of age- passages at each age (table 2). Students read between appropriate reading materials such as stories, poems, 8 and 15 passages and were asked between one and ve reports, and advertisements. The assessment was questions about each passage. Sample questions are designed to measure students’ ability to presented later in this section.

r locate speci c information in the text provided, Number of reading passages and questions in r make inferences based on information in two or TABLE 2. NAEP reading assessment, by student age group: more parts of the text, and 2008 r identify the main idea in the text. Reading Multiple-choice Constructed- Age group passages questions response questions Students’ reading skills were measured using mostly Age 9 37 84 4 multiple-choice questions and some constructed- Age 13 4010 0 7 response (or open-ended) questions. Each student Age 17 36 96 8 took only a part of the assessment, consisting of SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for three 15-minute sections. The complete 2008 reading Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2008 Long-Term Trend Reading Assessment.

8 THE NATION’S REPORT CARD Reading skills improve Overall, the national trend in reading showed improve- both 2004 and 1971, it was not always signi cantly differ- ment from 2004 to 2008 at all three ages ( gure 1). The ent from the scores in all the assessment years in between. average reading score for 9-year-olds was higher in 2008 The average reading score for 17-year-olds was higher in than in all previous assessment years, increasing 4 points 2008 than in 2004 but was not signi cantly different from since 2004 and 12 points in comparison to 1971. While the the score in 1971. average score for 13-year-olds in 2008 was higher than in

FIGURE 1. Trend in NAEP reading average scores for 9-, 13-, and 17-year-old students

Scale score 500

TRENDS IN ACADEMIC PROGRESS 9 Lower-performing 9- and 13-year-olds make gains Like the overall average reading in the scores over the same period score, the scores for 9-year-olds for middle- and higher-performing at the 10th, 25th, 50th, and 75th students (those at the 50th, 75th, and percentiles were higher in 2008 90th percentiles). Increases were seen than in all previous assessment for all but the lowest-performing years ( gure 2). While there was 13-year-olds (those at the 10th no signi cant change in the score percentile) in 2008 compared to 1971. for the highest-performing 9-year- olds (those at the 90th percentile) Gains for 17-year-olds at the 25th from 2004 to 2008, the score in and 75th percentiles contributed to 2008 was higher than in 1971. the overall increase in the average reading score from 2004 to 2008. While the overall average score for There were no signi cant changes in 13-year-olds was higher in 2008 than the scores for students at the 10th, in both 2004 and 1971, the results 50th, and 90th percentiles over the varied for students performing at same period. Scores did not change different percentile levels. Scores signi cantly in 2008 compared to increased since 2004 for lower- 1971 for 17-year-olds at any of the ve performing students (those at the percentile levels. 10th and 25th percentiles), but there were no signi cant changes

FIGURE 2. Trend in NAEP reading percentile scores for 9-, 13-, and 17-year-old students

Scale score Age 9 Percentile 500

270 263 263 266 264 265 260* 258* 262 260* 260* 260* 259* 90th 260 263 250 245 246 237* 237* 241* 240* 240* 240* 239* 240* 240* 239* 75th 240 243* 230 224 221 50th 220 217* 214* 214* 215* 215* 215* 209* 212* 212* 210* 219* 210 200 198 191* 194 25th 190 185* 186* 185* 180* 184* 184* 179* 183* 184* 191* 180 169 171 170 165* 10th 159* 157* 157* 156* 160* 158* 160 152* 150* 156* 162* 150 Original assessment format Revised assessment format 0 1971 1975 1980 1984 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1999 2004 2008 Year

See notes at end of ﬁgure.

10 THE NATION’S REPORT CARD FIGURE 2. Trend in NAEP reading percentile scores for 9-, 13-, and 17-year-old students—Continued

Scale score Age 13 Percentile 500

320 310 302* 309 307 306 308 305 306 300* 300* 302* 302* 302* 90th 300 304 290 287 285285 286 285 285 280* 281* 283 282* 281* 281* 75th 280 284 270 260 262 260 260 261 260 262 260 257* 258* 258* 258* 257* 50th 250 259 237 240 232* 233* 235 234* 234 233* 235 233* 233 234 235 25th 230 233* 220 213 209 210 213 210 209 210 211 210 208 208 205* 206 10th 200 205* Original assessment format Revised assessment format 0 1971 1975 1980 1984 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1999 2004 2008 Year

Scale score Age 17 Percentile 500 342 340 340 337 343 343 343 341 341 341 340 337 338 90th 330 337 320 317 316 317 316 319 319 319 316 316 317 315 315 75th 310 313* 300 293* 288 288 290 291 291 290 289 289 288 290 287 287 50th 280 286 270 263* 266* 263* 263* 258 259 260 260 261 258 258 260 256 25th 250 255* 241* 240 236* 237* 231 233 230 232 233 228 227 227 230 225 10th 220 224 Original assessment format Revised assessment format 0 1971 1975 1980 1984 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1999 2004 2008 Year

TRENDS IN ACADEMIC PROGRESS 11 No signiﬁcant change for 17-year-olds at any performance level

The skills and abilities demonstrated by students of 9-year-olds performed at or above level 250 in 2008, performing at different points on the reading scale help which was not signi cantly different from the percentage provide additional context for understanding changes in 2004 but was higher than the percentage in 1971. in students’ performance over time. While there have been some increases in the percentages of 9- and 13-year- At age 13, at least 92 percent of students performed at or olds at different levels, the percentages of 17-year-olds above level 200 in each assessment year. The percentage at different levels have not changed signi cantly in of students performing at or above this level in 2008 comparison to 2004 or 1971 ( gure 3). was 2 percentage points higher than in 2004 but was not signi cantly different from 1971. At age 9, at least 90 percent of students in each assessment year since 1971 could perform the simple, discrete reading Sixty-three percent of 13-year-olds performed at or above tasks described for performance level 150. In the 2008 level 250 in 2008. A higher percentage of students reached reading assessment, 96 percent performed at this level or this level in 2008 than in either 2004 or 1971. above, an increase of 2 percentage points since 2004 and Thirteen percent of students at age 13 were able to 5 percentage points in comparison to 1971. understand complicated information as described for Seventy-three percent of 9-year-olds in 2008 showed level 300. This percentage was not signi cantly different evidence of the partially developed skills and under- from the percentage in 2004 but was higher than in 1971. standing described for level 200. This percentage was Among 17-year-olds, 80 percent of students performed higher than the percentages in either 2004 or 1971. at or above level 250 in 2008; 39 percent performed at or In addition to demonstrating the abilities described for above level 300; and 6 percent were able to learn from levels 150 and 200, students performing at or above level specialized reading materials as described for level 350. For 250 demonstrated the ability to interrelate ideas and make all three levels, the percentages of students in 2008 did not generalizations about what they read. Twenty-one percent differ signi cantly from the percentages in 2004 or 1971.

Reading Performance-Level Descriptions Level 350: Learn from Specialized Reading Materials Readers at this level can extend and restructure the ideas presented in specialized and complex texts. Exam- ples include scientific materials, literary essays, and historical documents. Readers are also able to understand the links between ideas, even when those links are not explicitly stated, and to make appropriate generalizations. Performance at this level suggests the ability to synthesize and learn from specialized reading materials. Level 300: Understand Complicated Information Readers at this level can understand complicated literary and informational passages, including material about topics they study at school. They can also analyze and integrate less familiar material about topics they study at school as well as provide reactions to and explanations of the text as a whole. Performance at this level suggests the ability to find, understand, summarize, and explain relatively complicated information. Level 250: Interrelate Ideas and Make Generalizations Readers at this level use intermediate skills and strategies to search for, locate, and organize the information they find in relatively lengthy passages and can recognize paraphrases of what they have read. They can also make inferences and reach generalizations about main ideas and the author’s purpose from passages dealing with literature, science, and social studies. Performance at this level suggests the ability to search for specific information, interrelate ideas, and make generalizations. Level 200: Demonstrate Partially Developed Skills and Understanding Readers at this level can locate and identify facts from simple informational paragraphs, stories, and news articles. In addition, they can combine ideas and make inferences based on short, uncomplicated passages. Performance at this level suggests the ability to understand specific or sequentially related information. Level 150: Carry Out Simple, Discrete Reading Tasks Readers at this level can follow brief written directions. They can also select words, phrases, or sentences to describe a simple picture and can interpret simple written clues to identify a common object. Performance at this level suggests the ability to carry out simple, discrete reading tasks. 12 THE NATION’S REPORT CARD FIGURE 3. Trend in NAEP reading performance-level results for 9-, 13-, and 17-year-old students

Age 9 Percent 100 95 96 94* 96 91* 93* 92* 93* 90* 92* 92* 93* 93* 90 80 73 70 68* 70 69* 62* 62* 63* 62* 63* 64* 64* 60 59* 59* Original assessment format 50 Level 150 or above 40 Level 200 or above Level 250 or above 30 20 19 21 Revised assessment format 20 16* 15* 18* 17* 17* 18 16* 17* 17* 16* Level 150 or above 10 Level 200 or above 0 Level 250 or above 1971 1975 1980 1984 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1999 2004 20042008 Year

Age 13 Percent 100 93 93 95 94 95 94 93 92* 92 93 94 92* 94 90 80 70 61 62 61 61 63 60 58* 59* 59* 59* 59* 60 60 59* Original assessment format 50 Level 200 or above 40 Level 250 or above Level 300 or above 30 Revised assessment format 20 15 14 14 15 10* 10* 11* 11* 11* 11* 13 12 13 Level 200 or above 10 Level 250 or above 0 Level 300 or above 1971 1975 1980 1984 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1999 2004 2004 2008 Year

Age 17 Percent 100 90 86* 81 83* 84* 82* 81 82 82 80 79 80 80 79 80 70 60 Original assessment format 50 40 41 41* 43* 41 40 Level 250 or above 40 39 39 38 39 38 36 39 Level 300 or above Level 350 30 20 Revised assessment format Level 250 or above 10 7 6 5* 6 5* 7 7 7 7 6 6 5 6 Level 300 or above 0 Level 350 1971 1975 1980 1984 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1999 2004 20042008 Year

TRENDS IN ACADEMIC PROGRESS 13 Black students make greater gains compared to 1971 than White students At age 9, White and Black students had a 7-point gain, and Black students higher average reading scores in 2008 showed a 25-point gain in 2008 than in all previous assessment years compared to 1971. ( gure 4). The average score for 9-year- old White students was 14 points At age 17, the average reading score higher in 2008 than in 1971, while the increased for White students from score for Black students was 34 points 2004 to 2008 but showed no signi cant higher than in 1971. change for Black students. Comparing 1971 to 2008, White students showed a At age 13, White and Black students gain of 4 points, while Black students had higher scores in 2008 than in 2004 showed a gain of 28 points.1 and 1971. White students showed

No signiﬁcant change in White – Black score gaps since 2004 While there were no signi cant narrowed by 20 points, 17 points,2 changes in the gaps in reading and 24 points at ages 9, 13, and 17, scores between White and Black respectively. students from 2004 to 2008, the gaps at all three ages were narrower 1 The score-point change is based on the difference between unrounded scores as opposed to in 2008 than in 1971. The gaps the rounded scores shown in the gure. 2 The score-gap change is based on the difference between unrounded score gaps as opposed to the rounded score gaps shown in the gure.

Trend in White – Black NAEP reading average scores and score gaps for 9-, 13-, and FIGURE 4. 17-year-old students

Scale score Age 9 500

240 226 228 White 230 221* 224* 217* 221* 218* 218* 217* 218* 218* 220* 220 214* 24 Score gap 210 26 27 29 35* 200 35* 32* 32* 29 35* 33* 33* 44* 204 Black 190 200 197* 189* 186* 191* 186* 180 181* 189* 182* 185* 185* 170 170* 160 Original assessment format Revised assessment format 0 1971 1975 1980 1984 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1999 2004 2008 Year

See notes at end of ﬁgure.

14 THE NATION’S REPORT CARD Trend in White – Black NAEP reading average scores and score gaps for 9-, 13-, and FIGURE 4. 17-year-old students—Continued

Scale score Age 13 500

280 270 266 265* 266 267 266 265* 268 White 261* 262* 264* 263* 261* 262* 260 22 21 Score gap 18 21 29* 32* 29* 25 250 36* 32* 26* 31* 240 39* 247 Black 243 241 244 239* 230 233* 236* 238* 234* 234* 238* 220 222* 226* 210 200 Original assessment format Revised assessment format 0 1971 1975 1980 1984 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1999 2004 2008 Year

Scale score Age 17 500

310 297 297 296 300 291* 293 293 295 295 295 295 293 289* 295 White 290 20* 29 37* 30 29 280 32 31 29 27 29 Score gap 270 50* 53* 52* 260 274 266 Black 264 267 261 266 266 264264 262 250 240 241* 243* 230 239* Original assessment format Revised assessment format 0 1971 1975 1980 1984 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1999 2004 2008 Year

* Signiﬁcantly different (p < .05) from 2008. NOTE: Score gaps are calculated based on differences between unrounded average scores. Black includes African American. The White and Black race categories exclude Hispanic origin. SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), various years, 1971–2008 Long-Term Trend Reading Assessments.

About Student Demographics Each assessment year, NAEP gathers information on student demographics. Reading results are available for White and Black students back to the 1971 long-term trend assessment, and for Hispanic students back to 1975. Because results for Asian/Paciﬁc Islander students were not reportable for some of the previous assessment years, they are not included in this report. In the assessments administered between 1971 and 2004, students were assigned to a racial/ ethnic category based on the assessment administrator’s observation. One of the changes introduced as part of the revised assessment format in 2004 was the reporting of students’ race/ethnicity based on information collected from school records (see the Technical Notes for more information). Changes in the student population over time show a decrease in the percentages of White students in 2008 compared to 1971 at all three ages. In contrast, the percentages of Hispanic students increased in 2008 compared to 1975 at all three ages. For example, the percentage of White 9-year-olds decreased from 80 percent in 1975 to 56 percent in 2008, and the percentage of Hispanic 9-year-olds increased from 5 to 20 percent over the same period (see appendix table A-1). The percentage of Black students did not show a signiﬁcant change from 14 percent of 9-year-olds in 1971 to 16 percent in 2008. TRENDS IN ACADEMIC PROGRESS 15 Gains for Hispanic students vary by age At age 9, the average reading score At ages 13 and 17, there were no for Hispanic students was higher in signi cant changes in scores for 2008 than in all previous assess- Hispanic students since 2004, but ment years ( gure 5). Hispanic scores at both ages were higher students showed an 8-point gain in 2008 than in 1975. Compared between 2004 and 2008 and a to 1975, scores increased in 2008 25-point3 gain in comparison to by 10 points at age 13 and by 17 1975. points at age 17.

No signiﬁcant change in White – Hispanic score gaps since 2004 Across all three age groups, there by 15 points at age 17. The White – were no signi cant changes in the Hispanic score gap for 13-year-old gaps in reading scores between students did not change signi cantly White and Hispanic students from in 2008 compared to 1975. 2004 to 2008. However, when compared to 1975, the gaps in 2008 3 The score-point change is based on the difference between unrounded scores as opposed narrowed by 13 points at age 9 and to the rounded scores shown in the gure.

Trend in White – Hispanic NAEP reading average scores and score gaps for 9-, 13-, and FIGURE 5. 17-year-old students

Scale score Age 9 500

240 228 White 230 226 224* 221* 220* 221* 220 217* 218* 218* 217* 218* 218* 214* 21 25 21 Score gap 210 28 31* 31* 24 28* 26 32* 25 1 200 34* 207 Hispanic 205 199* 190 195* 193* 190* 194* 189* 192* 180 183* 187* 186* 170 160 Original assessment format Revised assessment format 0 1971 1975 1980 1984 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1999 2004 2008 Year

See notes at end of ﬁgure.

16 THE NATION’S REPORT CARD Trend in White – Hispanic NAEP reading average scores and score gaps for 9-, 13-, and FIGURE 5. 17-year-old students—Continued

Scale score Age 13 500

280 270 266 265* 266 267 265*266 268 White 261* 262* 264* 263* 261* 262* 260 23 24 24 26 Score gap 250 30 27 23 21 24 27 30 28 240 244 242 241 242 Hispanic 1 237 240 240 238 239 238 230 232* 235* 220 210 200 Original assessment format Revised assessment format 0 1971 1975 1980 1984 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1999 2004 2008 Year

Scale score Age 17 500

310 297 297 296 300 291* 293 293 295 295 295 295 293 289* 295 White 290 24 22 26 280 27 33 30 24 29 22 26 Score gap 41* 31 270 271 275 1 268 271 271 267 269 Hispanic 260 261* 263 265 264 250 252* 240 230 Original assessment format Revised assessment format 0 1971 1975 1980 1984 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1999 2004 2008 Year

* Signiﬁcantly different (p < .05) from 2008. 1 Hispanic was not reported as a separate race/ethnicity category in 1971, but data for Hispanic students were included in the overall national results. NOTE: Score gaps are calculated based on differences between unrounded average scores. Hispanic includes Latino. The White race category excludes Hispanic origin. SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), various years, 1971–2008 Long-Term Trend Reading Assessments.

TRENDS IN ACADEMIC PROGRESS 17 Scores increase since 2004 for males at all three ages The overall improvement in score for 13-year-old male students score for female students did not reading for 9-year-olds was also was higher in 2008 than in 2004, change signi cantly over the same seen in the results for both male while the score for female students period. There was no signi cant and female students. Average showed no signi cant change. In change for either male or female scores for both male and female comparison to 1971, scores were students when the scores in 2008 9-year-olds were higher in 2008 higher in 2008 for both male and were compared to those in 1971. than in any previous assessment female students. year ( gure 6). At age 17, the average reading Progress since 2004 varied by score for male students increased gender at age 13. The reading 4 points from 2004 to 2008, but the

Most gender gaps remain unchanged Across all three age groups, gap for 13-year-olds in 2008 was female students continued to score not signi cantly different from the higher on average in reading than gaps in either 2004 or in 1971. At male students in 2008. At age 9, age 17, the 11-point gap in 2008 the 7-point gap in 2008 was not was not signi cantly different from signi cantly different from the gap the gaps in any of the previous in 2004 but was narrower than the assessment years. gap in 1971. The 8-point gender

Trend in Female – Male NAEP reading average scores and score gaps for 9-, 13-, and FIGURE 6. 17-year-old students

Scale score Age 9 500

240 230 224 Female 220* 218* 221 219* 220 214* 216* 214* 216* 215* 215* 215* 215* 210 216 216 Male 210* 212* 200 207* 207* 206* 207* 207* 209* 201* 204* 204* 190 180 13* 12* 10 7 95871110 7 11 6 Score gap 170 160 Original assessment format Revised assessment format 0 1971 1975 1980 1984 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1999 2004 2008 Year

See notes at end of ﬁgure.

18 THE NATION’S REPORT CARD Trend in Female – Male NAEP reading average scores and score gaps for 9-, 13-, and FIGURE 6. 17-year-old students—Continued

Scale score Age 13 500

280 266 270 261* 262 263 262 263 263 265 264 265 264 262 264 Female 260 250 254 250* 250* 253* 252* 251* 254 251* 251* 254 254 252* 256 Male 240 230 220 11 13* 889 11 13* 11 15* 13* 12 1010 Score gap 210 200 Original assessment format Revised assessment format 0 1971 1975 1980 1984 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1999 2004 2008 Year

Scale score Age 17 500

310 300 294 294 296* 296* 295 295* 295 291 291 289 292 289 291 Female 290 280 286* 280 282 284* 284 284* 282 281 281 280 Male 270 279 278 276* 260 250 12 12 71110 8 12 11 13 15 13 14 14 Score gap 240 230 Original assessment format Revised assessment format 0 1971 1975 1980 1984 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1999 2004 2008 Year

* Signiﬁcantly different (p < .05) from 2008. 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), various years, 1971–2008 Long-Term Trend Reading Assessments.

TRENDS IN ACADEMIC PROGRESS 19 Reading scores improve for 9-year-old public and private school students over long term In 2008, between 90 and 92 percent of 9-, 13-, and 17-year-old public school students in 2008 showed no 17-year-olds attended public schools, and between 4 and signi cant changes compared to their scores in 1980. 5 percent attended Catholic schools (see appendix table 4 A-1). While the percentages of students attending public Nine-year-olds attending private schools scored higher schools have not changed signi cantly in comparison to in 2008 than in 1980, while 13-year-olds showed no sig- 1980 at any of the three ages, the percentages of 9- and ni cant change in their score when comparing 2008 to 13-year-olds attending Catholic schools were lower in 1980. The score for 9-year-old Catholic school students 2008 than in 1980. in 2008 was higher than their scores in 1980 and 2004.

Average reading scores for public school students at In 2008, public school students scored lower than all three ages increased in 2008 in comparison to 2004 private school students at ages 9 and 13. Scores were (table 3). When compared to 1980 (the earliest results lower for public school students than for Catholic available), the score for 9-year-old public school stu- school students at all three ages in 2008. dents was higher in 2008. However, scores for 13- and 4 Private schools include Catholic schools.

School Participation in NAEP Results by the type of school that students attended are available for the long-term trend reading assessments back to 1980. Assessment participation rates fell below the required standard for reporting results for 9- and 13-year-olds attending private schools in 2004, for 17-year-olds attending private schools in all the assessment years, and for 17-year-olds attending Catholic schools in 2004. In 1996, results for 17-year-old students attending Catholic schools are not reported because the sample size was insufﬁcient to permit a reliable estimate. See the section on School and Student Participation Rates in the Technical Notes for more information.

20 THE NATION’S REPORT CARD TABLE 3. Average scores in NAEP reading, by student age group and type of school: Various years, 1980–2008

Age group and type of school 19801984 1988 19901992 1994 19961 199920042 2004 2008 Age 9 Public 214* 209* 210* 208* 209* 209* 210* 210* 217 214* 218 Private 227* 223* 223* 228* 225* 225* 227* 226* ‡ ‡ 237 Catholic 226* 221* 223* 225* 223* 223* 227 225 228 230* 235 Age 13 Public 257 255* 256 255* 257 256 256 257 257 255* 258 Private 271 271 268 270276 276 273 276 ‡ ‡ 275 Catholic 270270266* 273 275 273 275 279 278 276 275 Age 173 Public 284 287* 289* 289* 288* 286 287 286 283 281* 284 Catholic 300 301 300 307 308 301 ‡ 305 ‡ ‡ 303 ‡ Reporting standards not met. * Signiﬁcantly different (p < .05) from 2008. 1 Original assessment format. Results prior to 2004 are also from the original assessment format. 2 Revised assessment format. Results after 2004 are also from the revised assessment format. 3 For students at age 17, results are not shown for private schools because the minimum participation guidelines for reporting were not met. NOTE: For all age groups, results are not available for 1971 and 1975. SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), various years, 1980–2008 Long-Term Trend Reading Assessments.

TRENDS IN ACADEMIC PROGRESS 21 Sample Questions Beginning in 2004, as a result of modi cations to the long-term trend reading assessment, it became possible to share questions with the public. Again in 2008, some of the questions that have been administered to students since the early 1970s are being released. These released questions will not be administered in future NAEP long- term trend assessments.

The NAEP long-term trend reading assessment contains a range of reading materials, from simple narrative passages to complex articles on specialized topics. The selections include stories, poems, essays, reports, and passages from textbooks, as well as samples of a train schedule, telephone bill, and advertisements. While some passages in the assessment were administered across the age levels, passage length and dif culty generally increased at ages 13 and 17.

Two sample reading questions for each age group are presented in this section. These questions provide some insight into the types of comprehension skills measured by the long-term trend reading assessment. The response options for the multiple-choice sample questions are provided as the students saw them, and the oval for the correct answer is lled in. Constructed-response questions in the long-term trend reading assessment were typically scored using a 5-level scoring guide, which categorized the accuracy and level of detail provided in the student responses.

In the sample questions that follow, the percentages of students who answered correctly overall and within each performance level are shown in the tables below each sample. For example, 67 percent of age 9 students answered the rst reading sample question correctly, while 30 percent of age 9 students at performance level 150 answered the question correctly (see facing page).

For More Information Additional sample questions from the 2008 long-term trend assessments can be found at http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/itmrls.

22 THE NATION’S REPORT CARD Sample Reading Passage and Questions Sample question 1 asked students to make an AGE 9 inference based on the details of the passage to determine the best overall description of early Frontier Women colonial women.

Like the early colonial women settlers of the Which statement best describes the frontier backwoods, frontier women made everything their women? families needed. Most began work at daybreak and did not rest until late evening. They cooked, spun A They lived dangerous lives and tamed cloth, made clothing, raised children, and tried the West. to keep their dirt homes clean. They cleared and B They hunted to provide food for their plowed ﬁelds, tended and harvested crops, milked families. the cows, raised hogs, rode and trained horses, and C They frequently worried about the safety did just about every chore on the farm. of their homes. The women not only worked, they also made D They worked hard and possessed many most of their own tools. To make pitchforks, they skills. attached handles to deer antlers. Many of the women learned to use a knife well enough to carve Percentage of correct responses for 9-year-old students at spoons, forks, and bowls out of animal bones. They each performance level: 2008 fashioned cups and containers out of vegetable Overall Below level 150Level 150Level 200Level 250 gourds and animal horns. 67 26 3075 99 SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2008 Long-Term Trend Reading Assessment.

Sample question 2 asked students to identify speci c information from the passage.

According to the article, what did frontier women make from animal horns and bones?

A Jewelry and ornaments B Tools and eating utensils

C Beds and household furniture D Toys and horseshoes

Percentage of correct responses for 9-year-old students at each performance level: 2008 Overall Below level 150Level 150Level 200Level 250 83 2056 94 99 SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2008 Long-Term Trend Reading Assessment.

TRENDS IN ACADEMIC PROGRESS 23 Sample Reading Passage and Questions AGE 13 Elephant Seals

Elephant seals cannot always be found together or imagine, the seals prospered and within another sixty even on land. In fact, for most of the year they prefer to years the size of the herd had greatly increased. be alone and at sea. But there are two reasons these seals gather on shore each year. One feature of elephant seal behavior may have aided this remarkable comeback. The males engage One is to escape the stinging effect of saltwater when in savage fighting that leaves one bull “King of the they molt, or shed their old hair for new hair. At this Beach.” The winner is a champion prizefighter in the time large patches of skin are also shed with the old elephant seal world and, as a reward, he will have hair. That is what makes them so sensitive to salt. The more “wives” on his part of the beach than any other other reason elephant seals come ashore is to give bull. Farther down the beach, however, there are also birth to their young and to mate. other champions. This type of grouping helps the seals, for the strength of the most powerful bulls is passed on During the mating season, the seals are as heavy as to the baby elephant seals. And in a vast ocean where they will ever be during the year. Females may weigh these pups have to outswim an occasional white shark as much as 1,700 pounds. Males may weigh close to or killer whale, speed and strength are important. 6,000 pounds and be 17 feet long. Most of the fighting among males takes place in early Much of the weight of these animals is fat, which they December. They arrive at the Mexican island and gain from their diet of squid and other seafood. This fat other areas several weeks before the females so their insulates them from the cold and provides the energy problems will be settled before their wives arrive. From for the long periods when they eat nothing at all. But this time until they leave in March, the bulls eat nothing unfortunately for the seals, their blubber is also a very at all. They stay on shore and live only on the food and rich source of oil. The fat from a large male may yield water contained in their stored fat. up to 210 gallons of oil. Females arrive on the beaches in late December. Although the animals are huge, they can be Several days later each gives birth to a pup that weighs approached without fear, for on land they move fairly about 90 pounds. For one month the mother seal also slowly. Unlike many other types of seals, elephant eats nothing at all. In fact, she does very little other seals have little fear of people. Thus, when large-scale than nurse her pup. By the end of this 30-day period hunting of seals began around 1850, it didn’t take long the pup may have tripled its weight, now weighing to kill most of them. By the 1890’s scientists supposed close to 300 pounds. At that time the mother leaves that these seals had been hunted off. the pup to survive by itself. She then mates. One year later she gives birth to another pup. In 1911 it was a great surprise when a small herd of about 100 seals was found on a Mexican island And so the story goes, just as it did for thousands near the coast of Baja California. This discovery of years before the hunters arrived. Now, with the was reported to the Mexican government, which hunters gone and the seals recovered, this story should immediately stationed soldiers on the island with continue for thousands of years more. orders to shoot anyone harming the seals. As you can

24 THE NATION’S REPORT CARD Sample question 3 asked students to recognize Sample question 4 asked students to identify the overall informative purpose of the passage a speci c cause of seal behavior presented in the and the emphasis on the seals’ appearance and passage. habits. Why do elephant seals come ashore each year? What is the main purpose of this article? A To eat and store up food A To explain why elephant seals are To escape the winter migration of the white important to humans B sharks and to avoid the cold water B To convince the reader that elephant seals To rest up from their hard life at sea and are not harmful to humans C hibernate C To describe the appearance and habits of D To escape the saltwater and to give birth to elephant seals their young D To convince the reader that laws should be made to protect elephant seals Percentage of correct responses for 13-year-old students at each performance level: 2008 Percentage of correct responses for 13-year-old students at Overall Below level 200 Level 200 Level 250 Level 300 each performance level: 2008 74 26 52 88 99 Overall Below level 200 Level 200 Level 250 Level 300 SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2008 Long-Term 63 32 55 67 82 Trend Reading Assessment. SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2008 Long-Term Trend Reading Assessment.

TRENDS IN ACADEMIC PROGRESS 25 Sample Reading Passage and Questions Sample question 5 asked students to use their understanding of the narrator’s words in the AGE 17 passage to recognize the nature of his fear.

Travels with Charley Which of the following best describes in Search of America the man’s fear? A He was worried that his dog was Even the cabin was dismal and damp. I turned the becoming ill. gas mantle high, lit the kerosene lamp, and lighted He kept having fearful thoughts even two burners of my stove to drive the loneliness B though he knew there was no danger. away. The rain drummed on the metal roof. Nothing in my stock of food looked edible. The darkness fell C He suspected that there were and the trees moved closer. Over the rain drums dangerous animals outside. I seemed to hear voices, as though a crowd of D He heard voices of people trying to people muttered and mumbled offstage. Charley break into the cabin. was restless. He didn’t bark an alarm, but he growled and whined uneasily, which is very unlike Percentage of correct responses for 17-year-old students at him, and he didn’t eat his supper and he left his each performance level: 2008 water dish untouched—and that by a dog who Overall Below level 250Level 250Level 300Level 350 drinks his weight in water every day and needs to 84 58 84 97 99 because of the outgo. I succumbed utterly to my SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2008 Long-Term desolation, made two peanut-butter sandwiches, Trend Reading Assessment. and went to bed and wrote letters home, passing my loneliness around. Then the rain stopped falling and the trees dripped and I helped spawn a school of secret dangers. Oh, we can populate the dark with horrors, even we who think ourselves informed and sure, believing nothing we cannot measure or weigh. I knew beyond all doubt that the dark things crowding in on me either did not exist or were not dangerous to me, and still I was afraid. I thought how terrible the nights must have been in a time when men knew the things were there and were deadly. But no, that’s wrong. If I knew they were there, I would have weapons against them, charms, prayers, some kind of alliance with forces equally strong but on my side. Knowing they were not there made me defenseless against them and perhaps more afraid.

26 THE NATION’S REPORT CARD Sample question 6 is a constructed-response question that asked students to interpret the overall mood or feeling of a short literary passage and then to explain how the writer of the passage created the mood. Responses to this question were rated with a 5-level scoring guide in one of the following categories:

5 – Mood identi ed and substantiated with multiple pieces of evidence 4 – Mood identi ed and substantiated 3 – Mood identi ed and substantiated with minimal evidence 2 – Mood identi ed without substantiation 1 – Unable to identify mood

The following sample response was rated as level 5 The following sample response was rated as level 3 because it correctly identi ed the mood of the because it provided minimal evidence of how the passage and provided multiple pieces of evidence. author created the mood. Overall, 74 percent of Overall, 3 percent of 17-year-olds provided 17-year-olds wrote responses that were rated as responses that were rated as level 5. level 3 or better.

Think about the article again. Write down a few Think about the article again. Write down a few words that describe the mood or feeling of the story. words that describe the mood or feeling of the story.

Explain how the writer created this mood. Explain how the writer created this mood.

Percentage of level 3 or better responses for 17-year-old students at each performance level: 2008 Overall Below level 250Level 250Level 300Level 350 74 44 73 89 97 SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2008 Long-Term Trend Reading Assessment.

Percentage of level 5 responses for 17-year-old students at each performance level: 2008 Overall Below level 250Level 250Level 300Level 350 3 ##516 # Rounds to zero. SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2008 Long-Term Trend Reading Assessment.

TRENDS IN ACADEMIC PROGRESS 27