Report of Student Performance in

advertisement
North Carolina
Testing Program
Report
of
Student Performance
in
Writing
on
The North Carolina General Writing Assessment at Grade 10
for Writing at Grade 10
NCEXTEND2 OCS Writing Assessment at Grade 10
NCEXTEND1 Test of Writing at Grade 10
2009-10
Published January 2011
Public Schools of North Carolina
State Board of Education
Department of Public Instruction
Accountability Services/Test Development Section
Raleigh, North Carolina 27601-2825
www.ncpublicschools.org/accountability/testing
STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION
The guiding mission of the North Carolina State Board of Education is that every public school
student will graduate from high school, globally competitive for work and postsecondary
education and prepared for life in the 21st Century.
WILLIAM C. HARRISON
Chairman :: Fayetteville
REGINALD KENAN
Rose Hill
JOHN A. TATE III
Charlotte
WAYNE MCDEVITT
Vice Chair :: Asheville
KEVIN D. HOWELL
Raleigh
ROBERT “TOM” SPEED
Boone
WALTER DALTON
Lieutenant Governor :: Rutherfordton
SHIRLEY E. HARRIS
Troy
MELISSA E. BARTLETT
Roxboro
JANET COWELL
State Treasurer :: Raleigh
CHRISTINE J. GREENE
High Point
PATRICIA N.
WILLOUGHBY
Raleigh
JEAN W. WOOLARD
Plymouth
NC DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION
June St. Clair Atkinson, Ed.D., State Superintendent
301 N. Wilmington Street :: Raleigh, North Carolina 27601-2825
In compliance with federal law, NC Public Schools administers all state-operated educational programs,
employment activities and admissions without discrimination because of race, religion, national or ethnic origin,
color, age, military service, disability, or gender, except where exemption is appropriate and allowed by law.
Inquiries or complaints regarding discrimination issues should be directed to:
Dr. Rebecca Garland, Chief Academic Officer :: Academic Services and Instructional Support
6368 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-6368 :: Telephone: (919) 807-3200 :: Fax: (919) 807-4065
Visit us on the Web:: www.ncpublicschools.org
M0910
Report
of
Student Performance
in
Writing
on
The North Carolina General Writing Assessment at Grade 10
NCEXTEND2 OCS Writing Assessment at Grade 10
NCEXTEND1 Test of Writing at Grade 10
2009-10
Published January 2011
Public Schools of North Carolina
State Board of Education
Department of Public Instruction
Accountability Services/Test Development Section
Raleigh, North Carolina 27601-2825
www.ncpublicschools.org/accountability/testing
i
This publication and the information contained within must not be used for personal or financial gain. North
Carolina LEA school officials and teachers, parents, and students may download and duplicate this publication
for instructional and educational purposes only. Others may not duplicate this publication without prior written
permission from the North Carolina Department of Public Instruction (NCDPI), Division of Accountability
Services/Test Development Section.
© 2011 All rights reserved. This document may not be reproduced by any means, in whole or in part, without
prior written permission from the North Carolina Department of Public Instruction, Division of Accountability
Services, Raleigh, North Carolina 27601-2825.
ii
North Carolina Testing Program
2009-10
Report of Student Performance in Writing
at
Grade 10
Table of Contents
Introduction..........................................................................................................................................1
2009-10 State-Level Summary Statistics for the North Carolina General Writing Assessment,
NCEXTEND2 OCS Writing Assessment, and the NCEXTEND1 Test of Writing at
Grade 10.................................................................................................................................................7
Grade 10 Sample Student Responses – General Writing Assessment.................................................35
Grade 10 Sample Student Responses – NCEXTEND2 OCS Writing Assessment.............................53
2009-10 North Caro lina General W riting A ssessment, Grade 10, Regional by LEA
Performance .........................................................................................................................................69
Section II
Appendices...........................................................................................................................................85
Appendix A: North Carolina General Writing Assessment - Grade Levels and Types
of Writing by Year ...............................................................................................................................87
Appendix B: 1991-92 to 2009-10 Percent of Students Scoring At or Above Level III, North
Carolina Writing Assessment (General and Alternates), Grade 10 .....................................................91
Appendix C:
List of North Carolina Charter Schools, 2009-10 .......................................................95
Appendix D: 2009-10 North Carolina Writing Advisory Consultants .............................................99
iii
[This page intentionally blank]
iv
Report of Student Performance in Writing, Grade 10, 2009-10
Introduction
In June 2008, the North Carolina State Board of Education (SBE) adopted the Framework for
Change: The Next Generation of Assessments and Accountability. This charge led the North
Carolina Department of Public Instruction to implement a new writing system. The new
writing system focuses on the writing process. It is based upon writing across the curriculum
in each content area and involves all educators.
This report presents data for the general and alternate writing assessments at grade 10 for the
2009-2010 school year.
North Carolina General Writing Assessment at Grade 10
The North Carolina Writing Assessment at Grade 10 was redesigned effective with the 20022003 school year. The redesign included eliminating the focused-holistic method of hand
scoring which had been used by the North Carolina Program since its inception. In addition,
the redesign eliminated the grade 10 English II Writing Assessment and instead requires a
once-a-year writing assessment, administered in the spring of grade 10, which is based on the
NCSCS (Standard Course of Study). The type of writing for grade 10 continues to be
informational writing which focuses on cause and effect or definition. The Writing
Assessment at Grade 10 is given to students statewide in a timed administration of 100
minutes. All student responses are scored by two independent scorers (effective with the
2002-2003 school year) using the North Carolina Writing Assessment Scoring Model
Rubrics for Content and Conventions.
NCCLAS for Writing at Grade 10
The North Carolina Checklist of Academic Standards (NCCLAS) for writing was
discontinued in 2009-10.
NCEXTEND2 OCS Writing Assessment at Grade 10 for Occupational Course of Study
The NCEXTEND2 OCS Writing Assessment at Grade 10 is a tim ed as sessment given
only to students in grade 10 receiving instruction under the NC
OCS (Occupational
Course of Study). Students who take the NCEXTEND2 OCS Writing Assessment receive
a prompt about life skills, work skills, or personal skills, which is specifically designed to
assess th e writing com petency goals from Occupational English I and Occupational
English II of the NC OCS. All student responses are scored by two independent raters on
two scoring com ponents: Content (focus, or ganization, and support and elaboration) and
Conventions (sentence formation, standard usage, and mechanics, including spelling). It
is im portant to recognize that the prom pts, rubrics, and the com posing features of the
NCEXTEND2 OCS Writing Alternate Assessm ent ar e different from the Grade 10
General Writing Assessment. Style has been eliminated from the Content rubric and case
has been removed from standard usage in the Conventions rubric.
1
Report of Student Performance in Writing, Grade 10, 2009-10
While the general and NCEXTEND2 OCS scoring rubrics have some similarities, it is in the
application of those rubrics and criteria that a modified assessment is designed. To that end,
it is critical that the annotated anchor papers and training papers are reviewed in order to
understand the way in which the rubrics and the features are being defined for this population
of students. The first operational administration of the NCEXTEND2 OCS Writing
Assessment at Grade 10 occurred in March, 2007.
For the 2009-10 school year, the NCEXTEND2 OCS Writing Assessment results
will be included in the ABCs performance composite for the last time. Effective with the
2008-09 school year, the NCEXTEND2 OCS Writing Assessment results are no longer
included in AYP determinations at the directive of the United States Department of
Education.
NCEXTEND1 Test of Writing at Grade 10
The NCEXTEND1 Test of Writing at Grade 10 is a performance-based writing assessment
designed to assess students with significant cognitive disabilities. Writing tasks for the
NCEXTEND1 are grade-level, content-specific performance tasks based on the extended
content standards of the NCSCS (Standard Course of Study). These tasks are not scored using
the North Carolina Writing Assessment Scoring Model, but are scored on the NCEXTEND1
score scale (0-14). Students are assessed on designated tasks during a testing window in the
spring. Student performance on the assessment tasks is submitted online. NCEXTEND1 is
only available to students who meet all of the eligibility requirements as stipulated in the Test
Administrator’s Manual for NCEXTEND1.
Types of Writing Assessed
Table 1. Type of Writing Assessed by Grade Level for General Writing Assessment
Grade Level
Type of Writing
10
Extended informational response (definition or cause/effect)
Table 2. Type of Writing Assessed by Grade Level for NCEXTEND2 OCS Writing
Assessment
Grade Level
Type of Writing
10 OCS
Extended expressive response (work skills, life skills, or personal skills)
Appendix A displays a complete list of the types of writing by grade level and year.
Distributed Scoring
Since receiving recommendations from the Writing Assessment Task Force in 2001, the
NCDPI has worked toward the goal of involving North Carolina educators in the scoring
process for the Writing Assessments. The advancement of modern technology has enabled
NCDPI to transition from a regional-based scoring model to a distributed scoring model
(remote web-based secure access system) for the North Carolina General Writing
2
Report of Student Performance in Writing, Grade 10, 2009-10
Assessment at Grade 10. Using a distributed scoring model, trained North Carolina
educators who met qualification criteria were given the opportunity to score the North
Carolina General Writing Assessments along with qualified professional scorers. Distributed
Scoring utilizes the process of scanning the handwritten student responses into the vendor’s
computerized database system, which distributes them securely to scorers using the webbased password-protected system. Computer technology enabled scorers to securely
download the necessary computer applications and score student responses.
Traditionally, the NCDPI has contracted with a vendor to score the large-scale writing
assessments in regional scoring centers. The vendor operated these regional scoring centers
and supervised the scorers under strict quality control measures. All training sessions for
scorers, however, were conducted by NCDPI Test Development and NCSU-TOPS staff who
were present at these scoring centers. The NCEXTEND2 OCS Writing Assessment
continued to be scored in this manner due to the small population size and modified nature of
the assessment.
The vendor for these projects maintained a central headquarters to supervise the distributed
scoring and regional scoring operations. In addition, NCDPI personnel monitored scorers
and the scoring process through secure online web access. The NCDPI generated real-time
scoring reports and daily data statistics.
Reliability Standards for Distributed Scoring
All scorers, including North Carolina educators who applied to become scorers, had to meet
the rigorous requirements set forth by the NCDPI as in previous years. Scorers first had to
meet the eligibility criteria, sign Test Security and Confidentiality Agreements, pass the
necessary training requirements, and qualify for a scoring position.
After qualifying to score the assessments, scorers were required by NCDPI to maintain the
industry standard inter-rater perfect agreement (reliability) of 70 percent. Scorers also had to
maintain a 70 percent validity standard (agreement with “true scores” assigned to responses
by the Writing Advisory Consultants and NCDPI Test Development Staff). All scorers who
did not meet or exceed the 70 percent standards (inter-rater and validity) were removed from
the project and all scores assigned to student responses were invalidated. These student
responses were subsequently rescored by two qualified scorers.
Table 3: Inter-Rater Reliability and Validity for the 2009-10 Scoring
Grade Level
Rubric Trait
IRR
Validity
10 General
Content
74
76
10 General
Conventions
76
82
10 NCEXTEND2 OCS
10 NCEXTEND2 OCS
Content
Conventions
3
94
93
85
84
Report of Student Performance in Writing, Grade 10, 2009-10
Scoring Procedure
Student responses were scored using the North Carolina Writing Assessment Scoring Model
which consists of the following:


a content component with a 1-4 score scale, and
a conventions component with a 0-2 score scale.
All student responses are scored by two independent readers.
The total writing score for each student is computed by combining the content and
conventions scores in the following manner:
Total Writing Assessment Score = sum of the (content component scores from the two
independent readers multiplied by 2) + the sum of the (conventions component scores from
the two independent readers multiplied by 1).
The Total Writing Assessment Score may be a minimum of 4 and a maximum of 20 for a
given student.
Students received the following information from the writing assessments: (a) point totals for
content, (b) point totals for conventions, (c) total writing scores, (d) Achievement Level, and
(e) their imaged responses. A review procedure was incorporated into the scoring process for
those students whose Total Writing Assessment Score fell within one point of the cut line at
Achievement Level III. This procedure precluded an LEA appeal mechanism, as conducted
under the previous focused holistic scoring system.
Writing Assessment Achievement Level Ranges
After carefully examining all data associated with the “Body of Work” and “Contrasting
Groups” standard-setting methods, pilot administration data, and the North Carolina Writing
Assessment Scoring Model, the North Carolina Department of Public Instruction (NCDPI)
Accountability Services, Instructional Services – English/language arts, and Exceptional
Children’s Division staff recommended the following Achievement Level ranges for
approval by the SBE.
Table 4. SBE Adopted Achievement Level Ranges for the North Carolina
General Writing Assessment at Grade 10 (October, 2003)
Level I
Level II
Level III
Level IV
Grade 10
4-7
8-11
12-16
17-20
4
Report of Student Performance in Writing, Grade 10, 2009-10
Table 5. SBE Adopted Achievement Level Ranges for the
NCEXTEND2 OCS Writing Assessment at Grade 10 (June, 2007)
Level I
Level II
Level III
Level IV
Grade 10 OCS
4-6
7-11
12-16
17-20
Grade 10
Table 6. SBE Adopted Achievement Level Ranges for the
NCEXTEND1 Test of Writing at Grade 10 (July, 2008)
Level I
Level II
Level III
Level IV
0-1
2-5
6-11
12-14
The State Board of Education policy delineatin g achievement-level ranges and perf ormancelevel descriptions (PLDs) can be accessed at http://sbepolicy.dpi.state.nc.us/
Table 7: Performance Level Descriptions
Test Type
SBE Policy ID Number
NC End-of-Grade Tests in Reading, Mathematics
at Grades 3-8, Science at Grades 5 & 8, and the
GCS-C-018
NC Writing Assessments at Grades 4, 7, & 10
NCEXTEND2 (EOG) Writing Assessment
Grades 4 and 7, and the NCEXTEND2 OCS
GCS-C-027
Writing Assessment at Grade 10
Interim Achievement Level Ranges for the
NCEXTEND1 Test of Writing
GCS-C-029
5
[This page intentionally blank]
6
2009-10
State-Level Summary Statistics
North Carolina General Writing Assessment
NCEXTEND2 OCS Writing Assessment
NCEXTEND1 Test of Writing
at Grade 10
7
[This page intentionally blank]
8
Report of Student Performance in Writing, Grade 10, 2009-10
Introduction
In June 2008, the North Carolina State Board of Education (SBE) adopted the Framework for
Change: The Next Generation of Assessments and Accountability. This charge led the North
Carolina Department of Public Instruction to implement a new writing system. The new
writing system focuses on the writing process. It is based upon writing across the curriculum
in each content area and involves all educators.
This report presents data for the general and alternate writing assessments at grade 10 for the
2009-2010 school year.
North Carolina General Writing Assessment at Grade 10
The North Carolina Writing Assessment at Grade 10 was redesigned effective with the 20022003 school year. The redesign included eliminating the focused-holistic method of hand
scoring which had been used by the North Carolina Program since its inception. In addition,
the redesign eliminated the grade 10 English II Writing Assessment and instead requires a
once-a-year writing assessment, administered in the spring of grade 10, which is based on the
NCSCS (Standard Course of Study). The type of writing for grade 10 continues to be
informational writing which focuses on cause and effect or definition. The Writing
Assessment at Grade 10 is given to students statewide in a timed administration of 100
minutes. All student responses are scored by two independent scorers (effective with the
2002-2003 school year) using the North Carolina Writing Assessment Scoring Model
Rubrics for Content and Conventions.
NCCLAS for Writing at Grade 10
The North Carolina Checklist of Academic Standards (NCCLAS) for writing was
discontinued in 2009-10.
NCEXTEND2 OCS Writing Assessment at Grade 10 for Occupational Course of Study
The NCEXTEND2 OCS Writing Assessment at Grade 10 is a tim ed as sessment given
only to students in grade 10 receiving instruction under the NC
OCS (Occupational
Course of Study). Students who take the NCEXTEND2 OCS Writing Assessment receive
a prompt about life skills, work skills, or personal skills, which is specifically designed to
assess th e writing com petency goals from Occupational English I and Occupational
English II of the NC OCS. All student responses are scored by two independent raters on
two scoring com ponents: Content (focus, or ganization, and support and elaboration) and
Conventions (sentence formation, standard usage, and mechanics, including spelling). It
is im portant to recognize that the prom pts, rubrics, and the com posing features of the
NCEXTEND2 OCS Writing Alternate Assessm ent ar e different from the Grade 10
General Writing Assessment. Style has been eliminated from the Content rubric and case
has been removed from standard usage in the Conventions rubric.
1
Report of Student Performance in Writing, Grade 10, 2009-10
While the general and NCEXTEND2 OCS scoring rubrics have some similarities, it is in the
application of those rubrics and criteria that a modified assessment is designed. To that end,
it is critical that the annotated anchor papers and training papers are reviewed in order to
understand the way in which the rubrics and the features are being defined for this population
of students. The first operational administration of the NCEXTEND2 OCS Writing
Assessment at Grade 10 occurred in March, 2007.
For the 2009-10 school year, the NCEXTEND2 OCS Writing Assessment results
will be included in the ABCs performance composite for the last time. Effective with the
2008-09 school year, the NCEXTEND2 OCS Writing Assessment results are no longer
included in AYP determinations at the directive of the United States Department of
Education.
NCEXTEND1 Test of Writing at Grade 10
The NCEXTEND1 Test of Writing at Grade 10 is a performance-based writing assessment
designed to assess students with significant cognitive disabilities. Writing tasks for the
NCEXTEND1 are grade-level, content-specific performance tasks based on the extended
content standards of the NCSCS (Standard Course of Study). These tasks are not scored using
the North Carolina Writing Assessment Scoring Model, but are scored on the NCEXTEND1
score scale (0-14). Students are assessed on designated tasks during a testing window in the
spring. Student performance on the assessment tasks is submitted online. NCEXTEND1 is
only available to students who meet all of the eligibility requirements as stipulated in the Test
Administrator’s Manual for NCEXTEND1.
Types of Writing Assessed
Table 1. Type of Writing Assessed by Grade Level for General Writing Assessment
Grade Level
Type of Writing
10
Extended informational response (definition or cause/effect)
Table 2. Type of Writing Assessed by Grade Level for NCEXTEND2 OCS Writing
Assessment
Grade Level
Type of Writing
10 OCS
Extended expressive response (work skills, life skills, or personal skills)
Appendix A displays a complete list of the types of writing by grade level and year.
Distributed Scoring
Since receiving recommendations from the Writing Assessment Task Force in 2001, the
NCDPI has worked toward the goal of involving North Carolina educators in the scoring
process for the Writing Assessments. The advancement of modern technology has enabled
NCDPI to transition from a regional-based scoring model to a distributed scoring model
(remote web-based secure access system) for the North Carolina General Writing
2
Report of Student Performance in Writing, Grade 10, 2009-10
Assessment at Grade 10. Using a distributed scoring model, trained North Carolina
educators who met qualification criteria were given the opportunity to score the North
Carolina General Writing Assessments along with qualified professional scorers. Distributed
Scoring utilizes the process of scanning the handwritten student responses into the vendor’s
computerized database system, which distributes them securely to scorers using the webbased password-protected system. Computer technology enabled scorers to securely
download the necessary computer applications and score student responses.
Traditionally, the NCDPI has contracted with a vendor to score the large-scale writing
assessments in regional scoring centers. The vendor operated these regional scoring centers
and supervised the scorers under strict quality control measures. All training sessions for
scorers, however, were conducted by NCDPI Test Development and NCSU-TOPS staff who
were present at these scoring centers. The NCEXTEND2 OCS Writing Assessment
continued to be scored in this manner due to the small population size and modified nature of
the assessment.
The vendor for these projects maintained a central headquarters to supervise the distributed
scoring and regional scoring operations. In addition, NCDPI personnel monitored scorers
and the scoring process through secure online web access. The NCDPI generated real-time
scoring reports and daily data statistics.
Reliability Standards for Distributed Scoring
All scorers, including North Carolina educators who applied to become scorers, had to meet
the rigorous requirements set forth by the NCDPI as in previous years. Scorers first had to
meet the eligibility criteria, sign Test Security and Confidentiality Agreements, pass the
necessary training requirements, and qualify for a scoring position.
After qualifying to score the assessments, scorers were required by NCDPI to maintain the
industry standard inter-rater perfect agreement (reliability) of 70 percent. Scorers also had to
maintain a 70 percent validity standard (agreement with “true scores” assigned to responses
by the Writing Advisory Consultants and NCDPI Test Development Staff). All scorers who
did not meet or exceed the 70 percent standards (inter-rater and validity) were removed from
the project and all scores assigned to student responses were invalidated. These student
responses were subsequently rescored by two qualified scorers.
Table 3: Inter-Rater Reliability and Validity for the 2009-10 Scoring
Grade Level
Rubric Trait
IRR
Validity
10 General
Content
74
76
10 General
Conventions
76
82
10 NCEXTEND2 OCS
10 NCEXTEND2 OCS
Content
Conventions
3
94
93
85
84
Report of Student Performance in Writing, Grade 10, 2009-10
Scoring Procedure
Student responses were scored using the North Carolina Writing Assessment Scoring Model
which consists of the following:


a content component with a 1-4 score scale, and
a conventions component with a 0-2 score scale.
All student responses are scored by two independent readers.
The total writing score for each student is computed by combining the content and
conventions scores in the following manner:
Total Writing Assessment Score = sum of the (content component scores from the two
independent readers multiplied by 2) + the sum of the (conventions component scores from
the two independent readers multiplied by 1).
The Total Writing Assessment Score may be a minimum of 4 and a maximum of 20 for a
given student.
Students received the following information from the writing assessments: (a) point totals for
content, (b) point totals for conventions, (c) total writing scores, (d) Achievement Level, and
(e) their imaged responses. A review procedure was incorporated into the scoring process for
those students whose Total Writing Assessment Score fell within one point of the cut line at
Achievement Level III. This procedure precluded an LEA appeal mechanism, as conducted
under the previous focused holistic scoring system.
Writing Assessment Achievement Level Ranges
After carefully examining all data associated with the “Body of Work” and “Contrasting
Groups” standard-setting methods, pilot administration data, and the North Carolina Writing
Assessment Scoring Model, the North Carolina Department of Public Instruction (NCDPI)
Accountability Services, Instructional Services – English/language arts, and Exceptional
Children’s Division staff recommended the following Achievement Level ranges for
approval by the SBE.
Table 4. SBE Adopted Achievement Level Ranges for the North Carolina
General Writing Assessment at Grade 10 (October, 2003)
Level I
Level II
Level III
Level IV
Grade 10
4-7
8-11
12-16
17-20
4
Report of Student Performance in Writing, Grade 10, 2009-10
Table 5. SBE Adopted Achievement Level Ranges for the
NCEXTEND2 OCS Writing Assessment at Grade 10 (June, 2007)
Level I
Level II
Level III
Level IV
Grade 10 OCS
4-6
7-11
12-16
17-20
Grade 10
Table 6. SBE Adopted Achievement Level Ranges for the
NCEXTEND1 Test of Writing at Grade 10 (July, 2008)
Level I
Level II
Level III
Level IV
0-1
2-5
6-11
12-14
The State Board of Education policy delineatin g achievement-level ranges and perf ormancelevel descriptions (PLDs) can be accessed at http://sbepolicy.dpi.state.nc.us/
Table 7: Performance Level Descriptions
Test Type
SBE Policy ID Number
NC End-of-Grade Tests in Reading, Mathematics
at Grades 3-8, Science at Grades 5 & 8, and the
GCS-C-018
NC Writing Assessments at Grades 4, 7, & 10
NCEXTEND2 (EOG) Writing Assessment
Grades 4 and 7, and the NCEXTEND2 OCS
GCS-C-027
Writing Assessment at Grade 10
Interim Achievement Level Ranges for the
NCEXTEND1 Test of Writing
GCS-C-029
5
Report of Student Performance in Writing, Grade 10, 2009-10
[This page intentionally blank]
6
Report of Student Performance in Writing, Grade 10, 2009-10
2009-10
State-Level Summary Statistics
North Carolina General Writing Assessment
NCEXTEND2 OCS Writing Assessment
NCEXTEND1 Test of Writing
at Grade 10
7
Report of Student Performance in Writing, Grade 10, 2009-10
[This page intentionally blank]
8
Report of Student Performance in Writing, Grade 10, 2009-10
The North Carolina General Writing Assessment - Grade 10
Results of
the
North
Carolina
General
Writing
Assessment
at Grade 10
The prom pt for the 2010 North Carolina General Writing Assessment at Grade 10
asked students to write an informational response to the following definition prompt:
Write a letter explaining the meaning of responsibility as it relates to the high
school experience. This letter will be included in a high school orientation
booklet. You may use the following information, your own experiences,
observations, and/or readings.
Responsibility: 1. the quality, state, or fact of being responsible. 2. Something for which one is
accountable: duty.
Source: Webster's II New College Dictionary
Responsibility is the thing people dread most of all. Yet it is the one thing in the world that
develops us.
Source: Frank H. Crane
We must exchange the philosophy of excuse-what I am is beyond my control-for the
philosophy of responsibility.
Source: Barbara Charline Jordan
It is not only for what we do that we are held responsible but also for what we do not.
Source: Jean Baptiste Poquelin Moliere
To achieve a healthy level of self-esteem, you must be able to accept who you are and be
confident about your decisions and behavior. But there is another important ingredient in the
development of self-esteem that is often overlooked-the ability to take responsibility for your
future. To live self-responsibly, you must be able to influence your behavior freely in three
major areas: …

Taking action in ways that will help you reach your goal

Being accountable for your decisions, priorities and actions

Thinking for yourself by examining and actively choosing the values that will guide
you, rather than blindly accepting whatever you're told by … friends or the culture in
which you live.
Since being responsible for yourself requires effort, thought and a range of difficult decisions,
many people convince themselves that it is an impossible challenge. Some blame others for
their problem. Others hope that someone will come along and make everything all right.
Remember: You cannot respect or trust yourself if you continually pass on to others the
burdens of your existence.
Source: Nathaniel Branden, "All About Responsibility"
At the tenth grade level, the North Carolina General Writing Assessment results
showed that 71.1 percent of tenth grade students scored proficient. Contracted
readers scored 98,874 public school responses for grade 10 from the 2009-10 North
Carolina General Writing Assessment. The scores show that 71.1 percent of the
tenth graders wrote well enough to score at or above Level III. A small percentage
of the tenth graders (less than or equal to five percent) in the 2009-10 North Carolina
9
Report of Student Performance in Writing, Grade 10, 2009-10
Results of
the
North
Carolina
General
Writing
Assessment
at Grade 10
(continued)
General Writing Assessment received the highest scores in Level IV, and 11.4
percent received the lowest scores in Level I. In 2009-10, about 0.2 percent of the
papers had problems which made them non-scorable. Non-scorable papers receive
Achievement Level I ratings and are included in the state results as Level I scores.
Observations
The following observations were noted during the scoring process:
The average weighted content score for tenth graders participating in the North
Carolina General Writing Assessment in 2009-10 was 8.4 in a range of four to
sixteen. The average conventions score was 3.3 on a scale of zero to four. The
average Total Writing Score was 11.7 in a range of four to twenty.

Most students found the prompt very accessible. Most responses dealt with
students’ personal experiences with responsibility, and some specificity was
included in most responses, as students described situations where they were
responsible for someone (e.g., siblings, relatives) or something (e.g., class
assignments, extracurricular school activities).

Some students attempted to contrast the positive and negative aspects of
having responsibilities; however, they did not do so consistently, either using
general or list-like elaborations that led to major lapses in logical progression
of ideas, or major weaknesses in relatedness to and in support of the topic.
This impeded the students’ ability to form a complete and unified piece of
writing. Many students expressed somewhat sophisticated ideas, but most
were unable to consistently support or elaborate those ideas.

Students that were successful tended to focus on either positive or negative
effects of responsibility, or were able to focus on contrasting responsible and
irresponsible behaviors within specific situations or specific examples (e.g.,
drivers should use a hands-free calling device and should not text while
driving). In either case, students that narrowed their focus were better able to
consistently support their ideas.

Almost all students were able to discuss how personal responsibilities affect
their lives and some were able to discuss responsibility from a global or
philosophical perspective, such as environmental conservation to save the
Earth’s natural resources.

The most common sentence formation errors were comma splices, fragments,
and run-ons. The most common usage error was the failure to use a word
according to standard meaning, such as there for their or your for you’re. In
mechanics, spelling errors and comma usage errors were most common.
10
Report of Student Performance in Writing, Grade 10, 2009-10
Performance Gender
of Subgroups Approximately 77.6 percent of the female students scored at or above Level III
compared to 64.4 percent for male students.
at Grade 10
Ethnicity
About 79.0 percent of White students scored at or above Level III compared to 77.1
percent of the Asian students, 75.8 percent of Multi-Racial students, 58.3 percent of
Hispanic students, 58.0 percent of Black students, and 56.1 percent of American
Indian students.
For the General Writing Assessment, there were 98,874 tenth grade public school
student responses scored by two independent readers. The inter-rater reliability rates
(agreement rates) of the readers exceeded the 70.0 percent criterion rate for perfect
agreement based upon industry standards.
Table 8: Tenth Grade Reader Agreement Statistics:
General Assessment
Total Public
School Papers
Content
98,874
Conventions 98,874
Perfect
Agreement
Percent
74.0
76.0
Adjacent
Agreement
Percent
26.0
22.0
Resolution
Required
Percent
1.0
2.0
The following pages present data for the Grade 10 North Carolina General Writing
Assessments. An increase of 31.2 percent of students scoring at or above
Achievement Level III on the North Carolina General Writing Assessment occurred
between the pilot year and the current year, an increase of 12.6 percent from 200203 to 2003-04, a decrease of 4.7 percent between 2003-04 and 2004-05, an increase
of 5.5 percent from 2004-05 to 2005-06, a decrease of 1.9 percent between 2005-06
and 2006-07, an increase of 21.0 percent between 2006-07 and 2007-08, a 0.6
percent decrease between 2007-08 and 2008-09, and a 0.7 percent decrease from
2008-09 and 2009-10. Females outperformed males. Also, White, Asian, and MultiRacial students performed at a higher level than the Hispanic, Black, and American
Indian subgroups. Less than or equal to five percent of tenth graders reached
Achievement Level IV, 68.9 percent of the students received a III, 17.5 percent
received a II, and 11.4 percent received Achievement Level I.
11
Report of Student Performance in Writing, Grade 10, 2009-10
The NCEXTEND2 OCS Writing Assessment - Grade 10
Results of
the
NCEXTEND2
OCS Writing
Assessment
at Grade 10
The prom pt for the 2010 Grade 10
NCEXTEND2 OCS W riting Assessm ent
asked students to write an expressive journal entry describing the Occupational
Course of Study program.
You are in the Occupational Course of Study (OCS). Write a
letter to a new student explaining the OCS Program.
Contracted readers scored 2,152 public school responses for grade 10 from the
2009-10 NCEXTEND2 OCS Writing Assessment. About 33.8 percent of the
tenth graders wrote well enough to score at or above Level III. Less than or equal
to five percent of the tenth graders in the 2009-10 NCEXTEND2 OCS Writing
Assessment received the highest scores in Level IV, and 34.2 percent received the
lowest scores in Level I. In 2009-10, 2.3 percent of the papers had problems
which made them non-scorable. Non-scorable papers receive Achievement Level
I ratings and are included in the state results as Level I scores.
The average weighted content score for tenth graders taking the NCEXTEND2
OCS Writing Assessment in 2009-10 was 7.1 in a range of four to sixteen. The
average conventions score was 2.0 in a range of zero to four. The average Total
Writing Assessment Score was 9.3 out of a possible 20.
Observations
The following observations were noted during the scoring process:

The prompt asked students to write a letter describing the OCS program to
a new student, and most student responses found this year’s prompt very
accessible.

Typical student responses addressed the topic by identifying classes and
activities that were designed for OCS students, or by discussing a favorite
OCS teacher and the support provided in the OCS program.

Most student responses described the type of schedule that OCS students
follow during the school day, the academic environment, and the program
requirement to work at a job.

Students who were successful provided more clear and specific examples
to support why the OCS program is beneficial, and demonstrated the
ability to develop a logical progression of ideas.

The most common sentence formation errors were run-ons, fragments, and
comma splices. The most common usage errors were subject/verb
12
Report of Student Performance in Writing, Grade 10, 2009-10
agreement, or using incorrect words in place of a homophone “there”
instead of “their” or “your” rather than “you’re.” In mechanics, spelling
errors, capitalization, and comma usage were the most prevalent of all
convention errors.
Performance
of subgroups
at Grade 10
Gender
Approximately 42.9 percent of the female students scored at or above Level III
compared to 29.2 percent for male students.
Ethnicity
About 38.8 percent of Multi-Racial students scored at or above Level III
compared to 37.4 percent of White students, 32.5 percent of Black students, 30.8
percent of Asian students, 29.7 percent of Hispanic students, and 12.9 percent of
American Indian students.
There were 2,152 tenth grade public school
student responses scored by two
independent readers. The inter-rater reliability rates (agreem
ent rates) of the
readers are shown in Table 8. The 70.0
percent criterion rate for perfect
agreement based upon industry standard s was exceeded and the resolutions
required were few.
Table 9. NCEXTEND2 OCS Writing Assessment
Tenth Grade Reader Agreement Statistics
Perfect
Adjacent
Total Public
Agreement
Agreement
School Papers
Percent
Percent
Content
2,152
94.0
5.0
Conventions 2,152
93.0
5.0
The following pages, and Appendix B,
NCEXTEND2 OCS Writing Assessment.
13
Resolution
Required
Percent
1.0
2.0
present data for the Grade 10
Report of Student Performance in Writing, Grade 10, 2009-10
Figure 1. North Carolina Testing Program
North Carolina Writing Assessments, 2002-03 to 2009-10,
Percent of Students Scoring At or Above Level III
Grade 10
100
90
83.8
14
Percent of Students
80
70
60
57.8
53.3
51.4
52.5
39.9
0
2002-03
1
GENERAL
ASSESSMENT
NCEXTEND1
41.4
29.8
7.9
71.1
54.2
50.2
47.8
20
71.8
62.8
53.1
50.0
30
10
72.4
67.1
50
40
74.0
NCAAP
NCCLAS
77.0
32.8
28.8
33.8
NCEXTEND2 OCS
22.4
11.1
9.8
2003-04
2004-05
NCAAAI
2005-06
2006-07
2007-08
2008-09
2009-10
Notes: 1The writing standard, scale, and scoring model changed effective with the 2002-03 school year.
The data from 2002-03 are reported from the pilot test administration.
The vertical line indicates the NCAAAI was discontinued and replaced by NCCLAS in 2005-06. Beginning in the 2009-10 school year, NCCLAS is discontinued.
The NCAAP was discontinued and NCEXTEND2 OCS and NCEXTEND1 writing assessments were operationalized in 2006-07.
Data received from LEAs and charter schools after July 22, 2010 are not included in this figure.
Prepared by the NCDPI Division of Accountablility Services/Test Development Section.
Report of Student Performance in Writing, Grade 10, 2009-10
Figure 2. North Carolina Testing Program
North Carolina General Writing Assessment, 2009-10,
Percent of Students At or Above Level III,
Grade 10, by Gender and Ethnicity
White Female
85.8%
*N=28,036
Asian Female
81.0%
*N=1,296
Multi-Racial Female
80.9%
*N=1,485
Asian Male
73.3%
*N=1,344
White Male
72.4%
*N=28,456
Multi-Racial Male
70.2%
*N=1,351
Black Female
65.5%
*N=14,331
64.0%
Hispanic Female
*N=3,982
American Indian Female
62.2%
*N=651
Hispanic Male
52.5%
*N=3,976
Black Male
*N=13,347
American Indian Male
49.8%
*N=619
State
State Percent
50.0%
71.1%
*N=98,874
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
Percent of Students
Notes: *N counts equal the number of students who participated in the North Carolina General Writing Assessment.
When summed, gender/ethnicity N counts may not match the state N counts because a gender/ethnicity category may not have been
coded on some student answer sheets.
Data received from LEAs and charter schools after July 22, 2010 are not included in this figure.
Prepared by the NCDPI Division of Accountability Services/Test Development Section.
15
100%
Report of Student Performance in Writing, Grade 10, 2009-10
Figure 3. North Carolina Testing Program
North Carolina Writing Assessment (NCEXTEND2 OCS ), 2009-10,
Percent of Students At or Above Level III,
Grade 10, By Gender and Ethnicity
Multi-Racial Female
50.0%
*N=18
White Female
49.3%
*N=280
Black Female
41.1%
*N=353
Asian Female
33.3%
*N=6
Multi-Racial Male
32.3%
*N=31
White Male
31.6%
*N=567
30.4%
Hispanic Female
*N=46
29.3%
Hispanic Male
*N=99
28.6%
Asian Male
*N=7
Black Male
28.1%
American Indian Female
13.6%
*N=22
American Indian Male
State Percent
*N=683
Percent of Students
12.5%
*N=40
State
33.8%
*N=2,152
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Percent of Students
Notes: *N counts equal the number of students who participated in the North Carolina Writing Assessment (NCEXTEND2 OCS ).
Performance data are not reported when number tested is fewer than five. Performance data that are less than or equal to 5.0 percent, or greater
than or equal to 95.0 percent, are not displayed.
When summed, gender/ethnicity N counts may not match the state N counts because a gender/ethnicity category may not have been
coded on some student answer sheets.
Data received from LEAs and charter schools after July 22, 2010 are not included in this figure.
Prepared by the NCDPI Division of Accountability Services/Test Development Section.
16
Report of Student Performance in Writing, Grade 10, 2009-10
Figure 4. North Carolina Testing Program
North Carolina Writing Assessment (NCEXTEND1 ), 2009-10,
Percent of Students At or Above Level III,
Grade 10, By Gender and Ethnicity
Multi-Racial Male
62.5%
*N=8
Black Female
60.0%
*N=90
American Indian Male
57.1%
*N=7
Asian Male
55.6%
*N=9
White Male
55.1%
*N=198
Black Male
53.9%
*N=204
White Female
53.3%
*N=137
Asian Female
50.0%
State Percent
*N=6
Hispanic Male
*N=29
Multi-Racial Female
48.3%
40.0%
*N=5
Hispanic Female
38.1%
*N=21
Percent of Students
American Indian Female
**
*N=2
State
54.2%
*N=716
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Percent of Students
Notes: *N counts equal the number of students who participated in the North Carolina Writing Assessment (NCEXTEND1 ).
**Performance data are not reported when number tested is fewer than five. Performance data that are less than or equal to 5.0 percent, or greater
than or equal to 95.0 percent, are not displayed.
When summed, gender/ethnicity N counts may not match the state N counts because a gender/ethnicity category may not have been
coded on some student answer sheets.
Data received from LEAs and charter schools after July 22, 2010 are not included in this figure.
Prepared by the NCDPI Division of Accountability Services/Test Development Section.
17
Report of Student Performance in Writing, Grade 10, 2009-10
Table 10. North Carolina Testing Program
North Carolina Writing Assessments, 2009-10
Statewide Number of Students Participating in the General Assessment, Taking Alternate Assessments, and Number Not Tested
Grade 10
Not Tested
Category
18
All Students
Female
Male
American Indian
Asian
Black
Hispanic
Multi-Racial/Other
White
Economically Disadvantaged
Not Economically Disadvantaged
Title I
Not Title I
Schoolwide Title I
Targeted Assistance
Migrant
Not Migrant
Limited English Proficient (LEP)
Not Limited English Proficient
Not Exceptional
Academically/Intellectually Gifted
Students with IEPs
Students without IEPs
Students with Disabilities
Students without Disabilities
Autism
Deaf-Blindness
Deafness
Serious Emotional Disability
Hearing Impairment
Intellectual Disability-Mild
Intellectual Disability-Moderate
Intellectual Disability-Severe
Specific Learning Disability
Multiple Disabilities
Other Health Impairment
Orthopedic Impairment
Speech or Language Impairment
Traumatic Brain Injury
Visual Impairment incl. Blindness
Section 504
Notes:
Membership 1
Number
Tested2
(General
Writing)
104,527
51,994
52,533
1,390
2,763
30,200
8,476
2,982
58,716
44,379
60,148
5,489
99,038
4,358
1,094
39
104,488
3,635
100,892
75,533
17,384
11,610
92,917
12,219
92,308
577
1
3
671
133
1,518
312
56
5,308
134
2,570
63
177
39
48
609
98,874
49,781
49,093
1,270
2,640
27,678
7,958
2,836
56,492
40,751
58,123
4,958
93,916
3,980
944
36
98,838
3,194
95,680
73,391
17,306
8,177
90,697
8,775
90,099
260
0
0
511
98
266
0
0
4,695
4
2,067
46
168
20
42
598
Percent
(General
Writing)
Mean
General
Writing
Score
Percent
Proficient
General
Writing
Number
Alternate
Writing
Assessments
Percent
Alternate
Writing
Assessments
Percent
Proficient
Alternate
Writing
Assessments
Number of
Medical
Exclusions
100.0
50.3
49.7
1.3
2.7
28.0
8.0
2.9
57.1
41.2
58.8
5.0
95.0
4.0
1.0
0.0
100.0
3.2
96.8
74.2
17.5
8.3
91.7
8.9
91.1
0.3
0.0
0.0
0.5
0.1
0.3
0.0
0.0
4.7
0.0
2.1
0.0
0.2
0.0
0.0
0.6
11.7
12.2
11.2
10.6
12.7
10.7
10.8
12.1
12.3
10.7
12.4
10.8
11.8
10.7
11.0
9.4
11.7
8.6
11.8
11.5
13.8
9.1
12.0
9.2
12.0
10.5
*
*
8.7
9.2
6.9
*
*
9.0
*
9.2
9.7
10.3
10.3
11.3
11.0
71.1
77.6
64.4
56.1
77.1
58.0
58.3
75.8
79.0
58.3
80.0
59.2
71.7
58.7
61.5
47.2
71.1
28.9
72.5
69.5
>=95%
34.3
74.4
36.1
74.5
50.8
*
*
32.5
40.8
13.2
*
*
32.7
*
36.7
41.3
50.0
55.0
61.9
60.2
2,868
986
1,882
71
28
1,330
195
62
1,182
2,047
821
232
2,636
190
40
2
2,866
125
2,743
12
0
2,856
12
2,856
12
301
1
3
84
29
1,172
292
47
405
118
364
14
4
17
5
0
2.7
1.9
3.6
5.1
1.0
4.4
2.3
2.1
2.0
4.6
1.4
4.2
2.7
4.4
3.7
5.1
2.7
3.4
2.7
0.0
0.0
24.6
0.0
23.4
0.0
52.2
100.0
100.0
12.5
21.8
77.2
93.6
83.9
7.6
88.1
14.2
22.2
2.3
43.6
10.4
0.0
38.9
45.8
35.3
18.3
42.9
37.7
33.3
41.9
42.2
37.8
41.8
41.8
38.7
41.6
40.0
*
38.9
31.2
39.3
33.3
*
38.9
33.3
38.9
33.3
44.5
*
*
51.2
31.0
33.6
45.9
23.4
36.0
39.0
48.4
35.7
*
41.2
60.0
*
21
12
9
1
0
5
1
1
13
9
12
0
21
0
0
0
21
1
20
5
3
13
8
13
8
2
0
0
0
0
0
1
3
0
3
2
1
0
1
0
0
Number of Number
Number Percent
LEP
Absent or Number Partici- ParticiExclusions
Other
Eligible pating
pating
58
30
28
0
13
12
24
2
7
38
20
3
55
1
2
0
58
58
0
57
0
1
57
1
57
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2,706
1,185
1,521
48
82
1,175
298
81
1,022
1,534
1,172
296
2,410
187
108
1
2,705
257
2,449
2,068
75
563
2,143
574
2,132
14
0
0
76
6
80
19
6
207
9
137
2
5
1
1
11
1
"Membership" is the total number of students on the 2009-10 Disag_Students data file who were present on the first day of spring, 2010.
2
"Number Tested" is the number of students who participated in the North Carolina General Writing Assessment and is the denominator for Percent.
*Performance data are not reported when number tested is fewer than five. Performance data that are less than or equal to 5.0 percent, or greater than or equal to 95.0 percent, are not displayed.
Data received from LEAs and charter schools after July 22, 2010 are not included in this table.
Prepared by the NCDPI Division of Accountability Services/Test Development Section.
104,506
51,982
52,524
1,389
2,763
30,195
8,475
2,981
58,703
44,370
60,136
5,489
99,017
4,358
1,094
39
104,467
3,634
100,872
75,528
17,381
11,597
92,909
12,206
92,300
575
1
3
671
133
1,518
311
53
5,308
131
2,568
62
177
38
48
609
101,742
50,767
50,975
1,341
2,668
29,008
8,153
2,898
57,674
42,798
58,944
5,190
96,552
4,170
984
38
101,704
3,319
98,423
73,403
17,306
11,033
90,709
11,631
90,111
561
1
3
595
127
1,438
292
47
5,100
122
2,431
60
172
37
47
598
97.4
97.7
97.1
96.5
96.6
96.1
96.2
97.2
98.2
96.5
98.0
94.6
97.5
95.7
89.9
97.4
97.4
91.3
97.6
97.2
99.6
95.1
97.6
95.3
97.6
97.6
100.0
100.0
88.7
95.5
94.7
93.9
88.7
96.1
93.1
94.7
96.8
97.2
97.4
97.9
98.2
Percent
Proficient
All Tests
70.1
77.0
63.3
54.1
76.7
57.1
57.7
75.1
78.3
57.3
79.5
58.4
70.8
58.0
60.7
50.0
70.2
29.0
71.5
69.5
>=95%
35.5
74.4
36.8
74.4
47.4
*
*
35.1
38.6
29.8
45.9
23.4
32.9
38.5
38.5
40.0
50.0
48.6
61.7
60.2
Report of Student Performance in Writing, Grade 10, 2009-10
Table 11a. North Carolina Testing Program
North Carolina General Writing Assessment, 1991-92 to 2009-10,
Distribution of Achievement Levels Across Years,
Grade 10
Level 1
Achievement Levels
Level II
Level III
Level IV
Number At Level II Number At Level III
Percent At Level II Percent At Level III
Number At Level IV
Percent At Level IV
Grade 10
Number
Tested
Number At Level I
Percent At Level I
1991-92
69,582
1992-93
72,101
1993-94
72,789
1994-95
78,384
1995-96
79,951
1996-97
79,662
1997-98
81,261
1998-99
81,563
1999-00
82,418
2000-01
86,034
30,296
43.5
25,592
35.5
24,197
33.2
17,000
21.7
16,399
20.5
13,777
17.3
11,922
14.7
8,066
9.9
7,441
9.0
6,448
7.5
―
15,815
18.8
8,311
9.4
16,558
17.6
12,538
13.0
15,606
16.0
10,931
11.2
9,184
9.5
11,315
11.4
2001-02
1
―
2002-032
84,093
2003-04
88,633
2004-05
93,862
2005-06
96,496
2006-07
97,796
2007-08
97,833
2008-09
96,580
2009-10
98,874
23,799
34.2
27,220
37.8
25,103
34.5
31,064
39.6
24,800
31.0
26,258
33.0
31,995
39.4
27,156
33.3
27,150
32.9
33,192
38.6
―
34,701
41.3
33,793
38.1
32,446
34.6
32,548
33.7
31,934
32.7
16,119
16.5
18,023
18.7
17,309
17.5
12,308
17.7
14,730
20.4
17,703
24.3
25,258
32.2
26,269
32.9
29,881
37.5
29,204
35.9
32,680
40.1
35,712
43.3
37,512
43.6
―
32,705
38.9
46,010
51.9
44,617
47.5
50,145
52.0
49,517
50.6
68,996
70.5
66,798
69.2
68,159
68.9
Notes: 1The North Carolina Writing Assessment was not administered in grade 10 during the 2001-02 school year.
2
The writing standard, scale, and scoring model changed effective with the 2002-03 school year.
*Beginning in 2004-05, performance data are not reported when number tested is fewer than five. Performance
data that are less than or equal to 5.0 percent, or greater than or equal to 95.0 percent, are not displayed.
Data received from LEAs and charter schools after July 22, 2010 are not included in this table.
Prepared by the NCDPI Division of Accountability Services/Test Development Section.
19
3,179
4.6
4,559
6.3
5,786
7.9
5,020
6.4
12,483
15.6
9,746
12.2
8,140
10.0
13,661
16.7
12,115
14.7
8,882
10.3
―
872
1.0
519
0.6
*
<=5.0%
*
<=5.0%
*
<=5.0%
*
<=5.0%
*
<=5.0%
*
<=5.0%
Table 11b. North Carolina Testing Program
NCEXTEND2 OCS Writing Assessment, 2006-07 to 2009-10,
Distribution of Achievement Levels Across Years,
Grade 10
Level I
Grade 10
Achievement Levels
Level II
Level III
Level IV
Number Number At Level I Number At Level II Number At Level III Number At Level IV
Tested Percent At Level I Percent At Level II Percent At Level III Percent At Level IV
2006-07
2,143
2007-08
2,196
2008-09
2,099
2009-10
2,152
716
33.4
845
38.5
736
35.1
736
34.2
809
37.8
858
39.1
674
32.1
688
32
572
26.7
480
21.9
641
30.5
702
32.6
*
<=5.0%
*
<=5.0%
*
<=5.0%
*
<=5.0%
Table 11c. North Carolina Testing Program
NCEXTEND1 Test of Writing, 2006-07 to 2009-10,
Distribution of Achievement Levels Across Years,
Grade 10
Level I
Grade 10
Achievement Levels
Level II
Level III
Level IV
Number Number At Level I Number At Level II Number At Level III Number At Level IV
Tested Percent At Level I Percent At Level II Percent At Level III Percent At Level IV
2006-07
681
2007-08
630
2008-09
690
2009-10
716
91
13.4
97
15.4
107
15.5
81.0
11.3
*
<=5.0%
217
34.4
297
43.0
247.0
34.5
108
15.9
261
41.4
264
38.3
292.0
40.8
Notes: *Performance data are not reported when number tested is fewer than five. Performance data that
are less than or equal to 5.0 percent, or greater than or equal to 95.0 percent, are not displayed.
Data received from LEAs and charter schools after July 22, 2010 are not included in this table.
Prepared by the NCDPI Division of Accountability Services/Test Development Section.
20
463
68.0
55
8.7
*
<=5.0%
96.0
13.4
Report of Student Performance in Writing, Grade 10, 2009-10
Table 12a. North Carolina Testing Program
North Carolina General Writing Assessment, 2009-10
Performance of Exceptional, Limited English Proficient, Title I, and Economically Disadvantaged Students
Grade 10
Category
21
All Students
Female
Male
American Indian
Asian
Black
Hispanic
Multi-Racial/Other
White
Economically Disadvantaged
Not Served by Title I
Schoolwide Title I
Targeted Assistance
Migrant
Limited English Proficient (LEP)
Academically/Intellectually Gifted
AIG Reading
AIG Mathematics
Students with IEPs
Students with Disabilities
Autism
Deaf-Blindness
Deafness
Serious Emotional Disability
Hearing Impairment
Intellectual Disability-Mild
Intellectual Disability-Moderate
Intellectual Disability-Severe
Number
Tested1
(General)
98,874
49,781
49,093
1,270
2,640
27,678
7,958
2,836
56,492
40,751
93,916
3,980
944
36
3,194
17,306
14,207
15,142
8,177
8,775
260
0
0
511
98
266
0
0
Percent2
(General)
Number
At or
Above
Level III
Percent
At or
Above
Level III
Number
At
Level I
Percent
At
Level I
Number
At
Level II
Percent
At
Level II
Number
At
Level III
Percent
At
Level III
Number
At
Level IV
Percent
At
Level IV
100.0
50.3
49.7
1.3
2.7
28.0
8.0
2.9
57.1
41.2
95.0
4.0
1.0
0.0
3.2
17.5
14.4
15.3
8.3
8.9
0.3
0.0
0.0
0.5
0.1
0.3
0.0
0.0
70,250
38,644
31,606
713
2,035
16,063
4,637
2,149
44,653
23,755
67,315
2,338
581
17
923
*
*
14,370
2,807
3,167
132
*
*
166
40
35
*
*
71.1
77.6
64.4
56.1
77.1
58.0
58.3
75.8
79.0
58.3
71.7
58.7
61.5
47.2
28.9
>=95%
>=95%
94.9
34.3
36.1
50.8
*
*
32.5
40.8
13.2
*
*
11,315
3,828
7,487
229
280
4,844
1,477
245
4,240
7,144
10,449
707
147
12
1,257
*
*
*
2,851
2,950
68
*
*
217
33
167
*
*
11.4
7.7
15.3
18.0
10.6
17.5
18.6
8.6
7.5
17.5
11.1
17.8
15.6
33.3
39.4
<=5%
<=5%
<=5%
34.9
33.6
26.2
*
*
42.5
33.7
62.8
*
*
17,309
7,309
10,000
328
325
6,771
1,844
442
7,599
9,852
16,152
935
216
7
1,014
*
*
*
2,519
2,658
60
*
*
128
25
64
*
*
17.5
14.7
20.4
25.8
12.3
24.5
23.2
15.6
13.5
24.2
17.2
23.5
22.9
19.4
31.7
<=5%
<=5%
<=5%
30.8
30.3
23.1
*
*
25.0
25.5
24.1
*
*
68,159
37,372
30,787
703
1,848
15,862
4,561
2,093
43,092
23,485
65,251
2,313
579
17
919
15,282
12,514
13,302
2,768
3,116
125
*
*
163
40
34
*
*
68.9
75.1
62.7
55.4
70.0
57.3
57.3
73.8
76.3
57.6
69.5
58.1
61.3
47.2
28.8
88.3
88.1
87.8
33.9
35.5
48.1
*
*
31.9
40.8
12.8
*
*
*
*
*
*
187
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
1,173
1,071
1,068
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
<=5%
<=5%
<=5%
<=5%
7.1
<=5%
<=5%
<=5%
<=5%
<=5%
<=5%
<=5%
<=5%
<=5%
<=5%
6.8
7.5
7.1
<=5%
<=5%
<=5%
*
*
<=5%
<=5%
<=5%
*
*
Notes: 1"Number Tested" is the number of students who participated in the North Carolina General Writing Assessment
2
"Percent" is calculated based on the number tested in the "All Students" category.
*Performance data are not reported when membership is fewer than five. Performance data that are less than or equal to 5.0 percent, or greater than or equal to 95.0 percent, are not displayed.
The total for "Students with Disabilities" includes Section 504. Some categories may not add up to the total due to missing coding.
Data received from LEAs and charter schools after July 22, 2010 are not included in this table.
Prepared by the NCDPI Division of Accountability Services/Test Development Section.
Report of Student Performance in Writing, Grade 10, 2009-10
Table 12a. (cont.) North Carolina Testing Program
North Carolina General Writing Assessment, 2009-10
Performance of Exceptional, Limited English Proficient, Title I, and Economically Disadvantaged Students
Grade 10
Category
Percent2
(General)
Number
At or
Above
Percent
At or
Above
Number
At
Percent
At
Number
At
Percent
At
Number
At
Percent
At
Number
At
Percent
At
Level III
Level III
Level I
Level I
Level II
Level II
Level III
Level III
Level IV
Level IV
4,695
2,402
1,171
1,953
116
4
2,067
46
168
20
42
598
4.7
2.4
1.2
2.0
0.1
0.0
2.1
0.0
0.2
0.0
0.0
0.6
1,534
667
320
554
46
*
759
19
84
11
26
360
32.7
27.8
27.3
28.4
39.7
*
36.7
41.3
50.0
55.0
61.9
60.2
1,599
900
452
729
39
*
700
14
40
6
6
99
34.1
37.5
38.6
37.3
33.6
*
33.9
30.4
23.8
30.0
14.3
16.6
1,562
835
399
670
31
*
608
13
44
3
10
139
33.3
34.8
34.1
34.3
26.7
*
29.4
28.3
26.2
15.0
23.8
23.2
1,519
662
315
549
45
*
750
19
81
11
25
348
32.4
27.6
26.9
28.1
38.8
*
36.3
41.3
48.2
55.0
59.5
58.2
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
<=5%
<=5%
<=5%
<=5%
<=5%
*
<=5%
<=5%
<=5%
<=5%
<=5%
<=5%
7
32
57
4
0
81
25
8
325
3,037
147
16
529
6,589
5,366
876
0
56
1
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.3
3.1
0.1
0.0
0.5
6.7
5.4
0.9
0.0
0.1
0.0
6
18
39
*
*
5
7
6
85
673
105
5
154
2,222
1,589
193
*
19
*
85.7
56.3
68.4
*
*
6.2
28.0
75.0
26.2
22.2
71.4
31.3
29.1
33.7
29.6
22.0
*
33.9
*
1
7
9
*
*
32
12
*
119
1,365
13
6
214
2,309
2,099
434
*
19
*
14.3
21.9
15.8
*
*
39.5
48.0
*
36.6
44.9
8.8
37.5
40.5
35.0
39.1
49.5
*
33.9
*
*
7
9
*
*
44
6
2
121
999
29
5
161
2,058
1,678
249
*
18
*
*
21.9
15.8
*
*
54.3
24.0
25.0
37.2
32.9
19.7
31.3
30.4
31.2
31.3
28.4
*
32.1
*
5
18
36
*
*
5
7
6
85
670
87
5
151
2,183
1,575
192
*
18
*
71.4
56.3
63.2
*
*
6.2
28.0
75.0
26.2
22.1
59.2
31.3
28.5
33.1
29.4
21.9
*
32.1
*
1
*
3
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
18
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
14.3
<=5%
5.3
*
*
<=5%
<=5%
*
<=5%
<=5%
12.2
*
<=5%
<=5%
<=5%
<=5%
*
<=5%
*
Number
Tested1
(General)
Students with Disabilities (continued)
22
Specific Learning Disability
Learning Disabled-Reading
Learning Disabled-Mathematics
Learning Disabled-Writing
Learning Disabled-Other
Multiple Disabiliities
Other Health Impairment
Orthopedic Impairment
Speech or Language Impairment
Traumatic Brain Injury
Visual Impairment incl. Blindness
Section 504
Accommodations
Braille Edition
Large Print
Assistive Technology
Braille Writer/Slate & Stylus
Cranmer Abacus
Dictation to Scribe
Interpreter Signs/Cues Test
Magnification Devices
Student Marks in Test Book
Test Administrator Reads Test Aloud
Use Of Typewriter or Word Processor
Hospital/Home Testing
Multiple Test Sessions
Scheduled Extended Time
Testing in a Separate Room
English/Native Lang. Dictionary/Electronic Translator
One Item per Page
Read Test Aloud to Self
Accommodation Notification Form
Notes: 1"Number Tested" is the number of students who participated in the North Carolina General Writing Assessment
2
"Percent" is calculated based on the number tested in the "All Students" category.
*Performance data are not reported when membership is fewer than five. Performance data that are less than or equal to 5.0 percent, or greater than or equal to 95.0 percent, are not displayed.
The total for "Students with Disabilities" includes Section 504. Some categories may not add up to the total due to missing coding.
Data received from LEAs and charter schools after July 22, 2010 are not included in this table.
Prepared by the NCDPI Division of Accountability Services/Test Development Section.
Report of Student Performance in Writing, Grade 10, 2009-10
Table 12b. North Carolina Testing Program
North Carolina Writing Assessment (NCEXTEND2 OCS ), 2009-10
Performance of Exceptional, Limited English Proficient, Title I, and Economically Disadvantaged Students
Grade 10
Category
23
All Students
Female
Male
American Indian
Asian
Black
Hispanic
Multi-Racial/Other
White
Economically Disadvantaged
Not Served by Title I
Schoolwide Title I
Targeted Assistance
Migrant
Limited English Proficient (LEP)
Academically/Intellectually Gifted
AIG Reading
AIG Mathematics
Students with IEPs
Students with Disabilities 3
Autism
Deaf-Blindness
Deafness
Serious Emotional Disability
Hearing Impairment
Intellectual Disability-Mild
Intellectual Disability-Moderate
Intellectual Disability-Severe
Number Tested1
(NCEXTEND2
OCS )
Percent2
(NCEXTEND2
OCS )
Number
At or
Above
Level III
Percent
At or
Above
Level III
Number
At
Level I
Percent
At
Level I
Number
At
Level II
Percent
At
Level II
Number
At
Level III
Percent
At
Level III
Number
At
Level IV
Percent
At
Level IV
2,152
725
1,427
62
13
1,036
145
49
847
1,571
1,991
125
35
1
107
0
0
0
2,141
100.0
33.7
66.3
2.9
0.6
48.1
6.7
2.3
39.4
73.0
92.5
5.8
1.6
0.0
5.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
99.5
728
311
417
8
4
337
43
19
317
512
664
50
13
*
30
*
*
*
725
33.8
42.9
29.2
12.9
30.8
32.5
29.7
38.8
37.4
32.6
33.4
40.0
37.1
*
28.0
*
*
*
33.9
736
183
553
31
8
346
62
16
273
538
686
36
14
*
46
*
*
*
734
34.2
25.2
38.8
50.0
61.5
33.4
42.8
32.7
32.2
34.2
34.5
28.8
40.0
*
43.0
*
*
*
34.3
688
231
457
23
1
353
40
14
257
521
641
39
8
*
31
*
*
*
682
32.0
31.9
32.0
37.1
7.7
34.1
27.6
28.6
30.3
33.2
32.2
31.2
22.9
*
29.0
*
*
*
31.9
702
300
402
8
4
325
42
19
304
495
646
43
12
*
29
*
*
*
699
32.6
41.4
28.2
12.9
30.8
31.4
29.0
38.8
35.9
31.5
32.4
34.4
34.3
*
27.1
*
*
*
32.6
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
7
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
<=5%
<=5%
<=5%
<=5%
*
<=5%
<=5%
<=5%
<=5%
<=5%
<=5%
5.6
<=5%
*
<=5%
*
*
*
<=5%
2,141
131
1
3
80
26
1,073
38
0
99.5
6.1
0.0
0.1
3.7
1.2
49.9
1.8
0.0
725
50
*
*
39
7
310
2
*
33.9
38.2
*
*
48.8
26.9
28.9
5.3
*
734
60
*
*
20
16
386
29
*
34.3
45.8
*
*
25.0
61.5
36.0
76.3
*
682
21
*
*
21
3
377
7
*
31.9
16.0
*
*
26.3
11.5
35.1
18.4
*
699
46
*
*
38
7
302
2
*
32.6
35.1
*
*
47.5
26.9
28.1
5.3
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
<=5%
<=5%
*
*
<=5%
<=5%
<=5%
<=5%
*
(
OCS ).
Notes: 1"Number Tested" is the number of students who participated in the North Carolina Writing Assessment NCEXTEND2
2
"Percent" is calculated based on the number tested in the "All Students" category.
3
Some students were miscoded as "not exceptional" in source data.
*Performance data are not reported when membership is fewer than five. Performance data that are less than or equal to 5.0 percent, or greater than or equal to 95.0 percent, are not displayed.
The total for "Students with Disabilities" includes Section 504. Some categories may not add up to the total due to missing coding.
Data received from LEAs and charter schools after July 22, 2010 are not included in this table.
Prepared by the NCDPI Division of Accountability Services/Test Development Section.
Report of Student Performance in Writing, Grade 10, 2009-10
Table 12b. (cont.) North Carolina Testing Program
North Carolina Writing Assessment (NCEXTEND2 OCS ), 2009-10
Performance of Exceptional, Limited English Proficient, Title I, and Economically Disadvantaged Students
Grade 10
Category
24
Students with Disabilities (continued)
Specific Learning Disability
Learning Disabled-Reading
Learning Disabled-Mathematics
Learning Disabled-Writing
Learning Disabled-Other
Multiple Disabiliities
Other Health Impairment
Orthopedic Impairment
Speech or Language Impairment
Traumatic Brain Injury
Visual Impairment incl. Blindness
Section 504
Miscoded
Accommodations
Braille Edition
Large Print
Assistive Technology
Braille Writer/Slate & Stylus
Cranmer Abacus
Dictation to Scribe
Interpreter Signs/Cues Test
Magnification Devices
Student Marks in Test Book
Test Administrator Reads Test Aloud
Use Of Typewriter or Word Processor
Hospital/Home Testing
Multiple Test Sessions
Scheduled Extended Time
Testing in a Separate Room
English/Native Lang. Dictionary/Electronic Translator
One Item per Page
Read Test Aloud to Self
Accommodation Notification Form
Number Tested1
(NCEXTEND2
OCS )
Percent2
(NCEXTEND2
OCS )
Number
At or
Above
Percent
At or
Above
Number
At
Percent
At
Number
At
Percent
At
Number
At
Percent
At
Number
At
Percent
At
Level III
Level III
Level I
Level I
Level II
Level II
Level III
Level III
Level IV
Level IV
404
316
233
249
55
26
334
7
4
10
4
0
11
18.8
14.7
10.8
11.6
2.6
1.2
15.5
0.3
0.2
0.5
0.2
0.0
145
106
80
87
17
9
153
1
*
3
*
*
35.9
33.5
34.3
34.9
30.9
34.6
45.8
14.3
*
30.0
*
*
117
97
69
77
15
13
81
4
*
4
*
*
29.0
30.7
29.6
30.9
27.3
50.0
24.3
57.1
*
40.0
*
*
142
113
84
85
23
4
100
2
*
3
*
*
35.1
35.8
36.1
34.1
41.8
15.4
29.9
28.6
*
30.0
*
*
141
101
77
85
17
8
145
1
*
3
*
*
34.9
32.0
33.0
34.1
30.9
30.8
43.4
14.3
*
30.0
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
<=5%
<=5%
<=5%
<=5%
<=5%
<=5%
<=5%
*
*
*
*
*
1
9
11
1
0
54
11
1
249
1,537
12
15
182
1,450
1,674
5
0
32
0
0.0
0.4
0.5
0.0
0.0
2.5
0.5
0.0
11.6
71.4
0.6
0.7
8.5
67.4
77.8
0.2
0.0
1.5
0.0
*
3
3
*
*
11
2
*
83
509
5
4
62
511
567
2
*
13
*
*
33.3
27.3
*
*
20.4
18.2
*
33.3
33.1
41.7
26.7
34.1
35.2
33.9
40.0
*
40.6
*
*
5
8
*
*
23
8
*
84
520
6
7
58
479
552
2
*
12
*
*
55.6
72.7
*
*
42.6
72.7
*
33.7
33.8
50.0
46.7
31.9
33.0
33.0
40.0
*
37.5
*
*
1
*
*
*
20
1
*
82
508
1
4
62
460
555
1
*
7
*
*
11.1
*
*
*
37.0
9.1
*
32.9
33.1
8.3
26.7
34.1
31.7
33.2
20.0
*
21.9
*
*
3
3
*
*
11
2
*
81
493
4
4
60
490
545
2
*
13
*
*
33.3
27.3
*
*
20.4
18.2
*
32.5
32.1
33.3
26.7
33.0
33.8
32.6
40.0
*
40.6
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
1
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
<=5%
*
*
<=5%
<=5%
8.3
*
<=5%
<=5%
<=5%
*
*
<=5%
*
Notes: 1"Number Tested" is the number of students who participated in the North Carolina Writing Assessment NCEXTEND2
(
OCS ).
2
"Percent" is calculated based on the number tested in the "All Students" category.
*Performance data are not reported when membership is fewer than five. Performance data that are less than or equal to 5.0 percent, or greater than or equal to 95.0 percent, are not displayed.
The total for "Students with Disabilities" includes Section 504. Some categories may not add up to the total due to missing coding.
Data received from LEAs and charter schools after July 22, 2010 are not included in this table.
Prepared by the NCDPI Division of Accountability Services/Test Development Section.
Report of Student Performance in Writing, Grade 10, 2009-10
Table 12c. North Carolina Testing Program
North Carolina Writing Assessment (NCEXTEND1 ), 2009-10
Performance of Exceptional, Limited English Proficient, Title I, and Economically Disadvantaged Students
Grade 10
Category
25
All Students
Female
Male
American Indian
Asian
Black
Hispanic
Multi-Racial/Other
White
Economically Disadvantaged
Not Served by Title I
Schoolwide Title I
Targeted Assistance
Migrant
Limited English Proficient (LEP)
Academically/Intellectually Gifted
AIG Reading
AIG Mathematics
Students with IEPS
Students with Disabilities3
Autism
Deaf-Blindness
Deafness
Serious Emotional Disability
Hearing Impairment
Intellectual Disability-Mild
Intellectual Disability-Moderate
Intellectual Disability-Severe
Specific Learning Disability
Learning Disabled-Reading
Learning Disabled-Mathematics
Learning Disabled-Writing
Learning Disabled-Other
Multiple Disabiliities
Other Health Impairment
Orthopedic Impairment
Speech or Language Impairment
Traumatic Brain Injury
Visual Impairment incl. Blindness
Section 504
Miscoded
1
2
Number Tested
Percent
(NCEXTEND1 ) (NCEXTEND1 )
Number
At or
Above
Level III
Percent
At or
Above
Level III
Number
At
Level I
Percent
At
Level I
Number
At
Level II
Percent
At
Level II
Number
At
Level III
Percent
At
Level III
Number
At
Level IV
Percent
At
Level IV
716
261
455
9
15
294
50
13
335
476
645
65
5
1
18
0
0
0
715
100.0
36.5
63.5
1.3
2.1
41.1
7.0
1.8
46.8
66.5
90.1
9.1
0.7
0.1
2.5
0.0
0.0
0.0
99.9
388
141
247
5
8
164
22
7
182
261
355
29
3
*
9
*
*
*
387
54.2
54.0
54.3
55.6
53.3
55.8
44.0
53.8
54.3
54.8
55.0
44.6
60.0
*
50.0
*
*
*
54.1
81
32
49
1
5
30
4
2
39
48
69
12
*
*
3
*
*
*
81
11.3
12.3
10.8
11.1
33.3
10.2
8.0
15.4
11.6
10.1
10.7
18.5
*
*
16.7
*
*
*
11.3
247
88
159
3
2
100
24
4
114
167
221
24
2
*
6
*
*
*
247
34.5
33.7
34.9
33.3
13.3
34.0
48.0
30.8
34.0
35.1
34.3
36.9
40.0
*
33.3
*
*
*
34.5
292
100
192
4
6
125
19
5
133
200
263
25
3
*
7
*
*
*
291
40.8
38.3
42.2
44.4
40.0
42.5
38.0
38.5
39.7
42.0
40.8
38.5
60.0
*
38.9
*
*
*
40.7
96
41
55
1
2
39
3
2
49
61
92
4
*
*
2
*
*
*
96
13.4
15.7
12.1
11.1
13.3
13.3
6.0
15.4
14.6
12.8
14.3
6.2
*
*
11.1
*
*
*
13.4
715
170
0
0
4
3
99
254
47
1
0
0
0
0
92
30
7
0
7
1
0
1
99.9
23.7
0.0
0.0
0.6
0.4
13.8
35.5
6.6
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
12.8
4.2
1.0
0.0
1.0
0.1
0.0
387
84
*
*
*
*
84
132
11
*
*
*
*
*
37
23
4
*
4
*
*
54.1
49.4
*
*
*
*
84.8
52.0
23.4
*
*
*
*
*
40.2
76.7
57.1
*
57.1
*
*
81
20
*
*
*
*
*
16
14
*
*
*
*
*
27
3
*
*
*
*
*
11.3
11.8
*
*
*
*
<=5%
6.3
29.8
*
*
*
*
*
29.3
10.0
*
*
*
*
*
247
66
*
*
*
*
14
106
22
*
*
*
*
*
28
4
3
*
3
*
*
34.5
38.8
*
*
*
*
14.1
41.7
46.8
*
*
*
*
*
30.4
13.3
42.9
*
42.9
*
*
291
60.0
*
*
*
*
56
109
9
*
*
*
*
*
33
12
3
*
3
*
*
40.7
35.3
*
*
*
*
56.6
42.9
19.1
*
*
*
*
*
35.9
40.0
42.9
*
42.9
*
*
96
24
*
*
*
*
28
23
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
11
1
*
1
*
*
13.4
14.1
*
*
*
*
28.3
9.1
<=5%
*
*
*
*
*
<=5%
36.7
14.3
*
14.3
*
*
Notes: 1"Number Tested" is the number of students who participated in the NCEXTEND1 Writing Assessment.
2
"Percent" is calculated based on the number tested in the "All Students" category.
3
Some students were miscoded as "not exceptional" in source data.
*Performance data are not reported when membership is fewer than five. Performance data that are less than or equal to 5.0 percent, or greater than or equal to 95.0 percent, are not displayed.
The total for "Students with Disabilities" includes Section 504. Some categories may not add up to the total due to missing coding.
Data received from LEAs and charter schools after July 22, 2010 are not included in this table.
Prepared by the NCDPI Division of Accountability Services/Test Development Section.
Report of Student Performance in Writing, Grade 10, 2009-10
Table 13a. North Carolina Testing Program
North Carolina General Writing Assessment, 2009-10
Average Score,
Grade 10
Category
26
All Students
Female
Male
American Indian
Asian
Black
Hispanic
Multi-Racial/Other
White
Economically Disadvantaged
Not Served by Title I
Schoolwide Title I
Targeted Assistance
Migrant
Limited English Proficient (LEP)
Academically/Intellectually Gifted
AIG Reading
AIG Mathematics
Students with IEPs
Students with Disabilities
Autism
Deaf-Blindness
Deafness
Serious Emotional Disability
Hearing Impairment
Intellectual Disability-Mild
Intellectual Disability-Moderate
Intellectual Disability-Severe
1
Number
Tested1
(General)
Percent2
(General)
98,874
49,781
49,093
1,270
2,640
27,678
7,958
2,836
56,492
40,751
93,916
3,980
944
36
3,194
17,306
14,207
15,142
8,177
8,775
260
0
0
511
98
266
0
0
100.0
50.3
49.7
1.3
2.7
28.0
8.0
2.9
57.1
41.2
95.0
4.0
1.0
0.0
3.2
17.5
14.4
15.3
8.3
8.9
0.3
0.0
0.0
0.5
0.1
0.3
0.0
0.0
Average
Average Total
Weighted
Writing Score Content Score
11.7
12.2
11.2
10.6
12.7
10.7
10.8
12.1
12.3
10.7
11.8
10.7
11.0
9.4
8.6
13.8
13.9
13.9
9.1
9.2
10.5
*
*
8.7
9.2
6.9
*
*
8.4
8.7
8.1
7.6
9.3
7.7
7.8
8.6
8.8
7.7
8.4
7.7
7.9
6.8
6.6
9.9
10.0
10.0
6.8
6.9
7.4
*
*
6.4
7.0
5.6
*
*
Notes: "Number Tested" is the number of students who participated in the North Carolina Writing Assessment.
2
"Percent" is calculated based on the number tested in the "All Students" category.
*Performance data are not reported when number tested is fewer than five.
The total for "Students with Disabilities" includes Section 504. Some categories may not add up to the total due to missing coding.
Data received from LEAs and charter schools after July 22, 2010 are not included in this table.
Prepared by the NCDPI Division of Accountability Services/Test Development Section.
Average
Conventions
Score
Number
Non-scorable
Percent
Non-scorable
3.3
3.5
3.1
3.0
3.3
3.0
2.9
3.5
3.5
3.0
3.3
3.0
3.0
2.3
1.9
3.9
3.9
3.9
2.2
2.3
2.8
*
*
2.1
2.3
1.3
*
*
231
71
160
3
16
76
32
7
97
151
213
12
5
1
39
3
2
2
49
52
6
*
*
7
0
2
*
*
0.2
0.1
0.2
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.2
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.0
*
*
0.0
0.0
0.0
*
*
Report of Student Performance in Writing, Grade 10, 2009-10
Table 13a. (cont.) North Carolina Testing Program
North Carolina General Writing Assessment, 2009-10
Average Score,
Grade 10
Category
27
Students with Disabilities (continued)
Specific Learning Disability
Learning Disabled-Reading
Learning Disabled-Mathematics
Learning Disabled-Writing
Learning Disabled-Other
Multiple Disabiliities
Other Health Impairment
Orthopedic Impairment
Speech or Language Impairment
Traumatic Brain Injury
Visual Impairment incl. Blindness
Section 504
Accommodations
Braille Edition
Large Print
Assistive Technology
Braille Writer/Slate & Stylus
Cramner Abacus
Dictation to Scribe
Interpreter Signs/Cues Test
Magnification Devices
Student Marks in Test Book
Test Administrator Reads Test Aloud
Use Of Typewriter or Word Processor
Hospital/Home Testing
Multiple Test Sessions
Scheduled Extended Time
Testing in a Separate Room
English/Native Lang. Dictionary/Electronic Translator
One Item per Page
Read Test Aloud to Self
Accommodation Notification Form
Number
Tested1
(General)
Percent2
(General)
4,695
2,402
1,171
1,953
116
4
2,067
46
168
20
42
598
4.7
2.4
1.2
2.0
0.1
0.0
2.1
0.0
0.2
0.0
0.0
0.6
9.0
8.6
8.6
8.7
9.3
*
9.2
9.7
10.3
10.3
11.3
11.0
7
32
57
4
0
81
25
8
325
3,037
147
16
529
6,589
5,366
876
0
56
1
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.3
3.1
0.1
0.0
0.5
6.7
5.4
0.9
0.0
0.1
0.0
14.0
10.6
11.6
*
*
7.2
8.0
11.9
8.6
8.1
12.7
8.6
8.7
9.0
8.7
7.8
*
9.3
*
Average
Average Total
Weighted
Writing Score Content Score
Average
Conventions
Score
Number
Non-scorable
Percent
Non-scorable
6.8
6.7
6.6
6.7
6.9
*
6.8
7.3
7.5
7.3
8.2
7.9
2.1
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.3
*
2.3
2.4
2.7
3.0
3.0
3.1
25
7
5
9
1
*
7
0
2
0
0
3
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
*
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
10.3
7.8
8.7
*
*
7.2
6.3
9.0
6.7
6.3
9.5
6.4
6.6
6.8
6.6
6.1
*
7.2
*
3.7
2.8
2.9
*
*
0.0
1.6
2.9
1.9
1.7
3.2
2.2
2.0
2.1
2.0
1.5
*
2.1
*
0
0
0
*
*
0
0
0
0
17
0
0
8
47
41
20
*
0
*
0.0
0.0
0.0
*
*
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
*
0.0
*
Notes: 1"Number Tested" is the number of students who participated in the North Carolina Writing Assessment.
2
"Percent" is calculated based on the number tested in the "All Students" category.
*Performance data are not reported when number tested is fewer than five.
The total for "Students with Disabilities" includes Section 504. Some categories may not add up to the total due to missing coding
Data received from LEAs and charter schools after July 22, 2010 are not included in this table.
Prepared by the NCDPI Division of Accountability Services/Test Development Section.
Report of Student Performance in Writing, Grade 10, 2009-10
Table 13b. North Carolina Testing Program
North Carolina Writing Assessment (NCEXTEND2 OCS ), 2009-10
Average Score,
Grade 10
Category
28
All Students
Female
Male
American Indian
Asian
Black
Hispanic
Multi-Racial/Other
White
Economically Disadvantaged
Not Served by Title I
Schoolwide Title I
Targeted Assistance
Migrant
Limited English Proficient (LEP)
Students with IEPs
Students with Disabilities3
Autism
Deaf-Blindness
Deafness
Serious Emotional Disability
Hearing Impairment
Intellectual Disability-Mild
Intellectual Disability-Moderate
Intellectual Disability-Severe
Number Tested1
Percent2
(NCEXTEND2 (NCEXTEND2
OCS )
OCS )
2,152
725
1,427
62
13
1,036
145
49
847
1,571
1,991
125
35
1
107
2,141
2,141
131
1
3
80
26
1,073
38
0
100.0
33.7
66.3
2.9
0.6
48.1
6.7
2.3
39.4
73.0
92.5
5.8
1.6
0.0
5.0
99.5
99.5
6.1
0.0
0.1
3.7
1.2
49.9
1.8
0.0
Average
Average Total
Weighted
Writing Score Content Score
9.3
10.1
8.9
7.5
7.8
9.3
8.7
9.3
9.6
9.2
9.2
10.2
8.9
*
8.5
9.3
9.3
9.4
*
*
10.2
7.7
8.9
5.8
*
7.1
7.6
6.9
6.1
5.5
7.1
6.5
7.1
7.3
7.1
7.1
7.9
6.9
*
6.4
7.1
7.1
6.6
*
*
7.5
6.2
6.9
4.5
*
Notes: 1"Number Tested" is the number of students who participated in the North Carolina Writing Assessment (NCEXTEND2 OCS ).
2
"Percent" is calculated based on the number tested in the "All Students" category.
3
Some students were miscoded as "not exceptional" in source data.
*Performance data are not reported when number tested is fewer than five.
The total for "Students with Disabilities" includes Section 504. Some categories may not add up to the total due to missing coding.
Starting in 2007-08, the disability categories were revised.
Data received from LEAs and charter schools after July 22, 2010 are not included in this table.
Prepared by the NCDPI Division of Accountability Services/Test Development Section.
Average
Conventions
Score
Number
Non-scorable
Percent
Non-scorable
2.0
2.3
1.8
1.2
1.6
2.0
1.7
2.2
2.0
1.9
1.9
2.1
1.9
*
1.6
2.0
2.0
2.1
*
*
2.4
1.3
1.8
0.6
*
50
13
37
1
1
23
6
0
19
32
48
2
0
*
7
50
50
9
*
*
2
1
26
5
*
2.3
0.6
1.7
0.0
0.0
1.1
0.3
0.0
0.9
1.5
2.2
0.1
0.0
*
0.3
0.0
2.3
0.4
*
*
0.1
0.0
1.2
0.2
*
Report of Student Performance in Writing, Grade 10, 2009-10
Table 13b. (cont.) North Carolina Testing Program
North Carolina Writing Assessment (NCEXTEND2 OCS ), 2009-10
Average Score,
Grade 10
Category
29
Students with Disabilities (continued)
Specific Learning Disability
Learning Disabled-Reading
Learning Disabled-Mathematics
Learning Disabled-Writing
Learning Disabled-Other
Multiple Disabiliities
Other Health Impairment
Orthopedic Impairment
Speech or Language Impairment
Traumatic Brain Injury
Visual Impairment incl. Blindness
Section 504
Miscoded
Accommodations
Braille Edition
Large Print
Assistive Technology
Braille Writer/Slate & Stylus
Cramner Abacus
Dictation to Scribe
Interpreter Signs/Cues Test
Magnification Devices
Student Marks in Test Book
Test Administrator Reads Test Aloud
Use Of Typewriter or Word Processor
Hospital/Home Testing
Multiple Test Sessions
Scheduled Extended Time
Testing in a Separate Room
English/Native Lang. Dictionary/Electronic Translator
One Item per Page
Read Test Aloud to Self
Accommodation Notification Form
1
Number Tested1
Percent2
(NCEXTEND2 (NCEXTEND2
OCS )
OCS )
Average
Average Total
Weighted
Writing Score Content Score
Average
Conventions
Score
Number
Non-scorable
Percent
Non-scorable
404
316
233
249
55
26
334
7
4
10
4
0
11
18.8
14.7
10.8
11.6
2.6
1.2
15.5
0.3
0.2
0.5
0.2
0.0
9.7
9.5
9.6
9.4
9.2
8.5
10.3
7.3
*
8.8
*
*
7.5
7.4
7.4
7.3
7.1
6.8
7.9
5.7
*
7.2
*
*
2.1
2.0
2.0
2.0
1.8
1.0
2.3
1.6
*
1.6
*
*
4
5
5
3
2
2
1
0
*
0
*
*
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.0
*
0.0
*
*
1
9
11
1
0
54
11
1
249
1,537
12
15
182
1,450
1,674
5
0
32
0
0.0
0.4
0.5
0.0
0.0
2.5
0.5
0.0
11.6
71.4
0.6
0.7
8.5
67.4
77.8
0.2
0.0
1.5
0.0
*
8.5
7.3
*
*
7.6
6.2
*
9.2
9.3
9.2
8.1
9.4
9.4
9.4
9.2
*
9.3
*
*
6.7
4.0
*
*
7.0
4.7
*
7.2
7.1
6.5
6.1
7.2
7.2
7.2
7.2
*
7.1
*
*
0.9
1.3
*
*
0.0
0.9
*
2.0
1.9
1.9
1.5
1.9
2.0
2.0
2.0
*
2.1
*
*
1
3
*
*
4
1
*
2
29
1
1
6
30
37
0
*
0
*
*
0.0
0.1
*
*
0.2
0.0
*
0.1
1.3
0.0
0.0
0.3
1.4
1.7
0.0
*
0.0
*
Notes: "Number Tested" is the number of students who participated in the North Carolina Writing Assessment (NCEXTEND2 OCS ).
2
"Percent" is calculated based on the number tested in the "All Students" category.
3
Some students were miscoded as "not exceptional" in source data.
*Performance data are not reported when number tested is fewer than five.
The total for "Students with Disabilities" includes Section 504. Some categories may not add up to the total due to missing coding
Starting in 2007-08, the disability categories were revised.
Data received from LEAs and charter schools after July 22, 2010 are not included in this table.
Prepared by the NCDPI Division of Accountability Services/Test Development Section.
Report of Student Performance in Writing, Grade 10, 2009-10
Table 13c. North Carolina Testing Program
North Carolina Writing Assessment (NCEXTEND1 ), 2009-10
Average Score,
Grade 10
Category
All Students
Female
Male
American Indian
Asian
Black
Hispanic
Multi-Racial/Other
White
Economically Disadvantaged
Not Served by Title I
Schoolwide Title I
Targeted Assistance
Migrant
Limited English Proficient (LEP)
Students with IEPs
3
Students with Disabilities
Autism
Deaf-Blindness
Deafness
Serious Emotional Disability
Hearing Impairment
Intellectual Disability-Mild
Intellectual Disability-Moderate
Intellectual Disability-Severe
Specific Learning Disability
Learning Disabled-Reading
Learning Disabled-Mathematics
Learning Disabled-Writing
Learning Disabled-Other
Multiple Disabilities
Other Health Impairment
Orthopedic Impairment
Speech or Language Impairment
Traumatic Brain Injury
Visual Impairment incl. Blindness
Section 504
Miscoded
Average Total
Number Tested1
Percent2
(NCEXTEND1 ) (NCEXTEND1 ) Writing Score
716
261
455
9
15
294
50
13
335
476
645
65
5
1
18
715
715
170
0
0
4
3
99
254
47
1
0
0
0
0
92
30
7
0
7
1
0
1
100.0
36.5
63.5
1.3
2.1
41.1
7.0
1.8
46.8
66.5
90.1
9.1
0.7
0.1
2.5
99.9
99.9
23.7
0.0
0.0
0.6
0.4
13.8
35.5
6.6
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
12.8
4.2
1.0
0.0
1.0
0.1
0.0
6
6.1
5.9
5.4
5.2
6
5.4
5.6
6.1
6
6.1
4.8
5.4
*
5.4
6
6
5.8
*
*
*
*
8.7
5.7
3.1
*
*
*
*
*
4.3
8.3
5.3
*
6.9
*
*
Notes: 1"Number Tested" is the number of students who participated in the NCEXTEND1 Test of Writing.
2
"Percent" is calculated based on the number tested in the "All Students" category.
3
Some students were miscoded as "not exceptional" in source data.
*Performance data are not reported when number tested is fewer than five.
The total for "Students with Disabilities" includes Section 504. Some categories may not add up to the total due to missing coding.
Data received from LEAs and charter schools after July 22, 2010 are not included in this table.
Prepared by the NCDPI Division of Accountability Services/Test Development Section.
30
Report of Student Performance in Writing, Grade 10, 2009-10
Table 14a. North Carolina Testing Program
North Carolina General Writing Assessment, 2009-10,
Distribution of Total Scores,
Grade 10
NUMBER OF
STUDENTS TESTED
NUMBER OF
STUDENTS WITH
VALID SCORES
20
LOW SCORE
4
PERCENTILES
TOTAL
SCORE
98,874
98,643
90
75
50 (median)
25
10
11.7
MEAN
HIGH SCORE
STANDARD
DEVIATION
3.1
VARIANCE
9.7
16
14
12
10
7
FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION
ACH
LEVEL
IV
III
II
I
WRITING
SCORE
FREQUENCY
CUMULATIVE
FREQUENCY
PERCENT
CUMULATIVE
PERCENT
20
19
18
17
16
15
14
13
12
11
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
nonscorable
452
1
1,623
15
12,008
478
13,387
1,400
40,886
1,438
7,935
4,415
3,521
1,540
4,436
2,203
2,905
231
98,874
98,422
98,421
96,798
96,783
84,775
84,297
70,910
69,510
28,624
27,186
19,251
14,836
11,315
9,775
5,339
3,136
231
0.5
0.0
1.6
0.0
12.1
0.5
13.5
1.4
41.4
1.5
8.0
4.5
3.6
1.6
4.5
2.2
2.9
0.2
100
99.5
99.5
97.9
97.9
85.7
85.3
71.7
70.3
29.0
27.5
19.5
15.0
11.4
9.9
5.4
3.2
0.2
Notes: Data received from LEAs and charter schools after July 22, 2010 are not included in this table.
Prepared by the NCDPI Division of Accountability Services/Test Development Section.
31
Report of Student Performance in Writing, Grade 10, 2009-10
Table 14b. North Carolina Testing Program
NCEXTEND2 OCS Writing Assessment, 2009-10,
Distribution of Total Scores,
Grade 10
NUMBER OF
STUDENTS TESTED
NUMBER OF
STUDENTS WITH
VALID SCORES
20
LOW SCORE
4
PERCENTILES
TOTAL
SCORE
2,152
2,102
90
75
50 (median)
25
10
9.3
MEAN
HIGH SCORE
STANDARD
DEVIATION
4.0
VARIANCE
16.3
16
12
10
4
4
FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION
ACH
LEVEL
IV
III
II
I
WRITING
SCORE
FREQUENCY
CUMULATIVE
FREQUENCY
PERCENT
CUMULATIVE
PERCENT
20
19
18
17
16
15
14
13
12
11
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
nonscorable
23
0
3
0
207
0
65
15
415
4
544
16
109
15
126
16
544
50
2,152
2,129
2,129
2,126
2,126
1,919
1,919
1,854
1,839
1,424
1,420
876
860
751
736
610
594
50
1.1
0.0
0.1
0.0
9.6
0.0
3.0
0.7
19.3
0.2
25.3
0.7
5.1
0.7
5.9
0.7
25.3
2.3
100
98.9
98.9
98.8
98.8
89.2
89.2
86.2
85.5
66.2
66.0
40.7
40.0
34.9
34.2
28.3
27.6
2.3
Notes: Data received from LEAs and charter schools after July 22, 2010 are not included in this table.
Prepared by the NCDPI Division of Accountability Services/Test Development Section
32
Report of Student Performance in Writing, Grade 10, 2009-10
Table 14c. North Carolina Testing Program
NCEXTEND1 Test of Writing, 2009-10,
Distribution of Total Scores,
Grade 10
NUMBER OF
STUDENTS TESTED
716
MEAN
6.0
STANDARD
DEVIATION
4.0
VARIANCE
16.0
HIGH SCORE
14
LOW SCORE
0
PERCENTILES
TOTAL
SCORE
90
75
50 (median)
25
10
12
9.5
6
2
0
FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION
ACH
LEVEL
WRITING
SCORE
FREQUENCY
CUMULATIVE
FREQUENCY
IV
14
36
716
5.0
100
13
12
1
59
680
679
0.1
8.2
95.0
94.8
III
11
10
9
8
7
6
3
80
3
88
4
114
620
617
537
534
446
442
0.4
11.2
0.4
12.3
0.6
15.9
86.6
86.2
75.0
74.6
62.3
61.7
II
5
4
3
2
4
123
8
112
328
324
201
193
0.6
17.2
1.1
15.6
45.8
45.3
28.1
27.0
I
1
0
2
79
81
79
0.3
11.0
11.3
11.0
PERCENT
Notes: The range used for the NCEXTEND1 Test of Writing assessment is different from the range used for
the North Carolina General Writing Assessment.
Data received from LEAs and charter schools after July 22, 2010 are not included in this table.
Prepared by the NCDPI Division of Accountability Services/Test Development Section.
33
CUMULATIVE
PERCENT
[This page intentionally blank]
34
2009-10
North Carolina General Writing Assessment
Grade 10
Copies of Grade 10
Sample Student Responses
The North Carolina W riting Assessm ent Scoring Model is com prised of a content com ponent
with a 1-4 score range and a c onventions component w ith a 0-2 score range. To report a total
writing sca le score for each stude nt, th e sco re is com puted by com bining the content and
conventions scores using the following model:
Total Writing Assessment Score = s um of the (c ontent component scores from two independen t
readers multiplied by 2) + the sum of the (conventions com ponent scores from two independent
readers multiplied by 1).
The following pages provide copies of sam
ple student responses from the North Carolina
Writing Ass essment at grade 10. The total content score, total conventions score, total writing
score, Achievem ent Level, and an notated exp lanations of the scores are provided for each
response.
35
[This page intentionally blank]
36
Writing, Grade 10
Write a letter explaining the meaning of responsibility as it relates to the high school experience. This
letter will be included in a high school orientation booklet. You may use the following information,
your own experiences, observations, and/or readings.
Responsibility: 1. The quality, state, or fact of being responsible. 2. Something for which one is accountable:
duty.
Source: Webster’s II New College Dictionary
Responsibility is the thing people dread most of all. Yet it is the one thing in the world that develops us.
Source: Frank H. Crane
We must exchange the philosophy of excuse–what I am is beyond my control–for the philosophy of
responsibility.
Source: Barbara Charline Jordan
It is not only for what we do that we are held responsible, but also for what we do not.
Source: Jean Baptiste Poquelin Moliére
To achieve a healthy level of self-esteem, you must be able to accept who you are and be confident about your
decisions and behavior. But there is another important ingredient in the development of self-esteem that is
often overlooked–the ability to take responsibility for your future. To live self-responsibly, you must be able to
influence your behavior freely in three major areas: ...
• Taking action in ways that will help you reach your goal
• Being accountable for your decisions, priorities and actions
• Thinking for yourself by examining and actively choosing the values that will guide you, rather than
blindly accepting whatever you’re told by ... friends or the culture in which you live.
Since being responsible for yourself requires effort, thought and a range of difficult decisions, many people
convince themselves that it is an impossible challenge. Some blame others for their problems. Others hope that
someone will come along and make everything all right.
Remember: You cannot respect or trust yourself if you continually pass on to others the burdens of your
existence.
Source: Nathaniel Branden, “All About Responsibility”
As you write a letter explaining the meaning of responsibility as it relates to the high school
experience, remember to
❑
Focus on the meaning of responsibility as it relates to the high school experience.
❑
Consider the purpose, audience, and context of your letter.
❑
Organize your letter so that your ideas progress logically.
❑
Include relevant details that clearly develop your letter.
❑
Edit your letter for standard grammar and language usage.
Use the blank sheet of paper given to you by your teacher to plan your letter. Anything you write on
the blank sheet will not be scored. You must write the final copy of your letter on the next page.
© 2010 All rights reserved. This document may not be reproduced by any means, in whole or in part, without the express written permission of the North Carolina
Department of Public Instruction, Raleigh, N.C.
37
Sample Student Response #1
•
Writing, Grade 10
20 10 North Carolina '['est.ing Program
VI hCA. t-
?
ReSfb,') S;!"I, J-Y ,5 f-4.e.. -/-J,,-,,~
~e
e'IC
is rcsPons; bl/lt-Y
Ye I-
MOSI- ofCi IJ
,' 5 bec.c;~/se
peOPle do
" f- ,5 .\-
o £ r e SPel) S 't,,;/
nOj-
:I:.f
do wAC,r (- ',e y do, Lt:
(JeoP le
fcr
be wor.~e 1C.i- pr
t-~.e CCd1S;QJA6,ce') CO~r{rJ.
r" ,':J.!J
the'll....
,f- Cllree.. ( ec(:onS , t) ;lif-y
dfec.d
4- i , .R wor Id +-~o../- de vela. ps CiS'
1-":, 1$. I I i
' /-'-Y
pePPle
i- I,ev t.-qVe JCl)e j- I, .(f1
wtc, f
rCd· {,er /-· I, ClO c,
cldt>1i +-
,. ,,1
1-0 t't-
f- ,zWqy
I" /','5Lscboo/ YCl<, mus +12.l/e('y t-h,'n~ YOlA do, r -/- yoCc do
Yo&.. will I'YlOSI- I,'ire/v
~ Ci.5 {-a
be dO/Je yo£<...
by f- yo£....
L+
'vJ ,',/
YO<-\.
('i,'j •
ey
fCr K P
{-Cik'e
s,- hi' '-/Y
f-Ct/, i"j. ,'-es/'Cn
0; 1/ not- ollly
beh e I Pi!l ').
,',-1
r-e SPc/) S I h,- , ;j-v
a.c+,'O()S
I+ is
ifYu?o(+Crin -l-
hwt..... alSO +cr
qre no-/- resfbr} :S,'", /e
+-11en
I.{r
.per He
H;n~s
n o/- re. Jre
101M
yo!.\.
-1--4 (J/)
(. c~ ;.
+ we
d,o fl..ctr
we
Cere
!,€. /d
e do no f- .s:., in I-,,'!V-, Schoo! ,'.f. va ~
enCMC,J.. t....o Nlre car e ot- Wt,Ci i- yo£.<.. need +-0
YOC( n e-ed f-O S f-c,r -I-
Jo
YOk do
W401f VJ
be ;1') $. resrons ;b Ie no !.v'
I(esr.on s ;h,"f,"l-v ; 5 SGiI'1e H,'-nq;.· -Fer
yO-fA...
A/9-1, sc/oc /
+I-.O(/- yo£{, k<1(e r esI'Jc'o :::,'b;/"t- V -tor YOL1r
bet:CtiAst" ; I- ,' " no ./.. .f. or IN t,q
resfbl')Sible
-/-01"" "LIt,q f-
yo""S elf: ;'1
af-t,e, Pe.OPIe. (JYrl,.!. SCt.(..+.e,' Ctrld 10.../-<'1" 0 /1 I1D~ 0/;/ '/ f-1,Cm
SIAUer 1-0
I-cr
,;1, i- /
rc Slbn s,' bil ,' f-y +he/7
Y)O -/- -/-"i/'\e....
helP//)5... YOl,r5'e f{: S·u.cc P(? d
do no +--
r r" ,</~i?1 J,e i
~JI1"Gh
re,S',<b/)s, 'b:lf"~- Y
VI.)(};utd lNr:rl1!-- f-O be c,r{/( ,Ilci yoc. Onl"!
I"
Oll e. is <{ceo(,, } +-ctble ,
I,'?e t-A en I/ob:x!y
yo ,. . ,
V Oll,
W,"I/
r.,c
O.(} ve,v Jo r/lev
Page 3
PLEASE DO NOT WR ITE IN THIS AREA
~•• OOO .
O. O. O••• O. OOOOOOO
•
38
095558
•
------------------------------------------
Grade 10-North Carolina General Writing Assessment - Sample Student Response #1 (G-2)
Rubric Content Score: 1
Total Content Score: 4
Total Writing Score: 6
Rubric Convention Score: 1
Total Conventions Score: 2
Achievement Level: I
Content Annotation:
The topic of this minimal response is unclear. The organizational structure fails to establish
connections between ideas, as the student primarily repeats information from the prompt.
Support and elaboration include sparse details, consisting mostly of repetitive attempts to define
the quotes (It is because of responsibility that people do what they do. . . . If you do not take
responsibility in your life then nobody would want to be around you and you will be very lonley).
The response lacks use of vocabulary that is precise and purposeful.
Conventions Annotation:
This response exhibits minimal control of grammatical conventions. So much of the response is
quoted from the prompt that not enough original content is written to exhibit reasonable control
of sentence formation, usage, or mechanics. Additionally, errors are present including
misspellings (consiquences…addmiting) and missing commas.
39
Sample Student Response #2
Sample Student REsponse #2
•
2010 North Carolina Testing ProgSaSample riting,
G-5
Gra Saml de 10
()/-=J
o{!
-
NoL Rc produco-
\.
10J
f-----'---"-'''"'''--'''-'''-'-'-''''''---.L
eo. eh \ ,\()UV'
JV<;t
V'
Page 3
PLEASE DO NOT WRITE IN THIS AREA
. 00 • • 00 •• 000 • • • 0 . 0000000
•
40
094617
------------------...
-----------------------
.. ,
Sample Student Response #2
t
f)
GTO~
Take any time left to check over your work carefully_
Page' 4
•
41
•
/
Grade 10-North Carolina General Writing Assessment - Sample Student Response #2 (G-5)
Rubric Content Score: 2
Total Content Score: 8
Total Writing Score: 10
Rubric Convention Score: 1
Total Conventions Score: 2
Achievement Level: II
Content Annotation:
The topic of this response is som
ewhat vague, with three definitions for responsibility
(Responsibility, relating to high school, can be defined as by, able to set goals for ones self, the
ability to know what one must do in order to reach this goal, and working as well as relizing
mistakes along the way ). There is an attempt to organiz e the paper around the three definitions,
but m ajor lapses occur in the logical progression of ideas ( Another meaning, a dmiting and
working. Responsibility is being able to realize mistaks along the way and and working for
expectations set. . . . An indivisual must learn to stop, think and learn ). Support and elaboration
is general and repetitive, and the few details offered are underdeveloped. The response exhibits
minimal use of vocabulary that is precise and purposeful, as well as minimal sentence fluency.
Conventions Annotation:
This response demonstrates minimal control of grammatical conventions. Errors are present in
standard usage (If everyone just handed you everything then how would we learn . . . ), sentence
fragments (Meaning prioritize.; The ability to pick and chose, plan ahead, Just enough to see
what should come first.; ), punctuation (dont; its part of being); missing a period on the last
sentence), and spelling (ourselfs; indivisual; maditory; relize; mistaks; priortize).
42
•
Sample Student Response #3
2010 North Cllrolina Testing Pmgnlm
Wri Ling, Gra de 10
G-J-
05'-/
Do 1"ot. Hcprooucc-XCDPI
d +'irr...d
0 ('
Page 3
PLEASE·DO Nar WRITE :IN THIS AREA
1QlII • • • • OO.O.O • • • O • .OOOOOOO
•
43
095550
•
-----
----------------------------------------
----------------..---------------------------
..
2010 North Carolina Testmg Program
Sample Student Response #3
Writing, Grade 10
•
Do Not Reproduce- NCDPI
f
<: .~
,l
GTO~
CD Trt-eV\.--r -=- ~
C. 0 1'\ \J .€J'\ .t lOY)5 = ;;A
Take any time left to check over your work carefull y.
Page 4
•
44
•
Grade 10-North Carolina General Writing Assessment - Sample Student Response #3 (G-7)
Rubric Content Score: 2
Total Content Score: 8
Total Writing Score: 12
Rubric Convention Score: 2
Total Conventions Score: 4
Achievement Level: III
Content Annotation:
While the topic of this response is somewhat vague (Whatever terms it is under, it is your
choices in responsibility that will reflect you, your parents and your school and determine your
success), the writing remains focused on and organized around the necessity of responsibility in
school and personal activities. Some connections are drawn between the paragraphs, however
sparse support and elaboration of each piece of evidence causes major weakness to occur in
logical progression of ideas as a whole (There is another huge responsibility outside of school,
your responsibility to make the right choices when facing peer pressure. . . . When choosing to
drink you put many peoples lives at risk including your own).The response demonstrates minimal
use of precise and purposeful vocabulary and minimal sentence fluency.
Conventions Annotation:
The response displays reasonable control of sentence formation, word usage, and mechanics.
45
Sample Student Response #4
•
(f -8'
Writing, Grade 10
2010 North Carolina Testing Progfilln
Do Not Heproduce-NCDPI
n
(i Of'
rr<:
,~
I
e.\ ~'
PLEASE DO NOT WRITE IN THIS AREA
. 0 . 00 . 00. 0 . 0 • • • 0 . 0000000
•
095525
•
46
-
------------------------------------------_
-
--------------------------------------_
_
_
.
Sample Student Response #4
. ~.
"
,
,
, " \ ) \\ t-
reason
~S
~_\~~~~~C~'~L'~
' ~~'~f~I~"~~\'~\O
~j~~LU~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~-U~~,~~
~' ~
h~f~~~~
1' ('
' 11t\ ,OnJ
'N(\" h f"C , II ",(, it' \'
I
\'
l'
J
u, rx" do
:)('\" , V"(11f1
J
n\~ <:,,\j(e , 'i<e hP Or.;, j i') \ I" " I, 13 f'o C; ', !
,t'
~ ~ Q U \G \" C, o'C1IOO';,
J ()
i0
"
1M ; v\!o;l(
OO I<;; , \wIO ol.\r~~WQ((..£)l\I ,j ob\C lloll\OUIO(-i\O\\":. ,o.ndmo.tel\O,UI own de(l<siorc
Take any time left to check over your work carefully,
Page 4
•
47
•
Grade 10-North Carolina General Writing Assessment - Sample Student Response #4 (G-8)
Rubric Content Score: 3
Total Content Score: 12
Total Writing Score: 16
Rubric Convention Score: 2
Total Conventions Score: 4
Achievement Level: III
Content Annotation:
The topic of this respon se is generally clear (Many situations in high school require you to be
responsible . . . make decisions that help you work towards goals, allow yourself to be held
responsible your actions, and make decisions based on what is best for you, not based on what
your friends want you to do ). The organizational structure is cl ear. Logical prog ression of ideas
occurs within each section of support (I have had to be accountable for my decision to quit figure
skating. The reason I quit was because I knew my school work was suffering . . . . I knew that I
had to tell my coach it was my decision even though she would be disappointed), however, minor
lapses occur overall as the sectio ns are no t log ically conn ected to each other. Som e specific
details are used to provide suppor t and elaboration of the ideas (I started off last semester by
doing very poorly in my Civics class, and my goal last semester was to pass all of my classes
with at least an eighty-five). The response demonstrates reasonable use of precise vocabulary and
sentence fluency.
Conventions Annotation:
The response displays reasonable control of sentence formation, standard usage, and mechanics.
The response contains very few errors.
48
Sample Student Response #5
•
2010 North Carolina Testing Program
Wdtins:. Grade 10
{3--1f
CYjtJ
Do Not Reproouoo-NCDPI
\)nlt
P age 3
PLEASE DO NOT WRITE IN T HIS AREA
• • • • 000000 • • • 000. 0000000
•
49
072719
•
--------------------
-----------------------
Sample Student Response #5
..
-----------------------------------------
be
J ttll
t
tlb' 'Jlt
lti1\
rvJ
"
v'
't1e \
OJ
Jh'((lf'l; '
, -Yt
I w
\ ~br~
{Ie
',
L
,! nn rl/hc
.
C,
\
11 \
"
\
ItJ
eel
~J
r 'ni h
'r»
Mi II \ ,e.,,",
GTO~
Cbn+'urt ~ l.}
CD '(\ WI'\.tUlYJ5
-=-
i9-
Take any time left to check over you r work carefully.
P age 4
•
50
•
Grade 10-North Carolina General Writing Assessment - Sample Student Response #5 (G-11)
Rubric Content Score: 4
Total Content Score: 16
Total Writing Score: 20
Rubric Convention Score: 2
Total Conventions Score: 4
Achievement Level: IV
Content Annotation:
This response develops and m aintains focus on a clear a nd specific topic ( Responsibility in high
school goes beyond simply accepting consequences, good or bad, for your actions; responsibility
is learning to choose those actions more carefully and having the discipline to do what you know
is best for yourself ). Focus is m aintained throughout th e response, and the organizational
structure serves to conn ect id eas. T he logical progression of ideas m akes the response unified
and com plete. Full support and elaboration of the writer’s ideas are provided by the use of
specific and detailed exam ples (Getting a job at Xxx Pizza was one of the best decisions I
ever made. . . . there may be an awesome party Saturday night, but is it worth no t studying and
failing that test on Monday? . . . One of my best friends just began as a freshman at Xxx
University). Skillful use of precise and purposeful vocabulary and sentence fluency are
consistently demonstrated throughout the response ( I bet I know exactly how your feeling right
now: lost to be starting in a new school, excited to meet new friends, and nervous about the
freedoms and responsibilities you are about to gain. . . . Many teenagers “get their wings,” as
my dad would say, in high school).
Conventions Annotation:
The response displays reasonable control of sentence formation, standard usage, and mechanics.
The response contains very few errors including a misused “your,” two misspelled words
(Licsenses…recieved), and one missing comma.
51
[This page intentionally blank]
52
2009-10
NCEXTEND2 OCS Writing Assessment
at Grade 10
Copies of Grade 10
Sample Student Responses
The North Carolina W riting Assessm ent Scoring Model is com prised of a content com ponent
with a 1-4 score range and a c onventions component w ith a 0-2 score range. To report a total
writing sca le score for each stude nt, th e sco re is com puted by com bining the content and
conventions scores using the following model:
Total Writing Assessment Score = s um of the (c ontent component scores from two independen t
readers multiplied by 2) + the sum of the (conventions com ponent scores from two independent
readers multiplied by 1).
The following pages provide copies of sample student responses from the NCEXTEND2 OCS Writing Assessment
at grade 10. The total content score, total conventions score, total writing score, Achievement Level, and annotated
explanations of the scores are provided for each response.
53
[This page intentionally blank]
54
2010 North Carolina Testing Program
NCEXTEND2 OCS Writing, Grade 10
Do Not Reproduce—NCDPI
You are in the Occupational Course of Study (OCS). Write a letter to a new student
explaining the OCS program.
As you write a letter explaining the OCS program to a new student, remember to
❑ Explain the OCS program.
❑ Organize your ideas.
❑ Write your letter so it makes sense.
❑ Use important details.
❑ Review and correct your letter for capitalization, punctuation, and spelling.
Use the blank sheet of paper given to you by your teacher to plan your letter.
Anything you write on the blank sheet will not be scored. You must write the final
copy of your letter on pages 3 and 4 of your test booklet.
Write the final copy of your letter on pages 3 and 4 of your test booklet.
© 2010 All rights reserved. This document may not be reproduced by any means, in whole or in part, without the express written permission of the North Carolina
Department of Public Instruction, Raleigh, N.C.
55
Sample Student Response #1
56
Grade 10-North Carolina NCEXTEND2 OCS Writing Assessment - Sample Student
Response #1 (G-03)
Rubric Content Score: 1
Total Content Score: 4
Total Writing Score: 6
Rubric Convention Score: 1
Total Conventions Score: 2
Achievement Level: I
Content Annotation:
While this brief response establishes a focus (Hey T---- welcome to the OCS program), the
organizational structure consists of ideas presented in a random fashion (It can show easy ways
to learn and show you ways to be yourself. Also the teachers is the best, they teach the best and
they work with you). Although the response contains some detail, elaboration is sparse and the
progression of ideas is confusing.
Conventions Annotation:
This response exhibits minimal control of sentence formation, standard usage, and mechanics.
Run-on sentences, major spelling and punctuation errors, as well as subject/verb agreement
errors are present (See the classes is’nt what people think it is, some people thank the class is for
something else but it’s for you to get your High School diaploma if you what it).
57
Sample Student Response #2
58
Grade 10-North Carolina NCEXTEND2 OCS Writing Assessment - Sample Student
Response #2 (G-05)
Rubric Content Score: 2
Total Content Score: 8
Total Writing Score: 10
Rubric Convention Score: 1
Total Conventions Score: 2
Achievement Level: II
Content Annotation:
This response begins with a strong focus on the topic (. . . and I’m writing you to tell you how
OCS works. OCS is Occupational Course of Study. It help you get ready for the real world.), but
due to organizational issues the focus breaks down, leading to a major lapse in focus. While
some elaboration is provided, the details are general and list-like.
Conventions Annotation:
This response exhibits minimal control of punctuation, spelling, and capitalization. Sentence
formation and mechanical errors are present in the response.
59
Sample Student Response #3
60
Sample Student Response #3
61
Grade 10-North Carolina NCEXTEND2 OCS Writing Assessment - Sample Student
Response #3 (G-07)
Rubric Content Score: 2
Total Content Score: 8
Total Writing Score: 12
Rubric Convention Score: 2
Total Conventions Score: 4
Achievement Level: III
Content Annotation:
This response is focused on the positive aspects of the OCS program, although the topic is not
explicitly stated. Some organizational structure is present, but little relationship is established
between ideas, leading to major lapses in the logical progression of ideas (Do you have any
classes? I will so you what classroom you will be in. Around the OCS Program, they have
Technical sessons). Support and elaboration consist of some details presented in a list-like
fashion (You can also join a after-school club. . . . like Spanish, french, S.A.D.D. . . . You can be
a cheerleader, girls basketball, girls baseball, girls sccoer, girls tinnis, & girls wrestsler) and
exhibit major weaknesses.
Conventions Annotation:
This response displays reasonable control of sentence formation, standard usage, and mechanics.
Subject/verb agreement and verb tense agreement are demonstrated. Although some errors in
capitalization and punctuation are present, the errors do not impede the meaning of the response.
62
Sample Student Response #4
63
Sample Student Response #4
64
Grade 10-North Carolina NCEXTEND2 OCS Writing Assessment - Sample Student
Response #4 (G-09)
Rubric Content Score: 3
Total Content Score: 12
Total Writing Score: 16
Rubric Convention Score: 2
Total Conventions Score: 4
Achievement Level: III
Content Annotation:
The focus of this response is generally clear (you are about to . . . probably like school more
now that your going to be in the (OCS) program . . . . because the work is easy but hard enough
where you learn something and the teachers are really nice). The organizational structure
demonstrates relationships between and among ideas. The response is reasonably complete (You
will also have to get a non paid job out in the community to graduate. Then you will be asked to
create a portfolio . . . you will have to present that in front of a few people your senior year in
order to graduate). Support and elaboration consist of some specific details.
Conventions Annotation:
This response exhibits reasonable control of sentence formation, standard usage, and mechanics.
Subject/verb agreement and verb tense agreement are demonstrated. The errors in this response
do not impede the meaning of the response.
65
Sample Student Response #5
66
Sample Student Response #5
67
Grade 10-North Carolina NCEXTEND2 OCS Writing Assessment - Sample Student
Response #5 (G-12)
Rubric Content Score: 4
Total Content Score: 16
Total Writing Score: 20
Rubric Convention Score: 2
Total Conventions Score: 4
Achievement Level: IV
Content Annotation:
The topic of this response is clear (I am a student . . . in the Occupational Course of Study
program. I am going to be explaining to you how the program works), and a strong focus on the
benefits of attending the OCS program is maintained throughout. The organizational structure
establishes relationships between and among ideas. A sustained logical progression of ideas
makes the response complete (Than I would work in the libarary and help out the libarians. Most
of those duties are required to gain hours to graduate . . . . All of the OCS requirements sound
hard but once you go threw and see for yourself it’ll be one of your first fun easy years of high
school). The student provides ample specific details and elaborates on each experienced benefit
of the program.
Conventions Annotation:
This response exhibits reasonable control of sentence formation, standard usage, and mechanics.
Subject/verb agreement and verb tense agreement are demonstrated.
68
2009-10
North Carolina General Writing Assessment
Grade 10
Regional by LEA Performance
The following tables present the percent of students at or above Achievement Level III for each
LEA and charter school, the average score for each LEA and charter school, and LEA and
charter school performance by region (former six Technical Assistance Centers configurations)
and by ethnicity, gender, Title I and migrant status.
69
[This page intentionally blank]
70
Report of Student Performance in Writing, Grade 10, 2009-10
Table 18. North Carolina Testing Program
North Carolina General Writing Assessment, 2009-10,
Percent of Students Scoring At or Above Level III, by LEA,
Grade 10
State
2008, 2009 State
2010 State
2000 State
1999 State
2001 State
2004, 2006 State
2007 State
1997 State
1996 State
2005 State
1998 State
2003 State
1995 State
1994 State
1993 State
Notes:
Percent†
>=95%
...
94
...
90
89
88
87
86
...
84
83
82
81
80
79
78
77
76
75
74
73
72
71
70
69
68
67
66
65
64
63
62
61
60
59
58
57
56
...
54
53
52
51
50
49
48
...
46
45
...
40
39
38
...
35
...
33
...
29
...
27
...
23
2010 LEA Performance
Gray Stone Day**, Lake Norman**, Roxboro Community**, The Hawbridge School**, Thomas Jefferson**
Raleigh Charter HS**
Gaston College Prep**
Franklin Academy**, Newton-Conover City
Chapel Hill-Carrboro City, Lincoln Charter**, Rocky Mount Prep Sch**
East Wake Academy**
Ashe, Brunswick, Carteret, River Mill Academy**
Woods Charter**
Pine Lake Prep**, Queen's Grant**, Watauga
Orange, Pender
Dare
Camden, Carolina International**, Catawba, Clay, Mount Airy City
Davie, Henderson
Lincoln, Wake
Charlotte/Mecklenburg, Graham, Hoke, Moore, Surry
Avery, Haywood, Kannapolis City, New Hanover, Tyrrell, Winston-Salem/Forsyth
Cleveland, Clover Garden**, Mitchell, Polk, Quality Education**, Roanoke Rapids City, Swain
Cabarrus, Elkin City, Union
Alamance-Burlington, Burke, Cherokee County, Davidson, Johnston, Onslow
Cumberland, Guilford, Jackson, Montgomery, Stokes, Union Academy**, Wilkes
Asheville City, Buncombe, Columbus, Duplin, Gates
Alexander, Haliwa-Saponi Tribal**, Hyde, Iredell-Statesville, Transylvania, Whiteville City
Perquimans, Wayne
Franklin, Gaston, Randolph, Vance
Asheboro City, Community Partners High**, Harnett, Hickory City, Lexington City
Caswell, Chatham, Clinton City, Jones, Lenoir, Mooresville City, Richmond
Edenton/Chowan, Granville, McDowell
Craven, Durham, Rockingham, Rutherford
Alleghany, Caldwell, Madison
Rowan-Salisbury, Thomasville City, Wilson
Yancey
Beaufort, Cape Lookout Marine**, Hertford, Stanly
Bladen, Lee, Sampson
Piedmont Community**, Warren
Bertie, Edgecombe, Kestrel Heights**, Northampton, Pamlico, Person, Pitt, Yadkin
Macon, Scotland
Currituck, Elizabeth City/Pasquotank
Weldon City
Martin, Nash-Rocky Mount
Robeson, Washington
Crossnore Academy**, Crossroads Charter**
Anson
Halifax
Greene
Pace Academy**
C.G. Woodson**
Kennedy Charter**
†
Percents are rounded to the nearest whole percent.
*Performance data are not reported when number tested is fewer than five. Performance data that are less than or equal to 5.0 percent, or greater than
or equal to 95.0 percent, are not displayed.
**Denotes a charter school. For reporting purposes the charter school name has been abbreviated; the complete charter school name
can be found in the Appendix.
Beginning in 2003, data are reported using the revised standard and are generated using the new scoring model.
Data for 2003 are from the pilot test administration.
Data received from LEAs and charter schools after July 22, 2010 are not included in this table.
Prepared by the NCDPI Division of Accountability Services/Test Development Section.
71
Report of Student Performance in Writing, Grade 10, 2009-10
Table 19. North Carolina Testing Program
North Carolina General Writing Assessment, 2009-10,
Average Total Writing Score, by LEA,
Grade 10
State
Mean Score†
15.0
...
14.5
...
14.1
...
13.5
13.3
13.1
13.0
12.9
12.7
12.5
12.3
2009 State
2008, 2010 State
12.1
12.0
11.9
11.7
11.5
11.3
2004 State
2006 State
2003, 2007 State
2005 State
11.1
11.0
10.9
10.7
10.5
10.3
10.1
10.0
9.9
...
8.9
...
7.7
7.5
2010 LEA Performance
Lake Norman**
Gray Stone Day**
Raleigh Charter HS**
Watauga
Ashe, Brunswick, Chapel Hill-Carrboro City, Gaston College Prep**, Roxboro Community**,
The Hawbridge School**
Clay
Thomas Jefferson**
Carteret, Franklin Academy**, Pender, Rocky Mount Prep Sch**
Elkin City, Hoke, Mount Airy City, Newton-Conover City, Queen's Grant**
Burke, Cleveland, Clover Garden**, East Wake Academy**, Moore, Orange, Pine Lake Prep**, Wake
Winston-Salem/Forsyth, Woods Charter**
Charlotte/Mecklenburg, Davie, Graham, Henderson, Jackson, Lincoln, Mitchell, Montgomery
River Mill Academy**, Surry
Cabarrus
Carolina International**, Catawba, Dare, Kannapolis City, Lincoln Charter**, New Hanover, Polk, Swain
Alamance-Burlington, Avery, Camden, Cherokee County, Cumberland, Guilford, Haywood, Tyrrell, Union
Asheville City, Buncombe, Davidson, Gates, Johnston, Onslow, Roanoke Rapids City, Stokes
Alexander, Columbus, Community Partners High**, Duplin, Gaston, Haliwa-Saponi Tribal**, Hickory City
Iredell-Statesville, Jones, Lexington City, McDowell, Mooresville City, Quality Education**, Randolph
Richmond, Union Academy**, Wayne, Whiteville City, Wilkes
Asheboro City, Chatham, Clinton City, Craven, Edenton/Chowan, Franklin, Harnett, Hyde, Lenoir, Perquimans,
Transylvania, Vance
Caswell, Granville, Madison
Caldwell, Durham, Rutherford
Alleghany, Beaufort, Hertford, Lee, Piedmont Community**, Rockingham, Rowan-Salisbury, Stanly,
Thomasville City, Weldon City, Wilson
Bertie, Cape Lookout Marine**, Edgecombe, Kestrel Heights**, Macon, Northampton, Pamlico, Person, Sampson,
Warren, Yancey
Bladen, Pitt, Scotland, Yadkin
Crossnore Academy**, Elizabeth City/Pasquotank, Nash-Rocky Mount, Washington
Martin
Currituck, Robeson
Anson, Crossroads Charter**
Greene, Halifax, Pace Academy**
Kennedy Charter**
C.G. Woodson**
Notes: †Scale scores are rounded up to the nearest two-tenths of a point.
*Performance data are not reported when number tested is fewer than five.
**Denotes a charter school. For reporting purposes the charter school name has been abbreviated; the complete charter
school name can be found in the Appendix.
Beginning in 2003, data are reported using the revised standard and are generated using the new scoring model.
Data for 2003 are from the pilot test administration.
Data received from LEAs and charter schools after July 22, 2010 are not included in this table.
Prepared by the NCDPI Division of Accountability Services/Test Development Section.
72
Report of Student Performance in Writing, Grade 10, 2009-10
xxx
Table 17a. North Carolina Testing Program
North Carolina General Writing Assessment, 2009-10,
Grade 10, by LEA and Ethnicity
Western Region
Total
American Indian
Buncombe
Multi-Racial
Number
Tested
Number
Tested
Percent At
or Above
Level III
58.3
53.2
2,836
182
75.8
75.8
56,492
5,610
79.0
73.5
Number
Tested
58.0
49.3
7,958
391
77.1
81.2
27,678
414
White
Percent At
or Above
Level III
Percent At
or Above
Level III
Number
Tested
2,640
69
1,270
95
98,874
6,761
Hispanic
Percent At
or Above
Level III
56.1
66.3
71.1
70.9
State
Western Region
Black
Number
Tested
Number
Tested
Number
Tested
Asian
Percent At
or Above
Level III
Percent At
or Above
Level III
Percent At
or Above
Level III
73
1,880
70.6
9
44.4
23
73.9
110
57.3
122
49.2
65
80.0
1,551
72.9
Asheville City
271
71.2
1
*
1
*
90
47.8
13
46.2
14
71.4
152
86.8
Cherokee County
266
72.6
2
*
4
*
5
80.0
2
*
3
*
250
72.4
Clay
80
80.0
0
*
0
*
1
*
0
*
1
*
78
80.8
Graham
81
76.5
11
72.7
0
*
0
*
0
*
1
*
69
76.8
Haywood
477
76.3
6
66.7
1
*
4
*
21
42.9
3
*
442
78.3
Henderson
931
78.9
0
*
12
83.3
42
54.8
108
62.0
36
75.0
733
82.9
Jackson
238
72.3
23
56.5
1
*
2
*
14
35.7
3
*
195
76.4
Macon
291
56.4
2
*
4
*
5
40.0
17
41.2
1
*
262
57.6
Madison
169
62.7
0
*
1
*
1
*
2
*
1
*
164
63.4
McDowell
429
65.0
0
*
9
88.9
17
23.5
27
63.0
5
>=95%
371
66.0
Mitchell
130
75.4
0
*
0
*
1
*
4
*
2
*
123
76.4
Polk
189
75.1
0
*
0
*
14
57.1
15
66.7
7
85.7
153
77.1
68.9
Rutherford
665
63.8
0
*
4
*
110
41.8
27
51.9
26
69.2
498
Swain
154
74.7
40
75.0
2
*
1
*
4
*
1
*
106
74.5
Transylvania
226
69.5
0
*
6
83.3
9
55.6
4
*
9
88.9
198
69.2
Yancey
Thomas Jefferson**
216
68
60.6
>=95%
1
0
*
*
0
1
*
*
2
0
*
*
11
0
45.5
*
4
0
*
*
198
67
62.6
>=95%
Notes: *Performance data are not reported when number tested is fewer than five. Performance data that are less than or equal to 5.0 percent, or greater than or equal to 95.0 percent, are not displayed
The ethnic categories may not sum to total number tested because ethnic category may not have been coded on some student answer sheet
**Denotes a charter school. For reporting purposes the charter school name has been abbreviated; the complete name can be found in the Appendix
Alternate assessment data by LEA school are available at http://report.ncsu.edu/ncpublicschools
Data received from LEAs and charter schools after July 22, 2010 are not included in this table
Prepared by the NCDPI Division of Accountability Services/Test Development Section
Report of Student Performance in Writing, Grade 10, 2009-10
Table 17b. North Carolina Testing Program
North Carolina General Writing Assessment, 2009-10,
Grade 10, by LEA, Gender, Title I, and Migrant Students
Western Region
Total
Served by Title I
Male
Female
Not Served by Title I
Schoolwide Title I
Program
Targeted Assistance
Migrant
74
Number
Tested
Percent At
or Above
Level III
Number
Tested
Percent At
or Above
Level III
Number
Tested
Percent At
or Above
Level III
Number
Tested
Percent At
or Above
Level III
Number
Tested
Percent At
or Above
Level III
Number
Tested
Percent At
or Above
Level III
Number
Tested
Percent At
or Above
Level III
Number
Tested
Percent At
or Above
Level III
State
Western Region
98,874
6,761
71.1
70.9
49,781
3,374
77.6
78.9
49,093
3,387
64.4
62.9
4,958
11
59.2
54.5
93,916
6,750
71.7
70.9
3,980
8
58.7
62.5
944
0
61.5
*
36
3
47.2
*
Buncombe
Asheville City
Cherokee County
Clay
Graham
Haywood
Henderson
Jackson
Macon
Madison
1,880
271
266
80
81
477
931
238
291
169
70.6
71.2
72.6
80.0
76.5
76.3
78.9
72.3
56.4
62.7
902
139
130
35
39
245
449
122
162
91
80.0
74.8
80.8
82.9
84.6
87.3
84.2
78.7
67.9
73.6
978
132
136
45
42
232
482
116
129
78
61.9
67.4
64.7
77.8
69.0
64.7
74.1
65.5
41.9
50.0
1
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
8
0
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
62.5
*
1,879
271
266
80
81
476
930
238
283
169
70.6
71.2
72.6
80.0
76.5
76.5
78.9
72.3
56.2
62.7
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
8
0
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
62.5
*
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
1
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
429
130
189
665
154
226
216
68
65.0
75.4
75.1
63.8
74.7
69.5
60.6
>=95%
224
55
91
348
74
119
114
35
72.8
76.4
86.8
70.4
81.1
78.2
75.4
>=95%
205
75
98
317
80
107
102
33
56.6
74.7
64.3
56.5
68.8
59.8
44.1
93.9
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
429
130
189
665
154
226
216
68
65.0
75.4
75.1
63.8
74.7
69.5
60.6
>=95%
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
McDowell
Mitchell
Polk
Rutherford
Swain
Transylvania
Yancey
Thomas Jefferson**
Notes: *Performance data are not reported when number tested is fewer than five. Performance data that are less than or equal to 5.0 percent, or greater than or equal to 95.0 percent, are not displayed.
The gender, Title I, and Migrant categories may not sum to total number tested because these categories may not have been coded on some student answer sheets.
**Denotes a charter school. For reporting purposes the charter school name has been abbreviated; the complete name can be found in the Appendix.
Alternate assessment data by LEA school are available at http://report.ncsu.edu/ncpublicschools.
Data received from LEAs and charter schools after July 22, 2010 are not included in this table.
Prepared by the NCDPI Division of Accountability Services/Test Development Section.
Report of Student Performance in Writing, Grade 10, 2009-10
Table 17c. North Carolina Testing Program
North Carolina General Writing Assessment, 2009-10,
Grade 10, by LEA and Ethnicity
Northwest Region
Total
Percent At
Number
or Above
Tested
Level III
American Indian
Percent At
Number
or Above
Tested
Level III
Asian
Percent At
Number
or Above
Tested
Level III
Black
Percent At
Number
or Above
Tested
Level III
Hispanic
Percent At
Number
or Above
Tested
Level III
Multi-Racial
Percent At
Number
or Above
Tested
Level III
White
Percent At
Number
or Above
Tested
Level III
75
State
98,874
71.1
1,270
56.1
2,640
77.1
27,678
58.0
7,958
58.3
2,836
75.8
56,492
Northwest Region
15,151
73.3
34
67.6
422
74.4
2,188
59.6
1,222
57.1
391
72.9
10,894
Alexander
416
70.0
0
*
19
57.9
25
60.0
23
39.1
2
*
347
Alleghany
98
63.3
1
*
0
*
1
*
13
76.9
1
*
82
Ashe
198
85.9
1
*
1
*
1
*
7
71.4
4
*
184
Avery
172
76.2
1
*
0
*
0
*
7
42.9
4
*
160
Burke
1,003
73.0
2
*
87
64.4
70
47.1
47
68.1
25
64.0
772
Caldwell
932
63.0
2
*
10
80.0
59
52.5
51
45.1
21
61.9
789
Catawba
1,236
79.9
4
*
113
75.2
80
61.3
109
67.9
36
80.6
894
Hickory City
271
67.2
0
*
17
52.9
79
51.9
25
56.0
11
45.5
139
Newton-Conover City
218
88.5
0
*
6
83.3
40
77.5
29
79.3
7
>=95%
136
Davidson
1,430
72.9
5
60.0
13
84.6
52
61.5
50
60.0
20
55.0
1,290
Lexington City
175
67.4
0
*
18
77.8
90
60.0
28
60.7
6
83.3
33
Thomasville City
178
62.4
1
*
1
*
96
57.3
34
58.8
5
>=95%
41
Davie
438
79.2
0
*
3
*
26
57.7
36
66.7
12
83.3
361
Winston-Salem/Forsyth
3,388
76.3
7
85.7
74
82.4
1,113
62.7
370
57.0
140
80.7
1,684
Iredell-Statesville
1,607
70.4
5
40.0
39
74.4
251
52.2
123
50.4
31
54.8
1,158
Mooresville City
374
66.3
0
*
6
>=95%
72
44.4
16
56.3
5
60.0
275
Stokes
571
72.3
2
*
1
*
27
51.9
20
65.0
15
66.7
506
Surry
610
76.7
1
*
3
*
22
68.2
82
61.0
11
81.8
491
Elkin City
103
73.8
0
*
0
*
7
85.7
17
35.3
2
*
77
Mount Airy City
97
80.4
0
*
0
*
10
50.0
6
83.3
2
*
79
Watauga
324
82.7
0
*
2
*
3
*
6
50.0
4
*
309
Wilkes
724
71.8
0
*
6
>=95%
34
70.6
45
55.6
13
61.5
626
Yadkin
447
56.6
0
*
2
*
10
50.0
72
37.5
10
70.0
353
Crossnore Academy**
11
45.5
1
*
0
*
0
*
0
*
3
*
7
Quality Education**
12
75.0
0
*
0
*
10
90.0
1
*
0
*
1
C.G. Woodson**
7
28.6
0
*
0
*
5
40.0
2
*
0
*
0
Pine Lake Prep**
111
82.9
1
*
1
*
5
60.0
3
*
1
*
100
Notes: *Performance data are not reported when number tested is fewer than five. Performance data that are less than or equal to 5.0 percent, or greater than or equal to 95.0 percent, are not displayed.
The ethnic categories may not sum to total number tested because ethnic category may not have been coded on some student answer sheets.
**Denotes a charter school. For reporting purposes the charter school name has been abbreviated; the complete name can be found in the Appendix.
Alternate assessment data by LEA school are available at http://report.ncsu.edu/ncpublicschools.
Data received from LEAs and charter schools after July 22, 2010 are not included in this table.
Prepared by the NCDPI Division of Accountability Services/Test Development Section.
79.0
77.8
73.8
61.0
86.4
76.9
76.8
64.8
83.7
81.3
93.4
74.0
84.8
73.2
81.7
88.8
76.9
72.0
73.7
79.4
80.5
83.5
83.2
73.0
60.3
42.9
*
*
83.0
Report of Student Performance in Writing, Grade 10, 2009-10
Table 17d. North Carolina Testing Program
North Carolina General Writing Assessment, 2009-10,
Grade 10, by LEA, Gender, Title I, and Migrant Students
Northwest Region
76
Schoolwide Title I
Total
Female
Male
Served by Title I
Not Served by Title I
Program
Targeted Assistance
Percent At or
Percent At
Percent At
Percent At
Percent At
Percent At
Percent At
or Above
Number Above Level
or Above
Number
or Above
Number
or Above
Number
or Above
Number
or Above
Number
Number
III
Level III
Tested
Level III
Tested
Level III
Tested
Level III
Tested
Level III
Tested
Level III
Tested
Tested
State
98,874
71.1
49,781
77.6
49,093
64.4
4,958
59.2
93,916
71.7
3,980
58.7
944
61.5
Northwest Region
15,151
73.3
7,588
79.8
7,563
66.7
1,709
61.1
13,442
74.8
1,699
61.3
7
28.6
Alexander
416
70.0
189
77.8
227
63.4
0
*
416
70.0
0
*
0
*
Alleghany
98
63.3
46
71.7
52
55.8
0
*
98
63.3
0
*
0
*
Ashe
198
85.9
102
93.1
96
78.1
0
*
198
85.9
0
*
0
*
Avery
172
76.2
81
93.8
91
60.4
0
*
172
76.2
0
*
0
*
Burke
1,003
73.0
489
80.6
514
65.8
0
*
1,003
73.0
0
*
0
*
Caldwell
932
63.0
468
70.7
464
55.2
13
46.2
919
63.2
13
46.2
0
*
Catawba
1,236
79.9
621
84.5
615
75.1
0
*
1,236
79.9
0
*
0
*
Hickory City
271
67.2
147
72.8
124
60.5
8
25.0
263
68.4
8
25.0
0
*
Newton-Conover City
218
88.5
118
91.5
100
85.0
0
*
218
88.5
0
*
0
*
Davidson
1,430
72.9
713
80.2
717
65.6
0
*
1,430
72.9
0
*
0
*
Lexington City
175
67.4
97
76.3
78
56.4
0
*
175
67.4
0
*
0
*
Thomasville City
178
62.4
99
75.8
79
45.6
0
*
178
62.4
0
*
0
*
Davie
438
79.2
237
86.5
201
70.6
2
*
436
79.6
2
*
0
*
Winston-Salem/Forsyth
3,388
76.3
1,705
79.8
1,683
72.7
877
62.3
2,511
81.2
877
62.3
0
*
Iredell-Statesville
1,607
70.4
792
76.6
815
64.3
771
61.2
836
78.8
771
61.2
0
*
Mooresville City
374
66.3
196
77.6
178
53.9
0
*
374
66.3
0
*
0
*
Stokes
571
72.3
275
85.5
296
60.1
5
20.0
566
72.8
5
20.0
0
*
Surry
610
76.7
305
83.3
305
70.2
3
*
607
76.8
0
*
0
*
Elkin City
103
73.8
50
76.0
53
71.7
0
*
103
73.8
0
*
0
*
Mount Airy City
97
80.4
51
84.3
46
76.1
0
*
97
80.4
0
*
0
*
Watauga
324
82.7
170
88.2
154
76.6
0
*
324
82.7
0
*
0
*
Wilkes
724
71.8
344
81.4
380
63.2
0
*
724
71.8
0
*
0
*
Yadkin
447
56.6
211
59.7
236
53.8
0
*
447
56.6
0
*
0
*
Crossnore Academy**
11
45.5
7
57.1
4
*
11
45.5
0
*
11
45.5
0
*
Quality Education**
12
75.0
7
85.7
5
60.0
12
75.0
0
*
12
75.0
0
*
C.G. Woodson**
7
28.6
3
*
4
*
7
28.6
0
*
0
*
7
28.6
Pine Lake Prep**
111
82.9
65
84.6
46
80.4
0
*
111
82.9
0
*
0
*
Notes: *Performance data are not reported when number tested is fewer than five. Performance data that are less than or equal to 5.0 percent, or greater than or equal to 95.0 percent, are not displayed.
The gender, Title I, and Migrant categories may not sum to total number tested because these categories may not have been coded on some student answer sheets.
**Denotes a charter school. For reporting purposes the charter school name has been abbreviated; the complete name can be found in the Appendix.
Alternate assessment data by LEA school are available at http://report.ncsu.edu/ncpublicschools.
Data received from LEAs and charter schools after July 22, 2010 are not included in this table.
Prepared by the NCDPI Division of Accountability Services/Test Development Section.
Migrant
Percent At
or Above
Number
Level III
Tested
36
47.2
3
*
0
*
0
*
0
*
0
*
0
*
0
*
0
*
0
*
0
*
0
*
0
*
0
*
0
*
0
*
0
*
0
*
0
*
3
*
0
*
0
*
0
*
0
*
0
*
0
*
0
*
0
*
0
*
Report of Student Performance in Writing, Grade 10, 2009-10
Table 17e. North Carolina Testing Program
North Carolina General Writing Assessment, 2009-10,
Grade 10, by LEA and Ethnicity
Southwest Region
Total
American Indian
Asian
Black
Hispanic
Multi-Racial
White
77
Percent At
Percent At
Percent At
Percent At
Percent At
Percent At
Percent At
Number
or Above
Number
or Above
Number
or Above
Number
or Above
Number
or Above
Number
or Above
Number
or Above
Tested
Level III
Tested
Level III
Tested
Level III
Tested
Level III
Tested
Level III
Tested
Level III
Tested
Level III
State
98,874
71.1
1,270
56.1
2,640
77.1
27,678
58.0
7,958
58.3
2,836
75.8
56,492
79.0
Southwest Region
23,267
73.1
217
62.7
690
76.2
6,973
61.9
1,999
61.5
561
74.9
12,827
81.0
Anson
291
45.4
0
*
12
91.7
173
33.5
7
28.6
4
*
95
61.1
Cabarrus
1,919
74.4
4
*
35
85.7
342
56.7
180
56.7
61
78.7
1,297
81.0
Kannapolis City
281
75.8
0
*
6
83.3
88
69.3
49
65.3
11
90.9
127
82.7
Cleveland
1,186
75.0
4
*
8
75.0
323
60.7
29
69.0
25
72.0
797
81.3
Gaston
2,199
68.3
6
83.3
45
82.2
445
53.7
142
52.1
27
66.7
1,534
73.5
Hoke
423
76.8
47
68.1
3
*
214
75.2
34
70.6
7
71.4
118
84.7
Lincoln
939
78.4
3
*
5
>=95%
64
62.5
65
66.2
32
78.1
770
80.6
Charlotte/Mecklenburg
8,428
77.0
33
78.8
451
74.7
3,684
68.1
985
67.8
228
82.0
3,047
90.7
Montgomery
282
71.6
0
*
6
66.7
77
55.8
55
63.6
2
*
142
84.5
Moore
937
77.1
3
*
9
77.8
176
62.5
61
60.7
23
78.3
665
82.6
Richmond
577
65.9
34
44.1
10
80.0
236
57.6
27
40.7
9
55.6
261
78.5
Rowan-Salisbury
1,355
62.4
3
*
15
66.7
250
49.6
75
50.7
42
59.5
970
66.6
Scotland
474
55.9
70
55.7
6
83.3
236
39.4
3
*
5
40.0
154
80.5
Stanly
682
59.8
3
*
29
48.3
103
45.6
36
47.2
15
40.0
496
64.7
Union
2,637
73.8
6
83.3
36
86.1
415
55.7
235
48.5
58
69.0
1,887
80.8
Carolina International**
20
80.0
0
*
2
*
6
83.3
1
*
1
*
10
80.0
Piedmont Community**
40
57.5
1
*
1
*
11
45.5
2
*
1
*
24
70.8
Lincoln Charter**
73
87.7
0
*
0
*
1
*
0
*
2
*
70
87.1
Kennedy Charter**
22
22.7
0
*
0
*
21
23.8
1
*
0
*
0
*
Lake Norman**
192
>=95%
0
*
6
83.3
13
84.6
4
*
5
>=95%
164
>=95%
Crossroads Charter**
59
45.8
0
*
0
*
58
44.8
1
*
0
*
0
*
Queen's Grant**
106
83.0
0
*
1
*
26
61.5
5
>=95%
2
*
72
90.3
Gray Stone Day**
62
>=95%
0
*
2
*
0
*
0
*
1
*
59
>=95%
Union Academy**
83
72.3
0
*
2
*
11
36.4
2
*
0
*
68
79.4
Notes: *Performance data are not reported when number tested is fewer than five. Performance data that are less than or equal to 5.0 percent, or greater than or equal to 95.0 percent, are not displayed.
The ethnic categories may not sum to total number tested because ethnic category may not have been coded on some student answer sheets
**Denotes a charter school. For reporting purposes the charter school name has been abbreviated; the complete name can be found in the Appendix
Alternate assessment data by LEA school are available at http://report.ncsu.edu/ncpublicschools
Data received from LEAs and charter schools after July 22, 2010 are not included in this table
Prepared by the NCDPI Division of Accountability Services/Test Development Section
Report of Student Performance in Writing, Grade 10, 2009-10
Table 17f. North Carolina Testing Program
North Carolina General Writing Assessment, 2009-10,
Grade 10, by LEA, Gender, Title I, and Migrant Students
Southwest Region
Total
Female
Served by Title I
Male
Not Served by Title I
Schoolwide Title I
Program
Targeted Assistance
Migrant
78
Number
Tested
Percent At
or Above
Level III
Number
Tested
Percent At
or Above
Level III
Number
Tested
Percent At
or Above
Level III
Number
Tested
Percent At
or Above
Level III
Number
Tested
Percent At
or Above
Level III
Number
Tested
Percent At
or Above
Level III
Number
Tested
Percent At
or Above
Level III
Number
Tested
Percent At
or Above
Level III
State
Southwest Region
98,874
23,267
71.1
73.1
49,781
11,884
77.6
78.9
49,093
11,383
64.4
67.1
4,958
1,179
59.2
58.2
93,916
22,088
71.7
73.9
3,980
386
58.7
59.3
944
788
61.5
57.7
36
5
47.2
40.0
Anson
Cabarrus
Kannapolis City
Cleveland
Gaston
Hoke
Lincoln
Charlotte/Mecklenburg
Montgomery
Moore
Richmond
Rowan-Salisbury
Scotland
Stanly
Union
Carolina International**
Piedmont Community**
Lincoln Charter**
Kennedy Charter**
Lake Norman**
Crossroads Charter**
Queen's Grant**
Gray Stone Day**
Union Academy**
291
1,919
281
1,186
2,199
423
939
8,428
282
937
577
1,355
474
682
2,637
20
40
73
22
192
59
106
62
83
45.4
74.4
75.8
75.0
68.3
76.8
78.4
77.0
71.6
77.1
65.9
62.4
55.9
59.8
73.8
80.0
57.5
87.7
22.7
>=95%
45.8
83.0
>=95%
72.3
152
946
140
594
1,096
225
465
4,385
135
451
290
691
233
353
1,396
13
23
30
17
93
30
59
35
32
49.3
80.2
81.4
83.3
77.5
80.9
83.2
81.1
80.0
84.3
75.9
70.2
60.5
68.0
79.3
92.3
78.3
90.0
23.5
>=95%
46.7
83.1
>=95%
90.6
139
973
141
592
1,103
198
474
4,043
147
486
287
664
241
329
1,241
7
17
43
5
99
29
47
27
51
41.0
68.8
70.2
66.7
59.1
72.2
73.6
72.6
63.9
70.4
55.7
54.2
51.5
51.1
67.6
57.1
29.4
86.0
20.0
>=95%
44.8
83.0
>=95%
60.8
0
0
0
0
0
5
0
729
282
0
82
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
22
0
59
0
0
0
*
*
*
*
*
40.0
*
58.7
71.6
*
26.8
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
22.7
*
45.8
*
*
*
291
1,919
281
1,186
2,199
418
939
7,699
0
937
495
1,355
474
682
2,637
20
40
73
0
192
0
106
62
83
45.4
74.4
75.8
75.0
68.3
77.3
78.4
78.7
*
77.1
72.3
62.4
55.9
59.8
73.8
80.0
57.5
87.7
*
>=95%
*
83.0
>=95%
72.3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
282
0
82
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
22
0
0
0
0
0
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
71.6
*
26.8
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
22.7
*
*
*
*
*
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
729
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
59
0
0
0
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
58.7
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
45.8
*
*
*
0
0
0
0
0
5
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
*
*
*
*
*
40.0
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Notes: *Performance data are not reported when number tested is fewer than five. Performance data that are less than or equal to 5.0 percent, or greater than or equal to 95.0 percent, are not displayed.
The gender, Title I, and Migrant categories may not sum to total number tested because these categories may not have been coded on some student answer sheets.
**Denotes a charter school. For reporting purposes the charter school name has been abbreviated; the complete name can be found in the Appendix.
Alternate assessment data by LEA school are available at http://report.ncsu.edu/ncpublicschools.
Data received from LEAs and charter schools after July 22, 2010 are not included in this table.
Prepared by the NCDPI Division of Accountability Services/Test Development Section.
Report of Student Performance in Writing, Grade 10, 2009-10
Table 17g. North Carolina Testing Program
North Carolina General Writing Assessment, 2009-10,
Grade 10, by LEA and Ethnicity
Northeast Region
79
Total
American Indian
Asian
Black
Hispanic
Multi-Racial
White
Percent At
Percent At
Percent At
Percent At
Percent At
Percent At
Percent At
Number
or Above
Number
or Above
Number
or Above
Number
or Above
Number
or Above
Number
or Above
Number
or Above
Tested
Level III
Tested
Level III
Tested
Level III
Tested
Level III
Tested
Level III
Tested
Level III
Tested
Level III
State
98,874
71.1
1,270
56.1
2,640
77.1
27,678
58.0
7,958
58.3
2,836
75.8
56,492
79.0
Northeast Region
5,919
59.6
32
59.4
50
74.0
2,826
48.4
248
56.0
105
63.8
2,658
71.3
Beaufort
487
60.2
0
*
0
*
181
47.5
38
44.7
10
60.0
258
71.3
Bertie
183
57.4
0
*
2
*
157
54.1
3
*
2
*
19
78.9
Camden
141
80.1
1
*
2
*
20
90.0
0
*
2
*
116
79.3
Edenton/Chowan
189
64.6
0
*
0
*
87
44.8
3
*
2
*
97
83.5
Currituck
331
52.9
0
*
1
*
22
50.0
10
50.0
7
42.9
291
53.3
Dare
331
81.0
1
*
4
*
9
88.9
20
65.0
9
77.8
288
81.9
Edgecombe
508
57.1
1
*
1
*
317
48.6
26
84.6
7
42.9
156
69.9
Gates
150
71.3
1
*
2
*
55
61.8
1
*
2
*
89
78.7
Halifax
280
39.3
18
44.4
0
*
252
38.1
5
40.0
1
*
4
*
Roanoke Rapids City
179
75.4
1
*
2
*
39
64.1
3
*
0
*
134
77.6
Weldon City
54
51.9
0
*
0
*
53
50.9
0
*
0
*
1
*
Hertford
209
59.8
2
*
0
*
177
58.8
3
*
1
*
26
57.7
Hyde
40
70.0
0
*
0
*
12
58.3
2
*
1
*
25
76.0
Martin
249
51.4
0
*
2
*
113
37.2
9
55.6
3
*
122
63.1
Northampton
159
56.6
1
*
1
*
128
57.0
2
*
1
*
26
57.7
Elizabeth City/Pasquotank
408
52.5
1
*
3
*
187
39.0
8
62.5
17
70.6
192
63.5
Perquimans
110
69.1
0
*
0
*
33
60.6
1
*
1
*
75
73.3
Pitt
1,650
57.4
2
*
29
72.4
801
44.6
105
53.3
36
58.3
677
72.5
Tyrrell
50
76.0
0
*
0
*
21
57.1
3
*
1
*
25
92.0
Washington
138
49.3
0
*
1
*
102
43.1
6
33.3
1
*
28
71.4
73
90.4
3
*
0
*
60
88.3
0
*
1
*
9
>=95%
Gaston College Prep**
Notes: *Performance data are not reported when number tested is fewer than five. Performance data that are less than or equal to 5.0 percent, or greater than or equal to 95.0 percent, are not displayed
The ethnic categories may not sum to total number tested because ethnic category may not have been coded on some student answer sheets
**Denotes a charter school. For reporting purposes the charter school name has been abbreviated; the complete name can be found in the Appendix
Alternate assessment data by LEA school are available at http://report.ncsu.edu/ncpublicschools
Data received from LEAs and charter schools after July 22, 2010 are not included in this table.
Prepared by the NCDPI Division of Accountability Services/Test Development Section
Report of Student Performance in Writing, Grade 10, 2009-10
Table 17h. North Carolina Testing Program
North Carolina General Writing Assessment, 2009-10,
Grade 10, by LEA, Gender, Title I, and Migrant Students
Northeast Region
Total
State
Northeast Region
Female
Number
Tested
Percent At
or Above
Level III
98,874
5,919
71.1
59.6
Served by Title I
Male
Number
Tested
Percent At
or Above
Level III
49,781
2,967
77.6
67.8
Number
Tested
Percent At
or Above
Level III
49,093
2,952
64.4
51.3
Number
Tested
Percent At
or Above
Level III
4,958
945
59.2
49.7
Not Served by Title I
Number
Tested
Percent At
or Above
Level III
93,916
4,974
71.7
61.4
Schoolwide Title I
Program
Number
Tested
Percent At
or Above
Level III
3,980
943
58.7
49.6
Targeted Assistance
Migrant
80
Number
Tested
Percent At
or Above
Level III
Number
Tested
Percent At
or Above
Level III
944
0
61.5
*
36
2
47.2
*
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Beaufort
487
60.2
259
71.0
228
47.8
0
*
487
60.2
0
*
Bertie
183
57.4
104
63.5
79
49.4
112
42.9
71
80.3
112
42.9
Camden
141
80.1
65
87.7
76
73.7
0
*
141
80.1
0
*
Edenton/Chowan
189
64.6
75
80.0
114
54.4
0
*
189
64.6
0
*
Currituck
331
52.9
160
56.9
171
49.1
0
*
331
52.9
0
*
Dare
331
81.0
163
89.0
168
73.2
0
*
331
81.0
0
*
Edgecombe
508
57.1
268
61.2
240
52.5
1
*
507
57.0
0
*
Gates
150
71.3
83
83.1
67
56.7
0
*
150
71.3
0
*
Halifax
280
39.3
130
47.7
150
32.0
280
39.3
0
*
280
39.3
Roanoke Rapids City
179
75.4
97
83.5
82
65.9
0
*
179
75.4
0
*
Weldon City
54
51.9
31
54.8
23
47.8
0
*
54
51.9
0
*
Hertford
209
59.8
106
66.0
103
53.4
0
*
209
59.8
0
*
Hyde
40
70.0
25
76.0
15
60.0
33
63.6
7
>=95%
33
63.6
Martin
249
51.4
126
57.1
123
45.5
249
51.4
0
*
249
51.4
Northampton
159
56.6
78
70.5
81
43.2
59
47.5
100
62.0
58
46.6
Elizabeth City/Pasquotank
408
52.5
202
61.4
206
43.7
0
*
408
52.5
0
*
Perquimans
110
69.1
51
84.3
59
55.9
0
*
110
69.1
0
*
Pitt
1,650
57.4
819
66.1
831
48.9
0
*
1,650
57.4
0
*
Tyrrell
50
76.0
25
80.0
25
72.0
0
*
50
76.0
0
*
Washington
138
49.3
64
59.4
74
40.5
138
49.3
0
*
138
49.3
Gaston College Prep**
73
90.4
36
91.7
37
89.2
73
90.4
0
*
73
90.4
Notes: *Performance data are not reported when number tested is fewer than five. Performance data that are less than or equal to 5.0 percent, or greater than or equal to 95.0 percent, are not displayed.
The gender, Title I, and Migrant categories may not sum to total number tested because these categories may not have been coded on some student answer sheets.
**Denotes a charter school. For reporting purposes the charter school name has been abbreviated; the complete name can be found in the Appendix.
Alternate assessment data by LEA school are available at http://report.ncsu.edu/ncpublicschools.
Data received from LEAs and charter schools after July 22, 2010 are not included in this table.
Prepared by the NCDPI Division of Accountability Services/Test Development Section.
Report of Student Performance in Writing, Grade 10, 2009-10
Table 17i. North Carolina Testing Program
North Carolina General Writing Assessment, 2009-10,
Grade 10, by LEA and Ethnicity
Southeast Region
Total
State
Southeast Region
81
Bladen
Brunswick
Carteret
Columbus
Whiteville City
Craven
Cumberland
Duplin
Greene
Jones
Lenoir
New Hanover
Onslow
Pamlico
Pender
Robeson
Sampson
Clinton City
Wayne
Cape Lookout Marine**
American Indian
Asian
Black
Hispanic
Multi-Racial
White
Number
Tested
98,874
15,853
Percent At
or Above
Level III
71.1
69.6
Number
Tested
1,270
747
Percent At
or Above
Level III
56.1
49.5
Number
Tested
2,640
218
Percent At
or Above
Level III
77.1
80.7
Number
Tested
27,678
5,303
Percent At
or Above
Level III
58.0
59.0
Number
Tested
7,958
1,149
Percent At
or Above
Level III
58.3
60.3
Number
Tested
2,836
575
Percent At
or Above
Level III
75.8
77.7
Number
Tested
56,492
7,861
Percent At
or Above
Level III
79.0
79.1
365
754
610
454
130
936
3,735
578
215
80
661
1,610
1,554
142
631
1,377
540
157
1,294
30
58.6
85.7
85.6
71.4
70.0
64.1
72.3
70.8
37.7
66.3
65.8
76.3
72.8
57.0
81.6
48.7
59.1
66.2
69.0
60.0
6
3
1
35
0
2
72
1
0
0
1
3
20
0
1
587
4
9
2
0
50.0
*
*
65.7
*
*
62.5
*
*
*
*
*
80.0
*
*
45.3
*
77.8
*
*
1
2
11
0
2
15
96
3
1
0
4
38
19
2
2
7
0
4
11
0
*
*
63.6
*
*
66.7
86.5
*
*
*
*
84.2
78.9
*
*
85.7
*
*
90.9
*
177
140
45
157
51
308
1,836
179
100
47
303
343
319
31
129
417
144
65
509
3
49.2
76.4
66.7
65.0
62.7
49.4
64.5
63.1
27.0
57.4
56.1
59.2
60.5
29.0
69.8
44.1
47.9
58.5
60.9
*
32
37
10
20
3
43
253
126
43
1
36
70
102
3
44
84
107
25
108
2
53.1
83.8
60.0
55.0
*
46.5
74.7
59.5
46.5
*
61.1
48.6
76.5
*
54.5
41.7
52.3
56.0
51.9
*
1
26
20
1
2
30
163
7
3
4
23
50
144
3
13
25
12
4
43
1
*
80.8
85.0
*
*
80.0
81.6
85.7
*
*
69.6
74.0
72.2
*
76.9
76.0
66.7
*
88.4
*
148
546
523
241
72
538
1,315
262
68
28
294
1,106
950
103
442
257
273
50
621
24
72.3
88.3
88.1
78.0
76.4
73.0
81.0
81.3
45.6
75.0
76.5
83.1
76.4
66.0
87.8
62.6
68.1
78.0
77.0
62.5
Notes: *Performance data are not reported when number tested is fewer than five. Performance data that are less than or equal to 5.0 percent, or greater than or equal to 95.0 percent, are not displayed
The ethnic categories may not sum to total number tested because ethnic category may not have been coded on some student answer sheets
**Denotes a charter school. For reporting purposes the charter school name has been abbreviated; the complete name can be found in the Appendix
Alternate assessment data by LEA school are available at http://report.ncsu.edu/ncpublicschools
Data received from LEAs and charter schools after July 22, 2010 are not included in this table.
Prepared by the NCDPI Division of Accountability Services/Test Development Section
Report of Student Performance in Writing, Grade 10, 2009-10
Table 17j. North Carolina Testing Program
North Carolina General Writing Assessment, 2009-10,
Grade 10, by LEA, Gender, Title I, and Migrant Students
Southeast Region
Total
State
Southeast Region
Female
Served by Title I
Male
Not Served by Title I
Schoolwide Title I
Program
Targeted Assistance
Migrant
Number
Tested
Percent At
or Above
Level III
Number
Tested
Percent At
or Above
Level III
Number
Tested
Percent At
or Above
Level III
Number
Tested
Percent At
or Above
Level III
Number
Tested
Percent At
or Above
Level III
Number
Tested
Percent At
or Above
Level III
Number
Tested
Percent At
or Above
Level III
Number
Tested
Percent At
or Above
Level III
98,874
15,853
71.1
69.6
49,781
8,014
77.6
77.1
49,093
7,839
64.4
62.0
4,958
281
59.2
65.1
93,916
15,572
71.7
69.7
3,980
267
58.7
65.5
944
0
61.5
*
36
16
47.2
56.3
Bladen
365
58.6
190
68.9
175
47.4
12
33.3
353
59.5
5
<=5%
0
*
7
57.1
Brunswick
754
85.7
409
91.7
345
78.6
2
*
752
85.8
0
*
0
*
2
*
Carteret
610
85.6
313
92.0
297
78.8
0
*
610
85.6
0
*
0
*
0
*
Columbus
454
71.4
255
79.2
199
61.3
8
62.5
446
71.5
5
60.0
0
*
3
*
Whiteville City
130
70.0
73
82.2
57
54.4
130
70.0
0
*
130
70.0
0
*
2
*
Craven
82
Cumberland
936
64.1
464
71.6
472
56.8
0
*
936
64.1
0
*
0
*
0
*
3,735
72.3
1,845
78.3
1,890
66.4
0
*
3,735
72.3
0
*
0
*
0
*
Duplin
578
70.8
297
78.5
281
62.6
0
*
578
70.8
0
*
0
*
0
*
Greene
215
37.7
98
40.8
117
35.0
1
*
214
37.9
0
*
0
*
1
*
Jones
80
66.3
45
77.8
35
51.4
0
*
80
66.3
0
*
0
*
0
*
661
65.8
314
76.8
347
55.9
5
<=5%
656
66.3
5
<=5%
0
*
0
*
New Hanover
Lenoir
1,610
76.3
792
84.6
818
68.2
0
*
1,610
76.3
0
*
0
*
0
*
Onslow
1,554
72.8
799
80.9
755
64.4
0
*
1,554
72.8
0
*
0
*
0
*
Pamlico
142
57.0
74
62.2
68
51.5
0
*
142
57.0
0
*
0
*
0
*
Pender
631
81.6
287
89.2
344
75.3
0
*
631
81.6
0
*
0
*
0
*
Robeson
1,377
48.7
728
55.1
649
41.6
0
*
1,377
48.7
0
*
0
*
0
*
Sampson
540
59.1
274
67.2
266
50.8
123
66.7
417
56.8
122
66.4
0
*
1
*
Clinton City
157
66.2
78
79.5
79
53.2
0
*
157
66.2
0
*
0
*
0
*
1,294
69.0
665
78.2
629
59.3
0
*
1,294
69.0
0
*
0
*
0
*
30
60.0
14
71.4
16
50.0
0
*
30
60.0
0
*
0
*
0
*
Wayne
Cape Lookout Marine**
Notes: *Performance data are not reported when number tested is fewer than five. Performance data that are less than or equal to 5.0 percent, or greater than or equal to 95.0 percent, are not displayed.
The gender, Title I, and Migrant categories may not sum to total number tested because these categories may not have been coded on some student answer sheets.
**Denotes a charter school. For reporting purposes the charter school name has been abbreviated; the complete name can be found in the Appendix.
Alternate assessment data by LEA school are available at http://report.ncsu.edu/ncpublicschools.
Data received from LEAs and charter schools after July 22, 2010 are not included in this table.
Prepared by the NCDPI Division of Accountability Services/Test Development Section.
Report of Student Performance in Writing, Grade 10, 2009-10
Table 17k. North Carolina Testing Program
North Carolina General Writing Assessment, 2009-10,
Grade 10, by LEA and Ethnicity
Central Region
Total
Percent At
or Above
Number
Level III
Tested
American Indian
Percent At
or Above
Number
Level III
Tested
Asian
Percent At
or Above
Number
Level III
Tested
Black
Percent At
or Above
Number
Level III
Tested
Hispanic
Percent At
or Above
Number
Level III
Tested
State
Central Region
98,874
31,923
71.1
71.4
1,270
145
56.1
70.3
2,640
1,191
77.1
77.7
27,678
9,974
58.0
57.6
7,958
2,949
Alamance-Burlington
Caswell
Chatham
Durham
Franklin
Granville
Guilford
Harnett
Johnston
Lee
Nash-Rocky Mount
Orange
Chapel Hill-Carrboro City
Person
Randolph
Asheboro City
1,474
73.3
4
*
19
78.9
328
61.0
221
65.6
1
*
2
*
90
52.2
83
Rockingham
Vance
Wake
Warren
Wilson
River Mill Academy**
Clover Garden**
The Hawbridge School**
Woods Charter**
Kestrel Heights**
Rocky Mount Prep Sch**
Pace Academy**
Roxboro Community**
Franklin Academy**
East Wake Academy**
Raleigh Charter HS**
Community Partners High**
Haliwa-Saponi Tribal**
Multi-Racial
Percent At
or Above
Number
Level III
Tested
White
Percent At
or Above
Number
Level III
Tested
58.3
56.6
2,836
1,022
75.8
77.5
56,492
16,642
79.0
81.4
207
59.4
34
76.5
882
81.0
9
77.8
5
80.0
114
75.4
577
65.7
2
*
5
>=95%
90
55.6
113
51.3
25
72.0
342
71.9
2,183
63.5
4
*
41
85.4
1,230
54.9
246
45.1
84
81.0
578
85.6
550
67.5
0
*
6
>=95%
195
54.4
40
60.0
6
83.3
303
75.9
593
64.9
1
*
7
57.1
187
55.6
40
52.5
20
65.0
338
71.9
5,157
71.7
18
72.2
307
64.2
2,152
60.6
351
63.8
183
76.5
2,146
84.7
1,276
67.3
10
80.0
7
57.1
348
58.6
148
51.4
77
77.9
686
73.9
2,034
72.5
12
66.7
11
72.7
396
59.6
238
60.5
54
75.9
1,323
78.4
653
58.8
6
50.0
9
77.8
151
45.7
152
43.4
20
65.0
315
71.7
1,200
50.6
5
40.0
12
83.3
657
41.6
60
51.7
21
61.9
445
62.5
554
81.6
2
*
7
85.7
104
68.3
34
64.7
14
78.6
393
86.8
909
87.6
1
*
128
72.7
117
80.3
72
68.1
34
>=95%
557
94.4
345
56.8
3
*
3
*
128
52.3
12
41.7
8
87.5
191
59.7
1,265
68.3
8
75.0
13
76.9
70
57.1
108
47.2
7
85.7
1,059
70.9
316
67.4
1
*
5
>=95%
40
47.5
96
47.9
9
88.9
165
81.2
994
63.7
0
*
7
57.1
236
47.5
59
54.2
29
69.0
663
70.1
79.1
438
67.6
0
*
3
*
263
63.5
33
60.6
5
60.0
134
9,493
77.6
29
79.3
564
85.8
2,573
61.3
837
59.7
359
77.4
5,131
87.8
194
57.7
18
55.6
0
*
120
46.7
7
71.4
5
80.0
44
84.1
820
62.4
1
*
12
75.0
384
49.0
68
64.7
5
80.0
350
76.0
42
28
24
45
53
57
23
76
101
69
134
15
10
85.7
75.0
>=95%
84.4
56.6
87.7
34.8
94.7
89.1
87.0
94.0
66.7
70.0
0
0
0
0
0
4
1
1
1
1
2
0
9
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
66.7
1
0
0
0
2
2
0
0
1
1
16
0
0
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
>=95%
*
*
4
2
2
2
24
31
13
5
6
12
10
3
1
*
*
*
*
54.2
80.6
30.8
80.0
>=95%
91.7
80.0
*
*
0
0
3
2
6
0
2
0
1
2
3
0
0
*
*
*
*
16.7
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
0
0
0
4
3
0
0
2
3
0
6
0
0
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
>=95%
*
*
37
26
19
37
18
20
7
68
89
53
97
12
0
86.5
76.9
94.7
81.1
72.2
>=95%
42.9
>=95%
88.8
84.9
93.8
58.3
*
Notes: *Performance data are not reported when number tested is fewer than five. Performance data that are less than or equal to 5.0 percent, or greater than or equal to 95.0 percent, are not displayed
The ethnic categories may not sum to total number tested because ethnic category may not have been coded on some student answer sheets
**Denotes a charter school. For reporting purposes the charter school name has been abbreviated; the complete name can be found in the Appendix.
Alternate assessment data by LEA school are available at http://report.ncsu.edu/ncpublicschools.
Data received from LEAs and charter schools after July 22, 2010 are not included in this table
Prepared by the NCDPI Division of Accountability Services/Test Development Section
Report of Student Performance in Writing, Grade 10, 2009-10
Table 17l. North Carolina Testing Program
North Carolina General Writing Assessment, 2009-10,
Grade 10, by LEA, Gender, Title I, and Migrant Students
Central Region
Total
Female
Number
Tested
Percent At
or Above
Level III
State
Central Region
98,874
31,923
71.1
71.4
Alamance-Burlington
Male
Number
Tested
Percent At
or Above
Level III
49,781
15,954
Served by Title I
Number
Tested
Percent At
or Above
Level III
Number
Tested
Percent At
or Above
Level III
77.6
77.5
49,093
15,969
64.4
65.2
4,958
833
Not Served by Title I
Number
Tested
Percent At
or Above
Level III
59.2
65.4
93,916
31,090
Schoolwide Title I
Program
Number
Tested
Percent At
or Above
Level III
71.7
71.5
3,980
677
Targeted Assistance
Migrant
Number
Tested
Percent At
or Above
Level III
Number
Tested
Percent At
or Above
Level III
58.7
62.0
944
149
61.5
83.2
36
7
47.2
14.3
1,474
73.3
747
78.6
727
67.8
0
*
1,474
73.3
0
*
0
*
0
*
Caswell
221
65.6
122
73.8
99
55.6
0
*
221
65.6
0
*
0
*
0
*
Chatham
577
65.7
301
75.1
276
55.4
0
*
577
65.7
0
*
0
*
0
*
Durham
2,183
63.5
1,116
69.3
1,067
57.5
0
*
2,183
63.5
0
*
0
*
0
*
Franklin
550
67.5
266
71.8
284
63.4
148
56.8
402
71.4
148
56.8
0
*
0
*
Granville
593
64.9
315
75.9
278
52.5
0
*
593
64.9
0
*
0
*
0
*
Guilford
5,157
71.7
2,544
78.4
2,613
65.2
123
72.4
5,034
71.7
123
72.4
0
*
0
*
Harnett
1,276
67.3
634
76.7
642
58.1
0
*
1,276
67.3
0
*
0
*
0
*
Johnston
2,034
72.5
1,050
78.3
984
66.3
3
*
2,031
72.5
0
*
0
*
3
*
653
58.8
316
66.1
337
51.9
0
*
653
58.8
0
*
0
*
0
*
1,200
50.6
616
55.8
584
45.0
0
*
1,200
50.6
0
*
0
*
0
*
Orange
554
81.6
289
89.3
265
73.2
4
*
550
82.0
4
*
0
*
0
*
Chapel Hill-Carrboro City
909
87.6
448
90.8
461
84.4
0
*
909
87.6
0
*
0
*
0
*
Person
345
56.8
170
67.1
175
46.9
345
56.8
0
*
345
56.8
0
*
0
*
1,265
68.3
628
78.7
637
58.1
0
*
1,265
68.3
0
*
0
*
0
*
Asheboro City
316
67.4
146
71.9
170
63.5
0
*
316
67.4
0
*
0
*
0
*
Rockingham
994
63.7
490
70.4
504
57.1
4
*
990
63.9
0
*
0
*
4
*
Vance
438
67.6
224
74.6
214
60.3
0
*
438
67.6
0
*
0
*
0
*
Wake
9,493
77.6
4,664
82.4
4,829
73.0
0
*
9,493
77.6
0
*
0
*
0
*
Warren
194
57.7
96
66.7
98
49.0
0
*
194
57.7
0
*
0
*
0
*
Wilson
820
62.4
393
69.7
427
55.7
0
*
820
62.4
0
*
0
*
0
*
River Mill Academy**
Clover Garden**
The Hawbridge School**
Woods Charter**
Kestrel Heights**
Rocky Mount Prep Sch**
Pace Academy**
Roxboro Community**
Franklin Academy**
East Wake Academy**
Raleigh Charter HS**
Community Partners High**
Haliwa-Saponi Tribal**
42
28
24
45
53
57
23
76
101
69
134
15
10
85.7
75.0
>=95%
84.4
56.6
87.7
34.8
94.7
89.1
87.0
94.0
66.7
70.0
24
19
12
25
28
35
9
45
54
35
79
9
5
79.2
63.2
>=95%
88.0
57.1
91.4
66.7
>=95%
94.4
88.6
>=95%
66.7
60.0
18
9
12
20
25
22
14
31
47
34
55
6
5
94.4
>=95%
91.7
80.0
56.0
81.8
14.3
93.5
83.0
85.3
87.3
66.7
80.0
42
28
0
0
0
57
0
0
0
69
0
0
10
85.7
75.0
*
*
*
87.7
*
*
*
87.0
*
*
70.0
0
0
24
45
53
0
23
76
101
0
134
15
0
*
*
>=95%
84.4
56.6
*
34.8
94.7
89.1
*
94.0
66.7
*
0
0
0
0
0
57
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
*
*
*
*
*
87.7
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
42
28
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
69
0
0
10
85.7
75.0
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
87.0
*
*
70.0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Lee
Nash-Rocky Mount
Randolph
84
Notes: *Performance data are not reported when number tested is fewer than five. Performance data that are less than or equal to 5.0 percent, or greater than or equal to 95.0, percent are not displayed.
The gender, Title I, and Migrant categories may not sum to total number tested because these categories may not have been coded on some student answer sheets.
**Denotes a charter school. For reporting purposes the charter school name has been abbreviated; the complete name can be found in the Appendix.
Alternate assessment data by LEA school are available at http://report.ncsu.edu/ncpublicschools.
Data received from LEAs and charter schools after July 22, 2010 are not included in this table.
Prepared by the NCDPI Division of Accountability Services/Test Development Section.
Appendices
85
[This page intentionally blank]
86
Appendix A
North Carolina General Writing Assessment
Grade Levels and Types of Writing by Year
87
[This page intentionally blank]
88
Report of Student Performance in Writing, Grade 10, 2008-09
Appendix A
North Carolina, believing that an emphasis on writing instruction was needed and that the m easurement
of writing would enhance instruction, began a st atewide writing assessment program in 1983-84. Since
that time, students' writing skills have im proved and changes in the program have been implemented as
illustrated below.
Grade Levels and Types of Writing by Year
Year
1983-84
1984-85
1985-86
1986-87
1987-88
1988-89
1989-90
1990-91
1991-92
1992-93
1993-94
1994-95
1995-96
1996-97
Grade 4
Grade 6
Descriptive
Expository
Expository
Descriptive
Expository
Descriptive
Expository
Descriptive
Expository
Descriptive
Expository
Grade 7
Grade 8
Grade 9
Persuasive
Expository
Persuasive
Expository
Persuasive
Expository
Persuasive
Expository
Persuasive
Expository
Persuasive
Expository
Grade 10
Expository
Expository
Expository
Expository
Expository
Expository
Expository
Expository
1997-98 Narrative
Expository
Expository
1998-99
1999-00
2000-01
2001-02
2002-03
Narrative
Narrative
Narrative
Narrative
Narrative
Expository
Expository
Expository
Expository
Argumentative
Expository
Expository
Expository
2003-04 Narrative
Argumentative
Informational
2004-05 Narrative
Argumentative
Informational
2005-06 Narrative
Argumentative
Informational
2006-07 Narrative
Argumentative
Informational
2007-08 Narrative
Argumentative
Informational
Narrative
Narrative
Narrative
Narrative
Narrative
Informational
2008-09
Informational
2009-10
Informational
Prepared by the NCDPI Division of Accountability Services/Test Development Section.
89
[This page intentionally blank]
90
Appendix B
North Carolina Writing Assessments
1991-92 to 2009-10 Percent of Students Scoring At or
Above Level III
Grade 10
91
[This page intentionally blank]
92
Report of Student Performance in Writing, Grade 10, 2009-10
Figure 6. North Carolina Testing Program
North Carolina Writing Assessments, 1991-92 to 2009-10,
Percent of Students Scoring At or Above Level III,
Grade 10
100
67.1
56.8
60
48.5
50
58.0
49.7
62.8
72.4
77.0
71.8
71.1
GENERAL
ASSESSMENT
57.8
53.9
53.1
50.0
46.0
53.3
51.4
52.5
38.6
40
54.2
50.2
47.8
39.9
32.3
NCEXTEND1
41.4
29.8
26.8
28.8
22.3
32.8
33.8
NCEXTEND2 OCS
93
22.4
20
11.1
7.9
10
0
74.0
NCAAP
70
30
NCCLAS
83.8
80
1
9.8
NCAAAI
1991- 1992- 1993- 1994- 1995- 1996- 1997- 1998- 1999- 2000- 2001- 2002- 2003- 2004- 2005- 2006- 2007- 2008- 20092
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
00
01
02
03
04
05
06
07
08
09
10
Notes: 1No writing assessment was administered in grade 10 during the 2001-02 school year. Prior to 2001-02, the writing assessment administered at grade 10 was an
English II end-of-course test administered at the end of English II courses which are typically offered at grade 10.
2
The writing standard, scale, and scoring model changed effective with the 2002-03 school year and the data from 2002-03 are reported from the pilot test administration.
The vertical line indicates the NCAAAI was discontinued and replaced by NCCLAS in 2005-06.
The NCAAP was discontinued and the NCEXTEND 2 OCS and the NCEXTEND 1 assessments were operationalized in 2006-07. Beginning in the 2009-10 school
year, the NCCLAS is discontinued.
Data received from LEAs and charter schools after July 22, 2010 are not included in this figure.
Prepared by the NCDPI Division of Accountablility Services/Test Development Section.
Appendix B
Percent of Students
90
[This page intentionally blank]
94
Appendix C
List of North Carolina Charter Schools, 2008-09
95
[This page intentionally blank]
96
The North Carolina State Testing Results, 2009-10
List of North Carolina Charter Schools, 2009-10
Alpha Academy (K-8)
American Renaissance (K-8)
Arapahoe Charter School (K-8)
Arts Based Elementary (K-5)
ArtSpace Charter School (K-8)
Bethany Community Middle (6-8)
Bethel Hill Charter School (K-6)
Brevard Academy (K-8)
Bridges (K-8)
Cape Fear Center for Inquiry (K-8)
Cape Lookout Marine Science (9-12)
Carolina International School (K-10)
Carter Community School (K-8)
Casa Esperanza Montessori (K-6)
Charlotte Secondary School (6)
Charter Day School (K-8)
Chatham Charter School (K-8)
CIS Academy (6-8)
Clover Garden (K-12)
Columbus Charter School (K-3)
Community School of Davidson (K-6)
Crosscreek Charter (K-8)
Crossnore Academy (K-12)
Crossroads Charter High (9-12)
Dillard Academy (K-4)
East Wake Academy (K-12)
Endeavor Charter School (K-8)
Evergreen Community Charter School (K-8)
Exploris Middle School (6-8)
Forsyth Academies (K-8)
Francine Delany New School for Children (K-8)
Gaston College Preparatory (5-12)
Grandfather Academy (5-12)
Gray Stone Day School (9-12)
Greensboro Academy (K-8)
Guilford Prep Academy (K-8)
Haliwa-Saponi Tribal (K-12)
Healthy Start Academy Charter (K-8)
Highland Charter Public School (K-3)
Hope Elementary School (K-5)
Kennedy Charter School (6-12)
Kestrel Heights School (6-12)
Kinston Charter Academy (K-8)
KIPP: Charlotte (5-6)
Lake Norman Charter School (5-8)
Learning Center (K-8)
Lincoln Charter School
Magellan Charter School (3-8)
Maureen Joy Charter School (K-8)
Metrolina Regional Scholars' Academy (K-8)
Millennium Charter Academy (K-8)
Mountain Discovery Charter (K-8)
Neuse Charter School (K-5)
Orange Charter School (K-8)
PACE Academy (9-12)
Phoenix Academy (K-5)
Piedmont Community School (K-12)
Pine Lake Preparatory (K-11)
PreEminent Charter School (K-8)
Provisions Academy (6-12)
Quality Education Academy (K-10)
Queen's Grant Community Schools (K-10)
Quest Academy (K-8)
Raleigh Charter High School (9-12)
Research Triangle Charter Academy (K-8)
River Mill Academy (K-12)
Rocky Mount Prep. School (K-12)
Roxboro Community School (7-11)
Sallie B. Howard School (K-8)
Sandhills Theatre Arts Renaissance School (STARS) (K-8)
Socrates Academy (K-3)
Southern Wake Academy (9-12)
Sterling Montessori Academy (K-8)
Success Institute (K-8)
Sugar Creek Charter School (K-8)
Summit Charter School (K-8)
The Academy of Moore County (K-8)
The Carter G. Woodson School of Challenge (K-12)
The Central Park School for Children (K-5)
The Children's Village Academy (K-6)
The Community Charter School (K-5)
The Downtown Middle School (5-8)
The Franklin Academy (K-12)
The Hawbridge School (9-12)
The Mountain Community School (K-8)
The New Dimensions School (K-5)
The Woods Charter School (1-12)
Thomas Jefferson Classical Academy (K-12)
Tiller School (K-5)
Torchlight Academy (K-5)
Triad Math and Science (K-7)
Two Rivers Community School (K-8)
Union Academy (K-11)
Vance Charter School (K-12)
Voyager Academy (4-8)
Washington Montessori (K-8)
Wilmington Preparatory Academy (K-4)
97
The North Carolina State Testing Results, 2009-10
[This page intentionally blank]
98
Appendix D
North Carolina
Writing Assessment
Advisory Consultants
2009-10
99
[This page intentionally blank]
100
1101101
North Carolina Writing Assessment at Grade 10
General Assessment and NCEXTEND2 OCS Assessment
Information about the Writing Advisory Consultants
Writing Advisory Cons ultants ar e qualif ied in dividuals who are dive rgent th inkers, possess leadersh ip sk ills,
support the NC W riting Assessm ent at Grad e 10, have a positive record of servi ce, and w ill devote the
necessary tim e required to attend the m eetings so that the objectives of the group are achieved. Efforts are
made to ensure that the consultants reflect the racial and ethnic diversity of North Carolina’s tenth grade student
population; furtherm ore, special atten tion is given to m ake sure that each geographic region in the state is
represented.
Consultant participation is based on staggered terms and consists of:
 at least six grade-level specific practicing classroom teachers (3 year term)
 at least five grade-span specific practicing classroom teachers (2 year term)
 at least one professional from the English/Language Arts department of NCDPI
 at least one post-secondary professional with experience relevant to the grade (3 year term)
 at least one professional in the area of special education (2 year term)
 at least one professional in the area of limited English proficiency (2 year term)
 at least one professional from the Test Development Section of NCDPI
There are curren tly two groups of W
NCEXTEND2 OCS.
riting Advisory Consultants: Grade 10 General and Grade 10
Purpose of the Writing Advisory Consultants
The prim ary purpose of the W riting Advisory Consulta nts is to m ake recommendation s to NCDPI Test
Development/Accountability Services based not on what students can do, but what students should be expected
to do as outlined in the NC Standard Course of Study (SCS) and NC Occupational Course of Study (OCS) for
English/Language Arts. Additional responsib ilities of the W riting Advisory Co nsultants in clude selecting
prompts as well as providing guidelines and criteria for the selection of anchor papers to be used in the scoring
of student responses.
Beginning in Septem ber of each s chool year, W riting A dvisory Consultan ts are as sembled to select the
operational and alternate prompts for the current school year, as well as any prompts necessary for field testing.
All consultants are required to sign test secu rity and conf identiality a greements in order to protec t secu re
information about the prompts.
DIVISION OF ACCOUNTABILITY SERVICES
6314 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-6314 | (919) 807-3769 | Fax (919) 807-3772
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY/AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER
101
After the selection of prom pts, Writing Advisory Consultants are conve ned to conduct the first round of rangefinding. This first round of range-finding often occurs
in February. Range-finding is a m ajor step in the
development process after the field te st prom pts have been adm inistered to students. The range-finding
processinvolves the sco ring contractor, W riting Advisory Consultan ts, NCDPI Accountability Services /Test
Development Section staff, NCSU-TOPS staff, NCDPI Instructional Services, English/Language Arts staff, and
NCDPI Exceptional Children staff.
The contractor gathers sam ples of st udent responses from the field test . The W riting Advisory Consultants
view and score responses to establish “anchor papers.” Anchor papers represent exam ples of particular score
points and are referenced by the scorers during the scoring process. They are used in conjunction with scoring
rubrics to help in deciding what score points student
responses are assigned. This helps to ensure that
consistency in standards is applied to all responses.
Days after the operational administration in March, round two of range-finding occurs. The second stage of the
range-finding process is the sam e as above EXCEPT that the s amples gathered from students are “L ive”
responses. “Live” student responses refer to responses that students wrote during the operational administration.
A representative sam ple of schools are contacted to subm it their test m aterials to NCDPI instead of shipping
them to the contractor. The contract or uses these student responses as samples to conduct round two of rangefinding prior to the start of the scoring project.
All of the papers scored by the Writing Advisory Consultants during both range-finding sessions are used in the
scoring project. Guide sets, Training sets, and Qualif ication sets a re c onstructed using the student sam ples
scored by the consultants during range-f inding. Scorers use these sets to learn the scoring rubric, practice
applying the scoring rubric, and qualify for a position to scor e the assessment. Scorers m ust pass all e ligibility
requirements in order to work on the North Carolina Writing Assessment at Grade 10.
Participation of the Writing Advisory Consultants
The following list shows the current North Carolina Writing Advisory Consultants at Grade 10. These
consultants participate on the General Assessment and/or NCEXTEND2 OCS Assessment based on their
education and credentials as well as their current teaching assignments.
For more information, please contact:
Jim Kroening, NCDPI, Director of Performance Assessments at jkroening@dpi.state.nc.us
Akia Beverly-Worsley, NCSU-TOPS, Writing Assessments at akia_worsley@ncsu.edu
Information about the North Carolina Writing Assessment at Grade 10 can be found at:
http://www.ncpublicschools.org/accountability/testing/writing/
Information about the North Carolina Testing Program can be found on the NCDPI website:
http://www.ncpublicschools.org/accountability/testing
102
2009-10 Writing Advisory Consultants
Grade 10
Region
Abourjilie, Karen
Guilford County
Region 6
Cumberland County
Region 5
NCEXTEND2 OCS
Annas, Linda
General/
Bobbe, Peter
General
NCEXTEND2 OCS
Yancey
Boehm, Jodee General
Claytor, Margaret
County
Mecklenburg
NCEXTEND2 OCS
Nash
Dunbar, Deanie
General
Perquim
Fedock, Barbara
General
Polk
County
County
ans County
County
Region 1
Region 3
Region 6
Region 4
Region 1
Gonzales, Janie
General/NCEXTEND2 OCS
Harnett County
Region 6
Hill, Guy
General/NCEXTEND2 OCS
Harnett County
Region 6
Killela, Christine
NCEXTEND2 OCS
Lemire, Deborah
NCEXTEND2 OCS
Harnett County
Region 6
McCall, Harriet
NCEXTEND2 OCS
Onslow County
Region 5
Memminger, Abigail
NCEXTEND2 OCS
Cumberland County
Region 5
County
Region 6
Pope, Bettina
General
Wake
Wake
County
Region 6
Shiflett, H. Randy
General/NCEXTEND2 OCS
Guilford County
Region 6
Smith, William
General/NCEXTEND2 OCS
Buncombe County
Region 1
Stephens, Susan
NCEXTEND2 OCS
Harnett County
Region 6
Craven County
Region 5
Alexander County
Region 2
Tart, Michael
General/
White, Mary Beth
Zimmerman, John
NCEXTEND2 OCS
General
General
Burke
County
NCDPI Curriculum Specialists:
Alexander, Bob
Bell, Vinetta
Lee, Freda
NCDPI ELA Consultant
NCDPI ELA Consultant
NCDPI OCS Consultant
DIVISION OF ACCOUNTABILITY SERVICES
6314 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-6314 | (919) 807-3769 | Fax (919) 807-3772
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY/AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER
103
Region 2
Download