North Carolina
WHAT IS NAEP?
Dynamic
NAEP is often called the “Nation’s Overall Results
„ In 2009, the average score of fourth-grade students in North
Report Card.” It is the only measure
Carolina was DR.
244. This IRIS
was higher GARNER
than the average score of 239
of student achievement in the
for public school students in the nation.
„ The average score for students in North Carolina in 2009 (244)
United States where you can
North Carolina
was not significantly different from their average score in 2007
compare the performance of
(242) and was higher than their average score in 1992 (213).
Coordinator
score gap between
students in North Carolina at the
students in your state with the „ In 2009, the NAEP
75th percentile and students at the 25th percentile was 36 points.
performance of students across the This performance
gap was narrower than that of 1992 (45 points).
igarner@dpi.state.nc.us
nation or in other states. NAEP, „ The percentage of students in North Carolina who performed at or
above the NAEP Proficient level was 43 percent in 2009. This
sponsored by the U.S. Department percentage was not significantly different from that in 2007 (41
of Education, has been conducted percent) and was greater than that in 1992 (13 percent).
„ The percentage of students in North Carolina who performed at or
for over 40 years.
above the NAEP Basic level was 87 percent in 2009. This
Science 2009
State Snapshot Report
North Carolina
Grade 4
Public Schools
Compare the Average Score in 2009 to Other States/Jurisdictions
ent was
elopments in
ch. The 2009
ntent areas.
s and
conservation,
n.
nd
pendence,
objects in
materials,
and
Questions Tool
http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreport
card/itmrlsx/landing.aspx
Grade 8
GRADE 8
Snapshot State Report
MATHEMATICS 2009
Subject-matter achievement is reported in
Mathematics
Compare the Average 2009
Score in 2009 to Other States/Jurisdictions
WHAT RESULTS DOES NAEP PROVIDE?
Public Schools
Department of Defense Education Activity (overseas and domestic
schools).
In 2009, the average score in North Carolina was
„ lower than those in 24 states/jurisdictions
„ higher than those in 9 states/jurisdictions
„ not significantly different from those in 13 states/jurisdictions
GRADE 4
NorthNAEP
Carolina
scale scores and achievement levels.
Grade 8
scale
score
results
provide
a
numeric
SCIENCE 2009 Science 2009
5 states/jurisdictions did not participate
Public Schools
Overall Results
In 2009, male students in North Carolina had an average
„
Percent at
tectonics,
energy
Earth
systems,
climatestudents.
and weather, and
score
that in
was
higher
than female
nt Advancedbiogeochemical cycles.
SUBJECTS NAEP ASSESS:
„ In 2009, Black students had an average score that was 36
The 2009
science assessment was
composed of •143
questions at
• points
mathematics
• reading
science
lower than White students.
This performance
gap was
1
grade 4, 162 at grade 8, and 179 at grade 12. Students responded to
#
not
significantly
different
from
the
nation
(35
points).
writing
• U.S.which
history
civics
only a•portion
of the questions,
included•both
multiple-choice
„ In 2009, Hispanic students had an average score that was
questions
and questions that•required
a written response.
1
• 30geography
economics
• the arts
points lower than White
students. This performance
gap
Achievement-Level Percentages and Average Score Results
* Significantly different (p < .05) from
a Accommodations not permitted.
state's results in 2009.
NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding.
WHO ARE THE STUDENTS
ASSESSED BY NAEP?
Compare the Average Score to Nation (public)
Achievement-Level Percentages and Average Score Results
In 2009, the average score of eighth-grade students in North
Carolina was 284. This was higher than the average score of 282
„
summary
ofstudents
what students
for public school
in the nation. know and can
S
t
a
t
e
S
n
apshot Report
Achievement-Level Percentages and Average Score Results
„ do
Thein
average
score for students
in North
Carolina in 2009 (284)
a particular
subject.
Achievement
was not categorize
significantly different
from their
average score inas
2007
North
levels
student
achievement
2009 Science Assessment Content
Compare
the Average Score
in 2009 to
Other States/Jurisdictions
(284) and was higher than their average score in 1990 (250).
rom the
Basic,
Proficient,
and
Advanced,
using
Guided by a new framework, the NAEP science assessment was
„ In 2009, the score gap between students in North Carolina at the
nation.
updated in 2009 to keep the content current with key developments in ranges
of performance
established
for50
each
75th percentile
and students at the
25th percentile was
points.
formed at or
science, curriculum standards, assessments, and research. The 2009 grade.
Department of Defense Education Activity schools (domestic and overseas).
This performance
gap category,
was not significantly
different
fromisthat¹ of
A fourth
below
Basic,
09. This
framework organizes science content into three broad content areas.
1990 (50 points).
In 2009, the average score in North Carolina was
on (32
also
reported
for
this
scale.
Physical science includes concepts related to properties and
„ The percentage of students in North Carolina who performed at or
„ lower than those in 4 states/jurisdictions
changes of matter, forms of energy, energy transfer and conservation,
above the NAEP Proficient level was 36 percent in 2009. This
formed at or
„ higher than those in 29 states/jurisdictions
NAEP
also
provides
results
about
subjectpercentage
was
not
significantly
different
from
that
in
2007
(34
position
and
motion
of
objects,
and
forces
affecting
motion.
NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding.
This
„ not significantly different from those in 18 states/jurisdictions
percent) and
was greater than instructional
that in 1990 (9 percent).
Life science includes concepts related to organization and
matter
achievement,
* Significantly different (p < .05) from state's results in 2009.
on (71
„ The percentage of students in North Carolina who performed Results
at or
a Accommodations
development, matter and energy transformations, interdependence,
for
Student Groups
in 2009
not permitted.
experiences, and school environment.
above the NAEP Basic level was 74 percent in 2009. This
NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because ofPercentages
rounding.
heredity and reproduction, and evolution and diversity.
at
percentage was not significantly different from that in 2007 (73
or above
Percent of Avg.
Percent at
Earth
and Gaps
spacefor
sciences
Score
Student includes
Groups concepts related to objects in
percent)
and
was
greater
than
that
in
1990
(38
percent).
Reporting
Groups
students
score
Basic
Proficient
Advanced
the universe, the history of the Earth, properties of Earth materials,
¹
at
MATHEMATICS 2009
Snapshot State Report
percentage was not significantly different from that in 2007 (85
North Carolina
percent) and was greater than that in 1992 (50 percent).
¹
estions at
esponded to
d the
Grade 4
Mathematics 2009
GRADE 4 Public Schools
http://www.ncpublicschools.org/
accountability/policies/naep/naep
„
The national results are based on a
representative sample of students
in public schools, private schools,
Bureau of Indian Education schools,
and Department of Defense schools.
Private schools include Catholic,
Conservative Christian, Lutheran,
Significantly different (p < .05) from 2009.
and other private schools. The
state results are based on public
North Carolina
Score Gaps for Student Groups
school students only.
*
Grade 4
2009, male students in North Carolina had an average
ReadingInscore
2009
Public
Schools
that was not significantly different from
that of
female
S t a t e S n astudents.
p s h o tThis
R eperformance
port
gap was not significantly
GRADE
4
•
READING
2009
http://www.ncpublicschools.org/
different from that in 1992 (1 point).
Department of Defense Education Activity (overseas and domestic
schools).
Gender
Compare the Average Score to Nation (public)
Male
51 244
86
Compare the Average Score in 2009 to Other States/Jurisdictions
44
„
8
In 2009, the average score in North Carolina was
Overall
Results
Achievement-Level
Percentages
and
Average
Score
Results
Female
49 244
87
42
8
„
In 2009, Black students
had an
average
score
that
was 27
„ lower than those in 29 states/jurisdictions
Race/Ethnicity
points lower than that of White students. This performance
33
„ In 2009, the average score of fourth-grade students in North
„ higher than those in 5 states/jurisdictions
White
54 254
95
59
13
27
gap was not significantly different from that in 1992 (30
Carolina was 219. This was not significantly
different
from
the
27 226
71
18
1
„ not significantly different from those in 12 states/jurisdictionsBlack
points).
average score of 220 for public school
students
in the nation.
Hispanic
11
236
84
27
2
45
„ 5 states/jurisdictions did not participate
„ In 2009, Hispanic students had an average score that was
Islander
259Carolina
93 in 2009
62 (219) 25
„ Asian/Pacific
The average
score for students in 2North
9
#
was not significantly different from the nation (32 points).
American
232
77 score in
30 2007
2
18 points lower than that of White students. Data are not
was not Indian/Alaska
significantly Native
different from1their
average
11
#
Overall
Results
Achievement-Level Percentages and Average Score Results
National School Lunch Program
reported for Hispanic students in 1992, because reporting
52
# „ In 2009, students who were eligible for free/reduced-price
(218) and was higher than their average score in 1992 (212).
„
thelunch,
average
of eighth-grade
North
Eligible
48 232
78
25
2
10
# In 2009,
school
an score
indicator
of low familystudents
income, in
had
an
standards were not met.
„ In 2009, the score gap between students in North Carolina at the
Not eligible
51 255
94
60
14
Carolina
was score
144. This
than lower
the average
score ofwho
149
average
that was
was lower
29 points
than students
„ In 2009, students who were eligible for free/reduced-price
75th percentile and students at the 25th percentile was 47 points.
13
# for public school students in the nation.
NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding, and because the
were not eligible for free/reduced-price school lunch. This
school lunch, an indicator of poverty, had an average score
This performance
was not
significantly
different
thatwhich
of
"Information
not available"gap
category
for the
National School
Lunchfrom
Program,
46
1 The percentage of students in North Carolina who performed at or
„
¹ Department of Defense Education Activity schools (domestic and overseas).provides free/reduced-price lunches, and the "Unclassified" category for
performance gap was not significantly different from the
that was 22 points lower than that of students who were
1992 (50 points).
above
the
NAEP
Proficient
level
was
24
percent
in
2009.
This
race/ethnicity are not displayed.
nation (29 points).
not eligible for free/reduced-price school lunch. This
„ The percentage of students in North Carolina who performed at or
In 2009, the average score in North Carolina was
percentage was smaller than the nation (29 percent).
performance gap was not significantly different from that in
„ lower than those in 14 states/jurisdictions
above* Significantly
the NAEPdifferent
Proficient
level
was
32 percent in 2009. This
(p < .05)
from
2009.
„ The percentage of students in North Carolina who performed at or
se the
1996 (25 points).
„ higher than those in 19 states/jurisdictions
percentage was not significantly different from that in 2007 (29
rogram, which
above the NAEP Basic level was 56 percent in 2009. This
for
„ * Significantly
not significantly
different
in 18 states/jurisdictions
Statistical
comparisons
are calculated
basis
of percent).
unrounded scale scores or percentages.
and
was greater
than thaton
in the
1992
(25
different
(p < .05)from
fromthose
North Carolina.
Significance tests NOTE:
werepercent)
percentage was smaller than the nation (62 percent).
SOURCE:
U.S.
Department
of
Education,
Institute
of
Education
Sciences,
National
Center
for
Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress
performed using unrounded numbers.
„ Thevarious
percentage
of
in North Carolina
who performed at or
(NAEP),
Mathematics
Assessments.
Results for Student Groups in 2009
Scoreyears,
Gaps1992–2009
forstudents
Student
Groups
ed scale scores or percentages.
* Significantly different (p < .05) from state's results in 2009.
ces, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress
above
the
NAEP
Basic
level
was
65
percent
in
2009.
This
NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding.
Percentages at
a Accommodations not permitted.
„ In 2009, female students in North Carolina had an average
North Carolina
or above
Percent of Avg.
Percentpercentage
at
was
significantly
different
fromfrom
that that
in 2007
(64
score
thatnot
was
not significantly
different
of male
Results for Student Groups in 2009
Score Gaps for Student Groups
Reporting Groups
students score Basic Proficient Advanced
NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding.
percent)students.
and was This
greater
than thatgap
in 1992
(56 significantly
percent).
Grade 8 Gender
performance
was not
Percentages at
2009
„ In 2009, male students in North Carolina had an average
different
from
that in
orPublic
above Schools
Percent of Avg.
Percent at
Male
284
73
9
Compare
the
Average
Score
in 1990
2009 (1
to point).
Other States/Jurisdictions
Average Scores for State/Jurisdiction and Nation (public)
score that was not significantly51different
from
female37
Groups
score Basic Proficient Advanced
Female
49 284
75
34
9
„ In 2009, Black students had an average score that was 34
S t a t e Reporting
Snaps
h o t R e p o r students
t
students.
Gender
Race/Ethnicity
points lower than that of White students. This performance
In 2009, Black students had an55average
score
that was
297
85
49 37 14
Male
51 145
57
25
2 „White
gap was not significantly different from that in 1990 (30
Achievement-Level Percentages
Average
Black
28 This
262 performance
53
12gap was 1
Female
49and143
55 Score Results
22
1
points lower than White students.
points).
Hispanic
274
67 points).24
2
Race/Ethnicity
n North
not significantly different from 10
the nation
(36
Asian/Pacific Islander
2 311
87
65
36 „ In 2009, Hispanic students had an average score that was
White
55 158
73
36
2
ore of 262
„ In 2009, Hispanic students had an average score that was
American Indian/Alaska Native
1 256
45
14
2
23 points lower than that of White students. Data are not
Black
28 121
25
5
#
26 points lower than White students. This performance gap
reported for Hispanic students in 1990, because reporting
Hispanic
10 132
41
11
# National School Lunch Program
Eligible
44 268
58 (30 points).
18
3
009 (260)
was not significantly different from
the nation
Asian/Pacific Islander
2 165
79
44
5
standards were not met.
54 298
86
50
15
American Indian/Alaska Native
1 119
30
6
# „Not
in 2007
Ineligible
2009, students who were eligible
for free/reduced-price
„ In 2009, students who were eligible for free/reduced-price
NOTE:
Detail may
not an
sumindicator
to totals because
rounding,
and because
the
school
lunch,
of lowoffamily
income,
had an
rage score inNational School Lunch Program
school lunch, an indicator of poverty, had an average score
Eligible
44 129
37
10
# "Information not available" category for the National School Lunch Program, which
provides
free/reduced-price
the "Unclassified"
for who
average
score thatlunches,
was 28and
points
lower thancategory
students
that was 30 points lower than that of students who were
Not eligible
55 156
71
35
2 race/ethnicity are not displayed.
were not eligible for free/reduced-price school lunch. This
olina at the
not eligible for free/reduced-price school lunch. This
performance gap was not significantly different from the
s 47 points. # Rounds to zero.
performance gap was not significantly different from that in
¹ Department of Defense Education Activity schools (domestic and overseas).
nation (28 points).
1996 (27 points).
om that of
NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding, and because the
2009,
the average score in North Carolina was
NOTE: Statistical comparisons are calculated on the basis of unrounded scaleIn
scores
or percentages.
"Information not available" category for the National School Lunch Program, which SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress
„ lower than those in 26 states/jurisdictions
formed at orprovides free/reduced-price lunches, and the "Unclassified" category for
* Significantly different (p < .05) from 2009.
(NAEP), various years, 1990–2009 Mathematics Assessments.
race/ethnicity are not displayed.
„ higher than those in 11 states/jurisdictions
09. This
NOTE: Statistical comparisons are calculated on the basis of unrounded scale scores or percentages.
* Significantly
2007 (28 SOURCE:
differentof(pEducation,
< .05) from
state's of
results
in 2009.
U.S. Department
Institute
Education
Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress„ not significantly different from those in 14 states/jurisdictions
a 2009 Science Assessment.
not permitted.
1998 (30 (NAEP),Accommodations
accountability/policies/naep/naep
GRADE 8
SCIENCE 2009
Engaging
NAEP PROGRAM GOALS:
1) to compare student achievement
in states and other jurisdictions
2) to track changes in achievement
of fourth-, eighth-, and twelfthgraders over time in mathematics,
reading, writing, science, and
other content domains
Reading
GRADE 8 • READING 2009
NAEP Data Explorer
http://nces.ed.gov/
nationsreportcard/naepdata/
http://www.ncpublicschools.org/
accountability/policies/naep/naep
HOW CAN EDUCATORS USE
NAEP RESOURCES?
NAEP materials such as frameworks,
released questions, and reports have
many uses in the educational
community. Frameworks can serve
as models for designing an assessment or revising curricula.
Released constructed-response
questions and their corresponding
scoring guides can serve as models
Results for Student Groups in 2009
of innovative assessment
practices.
Percentages
at
Encompassing
Item Maps
formed at or
This
2007 (71
t).
dictions
NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding.
TEAR OUT THE CUBES BELOW.
Average Scores for State/Jurisdiction and Nation (public)
http://nces.ed.gov/nations
reportcard/itemmaps/
or above
Percent of Avg.
Percent at
Reporting Groups
students score Basic Proficient Advanced
Gender
Male
51 215
61
29
6
Female
49 224
70
36
8
Race/Ethnicity
White
54 230
77
44
11
Black
27 204
48
14
1
Hispanic
10 204
50
17
3
Asian/Pacific Islander
2 241
90
52
15
American Indian/Alaska Native
1 202
47
18
6
National School Lunch Program
Eligible
48 205
50
17
2
Not eligible
51 233
79
46
12
NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding, and because the
"Information not available" category for the National School Lunch Program, which
provides free/reduced-price lunches, and the "Unclassified" category for
race/ethnicity are not displayed.
FOR MORE INFORMATION VISIT
http://www.ncpublicschools.org/
Score Gaps for Student Groups
accountability/policies/naep/naep
„ In 2009, female students in North Carolina had an average
„
„
„
score that was higher than that of male students.
In 2009, Black students had an average score that was 26
points lower than that of White students. This performance
gap was not significantly different from that in 1992 (26
points).
In 2009, Hispanic students had an average score that was
26 points lower than that of White students. Data are not
reported for Hispanic students in 1992, because reporting
standards were not met.
In 2009, students who were eligible for free/reduced-price
school lunch, an indicator of low income, had an average
score that was 28 points lower than that of students who
were not eligible for free/reduced-price school lunch. This
performance gap was not significantly different from that in
1998 (26 points).
NOTE: Statistical comparisons are calculated on the basis of unrounded scale scores or percentages.
SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress
(NAEP), various years, 1992–2009 Reading Assessments.
verseas).
EMBARGOED
*
Significantly different (p < .05) from 2009.
ictions
Score Gaps for Student Groups
at
Percent at
ent Advanced
22
36
1
4
39
12
19
4
#
2
„
„
„
In 2009, female students in North Carolina had an average
score that was higher than that of male students.
In 2009, Black students had an average score that was 28
points lower than that of White students. This performance
gap was not significantly different from that in 1998 (25
points).
In 2009, Hispanic students had an average score that was
22 points lower than that of White students. Data are not
EMBARGOED
EMBARGOED
EMBARGOED
EMBARGOED
EMBARGOED