Reading The Nation’s Report Card

Webinar

The National Assessment of Educational Progress

4th Grade Reading ResultsNov. 10, 2011 3 p.m. EST

Why has progress stalled in 4th grade reading and what will it take to improve achievement?

As a nation we have invested significant energy, research, and resources in early literacy, recognizing that children who read well by the end of 3rd grade are far more likely to succeed later in school and in life. Yet new results from the National Assessment of Educational Progress show no progress in 4th grade reading achievement in recent years.

In this webinar we dig deeper into the data and discuss what research says about the importance of early reading and what experts see as the persistent challenges to improving results.

Reading The Nation’s Report Card

Nov. 10, 2011

3 p.m. EST

Why has progress stalled in 4th grade reading and what will it

take to improve achievement?

Panelists:Jack Buckley, Commissioner, National Center for Education StatisticsJack Jennings, President and CEO, Center on Education PolicyDonald J. Hernandez, Professor and Researcher, Hunter College, City University of New York

Moderator: Doris Hicks, Board Member, National Assessment Governing Board, Principal and CEO of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Charter School for Science and Technology in New Orleans

Reading The Nation’s Report Card

Jack BuckleyJack BuckleyCommissioner

National Center for Education Statistics

November 10, 2011

2011 NAEP Reading Report Card

What is NAEP?

5

• Largest nationally representative assessment

• Provides a common measure of student achievement across the country

• First administered in 1969

• Reports results for:• Nation – since 1969• States – since 1990• Selected urban districts – since 2002

2011 Reading and Mathematics Reports

6

• National samples• 422,000 fourth-graders• 343,000 eighth-graders

• Results available for:• Nation• 50 states, the District of Columbia, and the Department of

Defense school system

• Performance reported as:• Scale scores (0—500) • Achievement levels (Basic, Proficient, Advanced)

7

8

9

Fourth-graders’ performance unchanged from 2009

* Significantly different (p < .05) from 2011.

10

Students from both lower- and higher-income families score higher in 2011

* Significantly different (p < .05) from 2011.

11

Asian students score higher than their peers

# Rounds to zero.

12

White – Black score gap not significantly different from 2009 but smaller than 1992

* Significantly different (p < .05) from 2011.

13

No significant change in White – Hispanic score gap

* Significantly different (p < .05) from 2011.

14

White and Asian/Pacific Islander score gap reverses compared to 1992

# Rounds to zero.* Significantly different (p < .05) from 2011. 1 Score gaps reflect the average score for Asian/Pacific Islander students minus the score for White students.

15

4 states score higher than in 2009, and 2 states score lower

1 Department of Defense Education Activity (overseas and domestic schools).

16

4 states narrow gap between high-income and low-income students since 2003

17

One-third of fourth-graders perform at or above Proficient in 2011

* Significantly different (p < .05) from 2011.

18

19

20

Grade 4 Literary Passage

Choice A Choice B Choice C Choice D Omitted

10 19 63 7 1

21

Early Childhood Longitudinal Study – Kindergarten (ECLS-K)

22

Mean reading scores for fall 1998 first-time kindergartners, by time of assessment and race/ethnicity: Fall 1998, spring 1999, spring 2000, and spring 2002

Note: Children who could not be assessed in English are not represented. Racial categories exclude those of Hispanic origin.Source: Early Childhood Longitudinal Study, Kindergarten Class of 1998–99 (ECLS-K), Longitudinal Kindergarten-First Grade Data File and Third Grade Data File, fall 1998, spring 1999, spring 2000, and spring 2002.

ECLS – K: Reading

3 point gap

6 point gap

10 point gap

14 point gap

23

Mean reading scores for fall 1998 first-time kindergartners, by time of assessment and poverty status: Fall 1998, spring 1999, spring 2000, and spring 2002

Note: Children who could not be assessed in English are not represented. Source: Early Childhood Longitudinal Study, Kindergarten Class of 1998–99 (ECLS-K), Longitudinal Kindergarten-First Grade Data File and Third Grade Data File, fall 1998, spring 1999, spring 2000, and spring 2002.

ECLS – K: Reading

7 point gap

10 point gap

18 point gap

21 point gap

• NAEP Data Explorer

• NAEP Questions Tool

• State Comparisons

• State & District Profiles

• Test Yourself

• NAEP Item Maps

24

25

For more information...

• http://nationsreportcard.gov.

• http://nces.ed.gov/ecls/kindergarten.asp

• Follow us on Twitter: @NAEP_NCES

• Fan us on Facebook: /NationalAssessmentofEducationalProgress

Don Hernandez

Professor and Researcher

Hunter College, City University of New York

Reading The Nation’s Report Card

Age 21

Grade 3

Birth

LearningTo

Read

Reading to Learn

Educational Achievement

Economic Success

Contribute to Society

Third Grade Reading Proficiency: Pivot Point for Student and Adult Success

27

Graduation Rates Based on 3rd Grade Reading Levels

Graduation Rates Based on Poverty Experience & Reading Levels

● Align high quality early education with curriculum and standards thru 3rd grade

● Attend to health and developmental needs of children

● Work training and other programs to help lift families out of poverty

What We Need to Do To Improve 3rd-Grade Reading and HS Graduation

Jack Jennings

President and CEO

Center on Education Policy

Reading The Nation’s Report Card

State Tests and NAEP• All 50 states submitted to CEP the results of reading and math tests used for NCLB from 2002-2009. • Over the last 5 years, CEP has issued reports analyzing this comprehensive collection of data. • State test and NAEP data can both suggest answers to two questions: why is the achievement gap persisting? And, why are reading trends showing less progress than trends in mathematics?

Achievement Gaps

NAEP results for 4th grade reading for 2011 compared with scores in 2009 show a gain of one point for white and Hispanic students, level achievement for blacks and Asian Americans, and a decline of two points for American Indians/Alaska Natives.

The delema is that we don’t want the top groups to stagnage, so we must devote much greater attention to the lower scoring groups.

Achievement Gap

• Different levels of achievement among the groups result in different effects on the achievement gap.

• For example, the gap between whites and Hispanics stayed the same because both went up one point, and the gap grew by one point between whites and blacks because whites went up and blacks stayed the same.

Achievement Gap

• The main point is that closing the gaps is dependent on the lower scoring group doing better than the higher scoring group. But, we don’t want closing to occur at the expense of the higher scoring students. So, there must be more attention to lower scoring students.

• The second point is that American Indian/Alaska Natives are doing worse, not just with 4th grade reading.

Reading

• NAEP and state tests both show more progress in mathematics than in reading.

Some possible reasons are:

1. Learning to read is influenced more by home factors than is learning to do math, e.g. books in the home.

Reading

2. The proportion of students tested who are in the lower scoring Latino group has tripled (7% in 1992 to 22% in 2011) and the proportion of tested students in the higher scoring white group has sharply declined.

3. The numbers of English language learners who were tested has increased, and this group scores very low.

Questions ?

Reading The Nation’s Report Card

This webinar was organized by the Campaign for Grade-Level Reading.

An archived version, including copies of the PowerPoint presentation, will be available online, at:

www.gradelevelreading.net

For more information, contact: Kathleen Kennedy Manzo Kathleen@thehatchergroup.com

Reading The Nation’s Report Card