7/28/2019 Trends in Academic Progress
1/60
NAEP 2012
Trends in Academic ProgressReading 19712012 | Mathematics 19732012
U.S. Department of Education
NCES 2013456
7/28/2019 Trends in Academic Progress
2/60
7/28/2019 Trends in Academic Progress
3/60
Figure A. Trend in NAEP reading and mathematics average scores for 9-, 13-, and 17-year-old students
Reading
Mathematics
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TRENDS IN ACADEMIC PROGRESS 2012
* Signicantly diferent (p< .05) rom 2012.
SOURCE: U.S. Department o Education, Institute o Education Sciences, National Center or Education Statistics, National Assessment
o Educational Progress (NAEP), various years, 19712012 Long-Term Trend Reading and Mathematics Assessments.
7/28/2019 Trends in Academic Progress
4/602 THE NATIONS REPORT CARD
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Racial/ethnic and gender gaps narrow
Closing achievement gaps is a goal o both national and state education policy. The results rom
the 2012 NAEP long-term trend assessments show some progress toward meeting that goal. The
narrowing o the White Black and White Hispanic score gaps in reading and mathematics rom
the 1970s is the result o larger gains by Black and Hispanic students than White students. Only
the White Hispanic gap in mathematics at age 9 has not shown a signifcant change rom the
early 1970s.
Female students scored higher in reading than male students at all three ages. The 2012 results
show 9-year-old males making larger score gains than emales. This has led to a narrowing o the
gender gap at age 9 as compared to 1971.
In mathematics, male 17-year-old students scored higher than emale students. The gender gap
at age 17 narrowed because emale students made gains rom 1971 to 2012, but 17-year-old male
students did not.
Reading
Characteristic
Score changes from 1971 Score changes from 2008
Age 9 Age 13 Age 17 Age 9 Age 13 Age 17
All students 13 8 3 Race/ethnicity
White 15 9 4
Black 36 24 30
Hispanic1 25 17 21 7
Gender
Male 17 9 4
Female 10 6 3
Score gaps
White Black Narrowed Narrowed Narrowed
White Hispanic Narrowed Narrowed Narrowed Narrowed
Female Male Narrowed
Mathematics
Characteristic
Score changes from 1973 Score changes from 2008
Age 9 Age 13 Age 17 Age 9 Age 13 Age 17
All students 25 19 4
Race/ethnicity
White 27 19 4
Black 36 36 18
Hispanic 32 32 17
Gender
Male 26 21
Female 24 17 3 5
Score gaps
White Black Narrowed Narrowed Narrowed
White Hispanic Narrowed Narrowed
Male Female2 Narrowed
1 Reading results or Hispanic students were rst available in 1975. Thereore, the results shown in the 1971 section or
Hispanic students are rom the 1975 assessment.2 Score diferences between male and emale students in mathematics were not ound to be statistically signicant (p< .05)
at age 9 in 1973, 2008, or 2012, and at age 13 in 1973 and 2012.
NOTE: Black includes Arican American, and Hispanic includes Latino. Race categories exclude Hispanic origin.
Indicates score was higher in 2012
Indicates no signifcant change in 2012
SOURCE: U.S. Department o Education, Institute o Education Sciences, National Center or Education Statistics, National Assessment o Educational Progress (NAEP), various years, 19712012
Long-Term Trend Reading and Mathe matics Assessments.
7/28/2019 Trends in Academic Progress
5/60TRENDS IN ACADEMIC PROGRESS 2012
Introduction
INTRODUCTION
The National Assessment o Educational Progress (NAEP) long-
term trend assessments provide the most extended retrospective
picture o student achievement in the United States. Results span
our decades o student perormance by 9-, 13-, and 17-year-olds
in two major subject areas. Reading results are available or 12
assessments dating back to 1971, and mathematics results are
available or 11 assessments dating back to 1973.
There are two separate components o NAEPlong-term trend
assessments and main assessments. Results rom the long-term
trend assessments are not directly comparable to those rom the
main assessments because the long-term trend assessments use
diferent questions and because students are sampled by age
rather than by grade. Learn more about the diferences between the
two NAEP assessments at http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/
about/ltt_main_dif.asp.
http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/about/ltt_main_diff.asphttp://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/about/ltt_main_diff.asp7/28/2019 Trends in Academic Progress
6/60
Changes in the Student Population
Over the past our decades, the demographic makeup o American students has changed considerably.
Notably, Hispanic students now account or a larger proportion o students, and White students account
or a lower proportion, than in the 1970s. At age 13, or example, the proportion o Hispanic students more
than tripled between 1978 and 2012, while the proportion o White students decreased rom 80 percent
to 56 percent (fgure 1). These changes were similar at ages 9 and 17 (see appendix tables A-1 and A-2).
Another notable change is that students at all three ages tend to be in lower grades now than they were
in the past. For example, 72 percent o 13yearolds were in 8th grade in 1978 compared with 60 percent
in 2012. The proportion o 13yearolds in 7th grade or below has increased rom 28 percent to 39 percent
over the same period. Similar patterns in grade enrollment were observed or 9 and 17yearolds.
Figure 1. Percentage distribution of 13-year-old students assessed in NAEP mathematics, by selected characteristics:1978 and 2012
INTRODUCTION
# Rounds to zero.
* Signicantly diferent (p< .05) rom 2012.1 Typical grade or age group.
NOTE: Results or 1978 are rom the original assessment ormat, and results or 2012 are rom the revised assessment ormat. Black includes Arican American, Hispanic includes Latino, Pacic Islander inclu
Native Hawaiian, and other includes American Indian/Alaska Native, two or more races, and unclassied. Race categories exclude Hispanic origin. Detail may not sum to totals because o rounding.
Accommodations and Exclusions in NAEP
NAEP aims to include all students sampled or the assessments including students with disabilities (SD)
and English language learners (ELL). This goal is accomplished by allowing many o the same accom-
modations that students use on other tests such as extra testing time or individual administration. Some
accommodations such as bilingual books and reading the test aloud to students are oered or the math-
ematics assessment but not or the reading assessment. Accommodations were rst made available in
the longterm trend assessments in 2004.
Inormation on exclusion rates o SD and/or ELL students was rst collected in 1990. At that time,4 to 6 percent o all students at each age group were excluded rom the longterm trend assessments.
By 2012, only 1 to 2 percent o all students at each age group were excluded (see appendix table A-3).
SOURCE: U.S. Department o Education, Institute o Education Sciences, National Center or Education Statistics, National Assessment o Educational Progress (NAEP), 1978 and 2012
Mathematics Assessments.
THE NATIONS REPORT CARD4
7/28/2019 Trends in Academic Progress
7/60
INTRODUCTION
Reporting NAEP Results
The results in this report are based on nationally representative samples o students at ages
9, 13, and 17 rom both public and private schools. The longterm trend assessments are not
designed to provide results or individual states or large urban districts. More inormation on
NAEP samples and participation o schools and students is provided in the Technical Notes.
This report summarizes students perormance on the NAEP longterm trend assessments inseveral dierent ways: average scores, percentiles, and perormance levels. Average scores in
reading and mathematics are reported on 0500 scales or each subject. Although the scale
range is the same or both reading and mathematics, scores cannot be compared across sub-
jects because the scales are developed independently o one another.
Scores or students at ve selected percentiles indicate whether or not changes in the overall
average scores are refected in the perormance o lower perorming students (at the 10th and
25th percentiles), middle perorming students (at the 50th percentile), or higher perorming
students (at the 75th and 90th percentiles).
Percentages o students attaining perormance levels that correspond to ve points on the
scale (150, 200, 250, 300, and 350) provide inormation about changes in what students know
and can do. The knowledge and skills associated with each level are described in the readingand mathematics sections o this report. In each subject, the perormance o 9yearolds tends
to concentrate within the lower three levels, 13yearolds within the middle three levels, and
17yearolds within the top three levels. Thereore, this report contains only results or the three
perormance levels most relevant or each age group.
Interpreting NAEP Results
The longterm trend assessments have undergone some changes over the past our decades.
The potential eects o these changes were examined prior to implementation and the actual
eects were monitored aterward to ensure that comparability o results was maintained across
assessments. When changes in content and administration procedures were last implemented
in 2004, NAEP administered the original and the revised versions o the assessment to ensurecomparability o the results. Results rom both versions o the 2004 assessment are presented
in some o the tables and gures in this report.
An asterisk (*) is used in gures and tables to indicate that an earlier years score or percentage
is signicantly dierent rom the 2012 results. Changes in students perormance over time are
summarized in the text by comparing 2012 results to those rom the last assessment in 2008
and to results rom the rst year each subject was assessed. Only statistically signicant
dierences are discussed as higher or lower. Statistical signicance is set at a level o .05 with
appropriate adjustments or multiple comparisons. More inormation on NAEP statistical stan-
dards is provided in the Technical Notes o this report.
Score gaps between student groups presented in the gures in this report are based on the
dierence between unrounded scores. Score point changes over time cited in the text arebased on the dierences between the rounded estimates used in the gures. The word about
precedes the score point change i it would have rounded one point higher or lower when calcu-
lated using the unrounded estimates.
NAEP reports changes in perormance, but is not designed to identiy the causes o these
changes. Trends in student perormance based on demographic characteristics and educational
experiences are reported but do not establish or imply a causal relationship. Many actors may
infuence student achievement, including educational practices and policies, availability o
resources, and the demographic makeup o the student body. Such actors may change over
time and vary among student groups.
TRENDS IN ACADEMIC PROGRESS 2012
7/28/2019 Trends in Academic Progress
8/60
READING ASSESSMENT
The Long-Term TrendAssessment in ReadingWhat does the assessment measure?
The longterm trend reading assessment measures students reading comprehension skills using
an array o passages that vary by text types and length. These passages include expository texts,
narrative pieces, poems, advertisements, and schedules. Locating specic inormation, identiying
main ideas, and making inerences across a passage to provide an explanation are typical o the
skills measured by assessment questions.
What did students do?
Students participating in the assessment read passages and responded to questions in three
15minute sections. Each section contained three or our short passages and approximately
10 questions. The majority o the questions were presented in a multiplechoice ormat. Some
questions and their corresponding materials were administered to more than one age group.
How did students perform?
Results rom the 2012 NAEP longterm trend assessment show improvement in the reading skills
o 9 and 13yearolds compared to students their age in 1971, but no signicant change in the
perormance o 17yearolds. There is a pattern across all three age groups o longterm gains or
lower perorming students.
THE NATIONS REPORT CARD6
7/28/2019 Trends in Academic Progress
9/60
SOURCE: U.S. Department o Education, Institute o Education Sciences, National Center or Education Statistics, National Assessment o Educational Progress (NAEP), various years,
19712012 Long-Term Trend Readin g Assessments.
* Signicantly diferent (p< .05) rom 2012.
AVERAGE SCORES
Nine- and 13-year-olds make long-term gains
The national trend in reading shows improvement at ages 9 and 13. Students in both age groups
scored higher in 2012 than did students their age in 1971 (fgure 2). Seventeenyearolds did not show
improvement. The average reading score in 2012 or 17yearolds was not signicantly dierent rom
the score in 1971.
Figure 2. Trend in NAEP reading average scores for 9-, 13-, and 17-year-old students
Thirteen-year-olds
were the only age
group to make score
gains from 2008
to 2012.
TRENDS IN ACADEMIC PROGRESS 2012
7/28/2019 Trends in Academic Progress
10/60
SOURCE: U.S. Department o Education, Institute o Education Sciences, National Center or Education Statistics, National Assessment o Educational Progress (NAEP), various years,
19712012 Long-Term Trend Reading Assessments.
THE NATIONS REPORT CARD
PERCENTILE SCORES
Lower, middle, and higher performing 9-year-olds makelong-term gains
Percentile results provide inormation on which students are making progress. For example,
changes in the scores o students perorming at dierent percentiles indicate i overall trends
are being driven by lower or higher perorming students.
In 2012, the score increase or 9yearolds in comparison to 1971 was evident at all ve percentilesreported (fgure 3). Larger gains were made by lower and middle perorming students at the 10th,
25th, and 50th percentiles than by those at higher percentiles.
Figure 3. Trend in NAEP reading percentile scores for 9-year-old students
* Signicantly diferent (p< .05) rom 2012.
Scores for students
at the 10th and
25th percentiles
were 19 pointshigher than in 1971.
8
7/28/2019 Trends in Academic Progress
11/60
ITEM MAP
What 9-year-olds know and can do in reading
The item map below illustrates a range o reading behaviors associated with scores on the long
term trend reading scale. The cut scores or the three perormance levels reported at age 9 are
highlighted in boxes on the scale. The descriptions o selected assessment questions indicate
what students need to do to receive credit or a correct answer. For example, 9yearolds with
a score o 201 were likely to be able to connect explicit details to recognize the main idea o an
expository passage.
Age 9 NAEP Reading Item Map
Scale score Question description
500//296 Iner the meaning o a supporting idea in a biographical sketch (MC - ages 13 and 17)289 Generalize rom details to recognize the meaning o a description (MC - ages 13 and 17)278 Recognize a sequence o supporting details in a story excerpt (MC - age 13)271 Interpret story details to recognize what happened (MC - age 13)266 Recognize the main purpose o an expository passage (MC)255 Recognize the main idea o instructions (MC - ages 13 and 17)253 Retrieve and provide relevant inormation about the subject o a biographical sketch (CR - ages 13 and 17)250244 Locate and recognize a act in an expository passage (MC - age 13)240 Recognize the similarity between two story characters (MC - ages 13 and 17)237 Iner the characters eelings based on the story dialogue (MC - age 13)231 Make an inerence to recognize generalization o the main topic (MC)228 Recognize the main topic o a short paragraph (MC)221 Make an inerence based on explicit inormation in a biographical sketch (MC - ages 13 and 17)214 Recognize the meaning o a gure o speech in a short poem (MC)209 Recognize a supporting detail in a short document (MC - age 13)209 Recognize an explicitly stated act rom a short expository passage (MC)202 Retrieve and provide a relevant act related to the main idea (CR - ages 13 and 17)201 Connect explicit details to recognize the main idea (MC)200198 Recognize an explicitly stated sequence rom an expository passage (MC)183 Use details and prior knowledge to iner a speaker (MC)177 Recognize explicit inormation in an expository passage (MC)161 Choose the best description o a text eature (MC)153 Recognize an explicit detail rom a poem (MC)150//0
CR Constructed-response question MC Multiple-choice question
NOTE: Ages in parentheses indicate a cross-age question. The position o a question on the scale represents the scale score attained by students who had a 65 percent probability o
successully answering a constructed-response question, or a 74 percent probability o correctly answering a our-option multiple-choice question. For constructed-response questions,
the question description represents students perormance rated as completely correct. Scores associated with the three perormance levels reported or age 9 are boxed.
SOURCE: U.S. Department o Education, Institute o Education Sciences, National Center or Education Statistics, National Assessment o Educational Progress (NAEP),
2012 Long-Term Trend Reading Assessment.
TRENDS IN ACADEMIC PROGRESS 2012
7/28/2019 Trends in Academic Progress
12/60
SOURCE: U.S. Department o Education, Institute o Education Sciences, National Center or Education Statistics, National Assessment o Educational Progress (NAEP), various years,
19712012 Long-Term Trend Reading Assessments.
THE NATIONS REPORT CARD
PERCENTILE SCORES
Thirteen-year-olds make long- and short-term gains
The increase rom 1971 to 2012 in the overall average score or 13yearolds is refected at all ve
percentilesan indication that students across the perormance distribution made gains (fgure
The shortterm gains since 2008 were not as broad. The overall score increase is refected only
the 25th, 50th, and 75th percentiles.
Figure 4. Trend in NAEP reading percentile scores for 13-year-old students
* Signicantly diferent (p< .05) rom 2012.
0
7/28/2019 Trends in Academic Progress
13/60
ITEM MAP
What 13-year-olds know and can do in reading
As shown in the item map below, 13yearolds with a score o 262 were likely to demonstrate the ability to
summarize main ideas in an expository passage in order to provide a textbased description. Students with
a score o 301 on the scale were likely to successully provide an example to illustrate how the author o the
story created a mood.
Age 13 NAEP Reading Item Map
Scale score Question description
500//345 Provide an example o language and explain the eect on the reader (CR - age 17)315 Provide relevant inormation about the subject o a biographical sketch and explain why it is important (CR - ages 9 and 17)306 Support an opinion about a story using details (CR - ages 9 and 17)301 Provide an example to illustrate the author's device or creating a mood (CR - age 17)300291 Provide a description that refects the main idea o a short science passage (CR - ages 9 and 17)284 Recognize the meaning o a word as used in a document (MC - age 17)284 Iner the meaning o a supporting idea in a biographical sketch (MC - ages 9 and 17)282 Recognize an explicitly stated purpose in a process description (MC - age 17)274 Recognize the sequence o a supporting detail in a story excerpt (MC - age 9)266 Generalize rom details to recognize the meaning o a description (MC - ages 9 and 17)264 Recognize the main purpose o a description o a process (MC - ages 9 and 17)262 Summarize the main ideas to provide a description (CR - age 17)253 Connect explicit inormation to recognize the main idea in an expository passage (MC)250248 Locate and recognize a relevant detail in a document (MC)241 Locate and recognize a act in an expository passage (MC - age 9)229 Recognize the main idea o a short expository passage (MC)223 Recognize a character's eeling in a short narrative passage (MC - age 17)208 Provide a key act related to the main topic o an expository passage (CR - ages 9 and 17)200 Recognize a supporting detail in a short document (MC - age 9)200184 Recognize an explicit detail rom a poem (MC - age 9)172 Iner the type o inormation based on a short paragraph (MC - age 17)163//0
Provide a act relevant to a then-now comparison (CR - ages 9 and 17)
CR Constructed-response question MC Multiple-choice question
NOTE: Ages in parentheses indicate a cross-age question. The position o a question on the scale represents the scale score attained by students who had a 65 percent probability o successully answering a
constructed-response question, or a 74 percent probability o correctly answering a our-option multiple-choice question. For constructed-response questions, the question description represents studentsperormance rated as completely correct. Scores associated with the three perormance levels reported or age 13 are boxed.
SOURCE: U.S. Department o Education, Institute o Education Sciences, National Center or Education Statistics, National Assessment o Educational Progress (NAEP), 2012 Long-Term Trend Reading Assessment.
TRENDS IN ACADEMIC PROGRESS 2012
7/28/2019 Trends in Academic Progress
14/60
SOURCE: U.S. Department o Education, Institute o Education Sciences, National Center or Education Statistics, National Assessment o Educational Progress (NAEP), various years,
19712012 Long-Term Trend Reading Assessments.
THE NATIONS REPORT CARD
PERCENTILE SCORES
Lower performing 17-year-olds make gains
Lower perorming 17yearolds made gains since the early 1970s even though the overall average
reading score or this age group did not change signicantly (fgure 5). Scores or students at the
10th and 25th percentiles were higher in 2012 than in 1971. Shortterm gains since 2008 were made
only by 17yearolds perorming at the 10th percentile.
Figure 5. Trend in NAEP reading percentile scores for 17-year-old students
* Signicantly diferent (p< .05) rom 2012.
The score at the
10th percentile
was 7 pointshigher than in
1971 and about 5
points higher thanin 2008.
2
7/28/2019 Trends in Academic Progress
15/60
ITEM MAP
What 17-year-olds know and can do in reading
As shown in the item map below, 17yearolds with a score o 276 were likely to recognize the main point o
a scientic passage. Seventeenyearolds with a score o 316 were likely to be able to nd specic inorma-
tion in a highly detailed schedule. Students at age 17 with a score o 387 were likely to provide textbased
descriptions o the key steps in a process.
Age 17 NAEP Reading Item Map
Scale score Question description
500//399 Extend the inormation in a short historical passage to provide comparisons (CR - ages 9 and 13)387 Provide a text-based description o the key steps in a process (CR)356 Make an inerence to recognize a non-explicit cause in an expository passage (MC - age 13)354 Provide a description that includes the key aspects o a passage topic (CR - ages 9 and 13)350348 Iner and provide a moral based on a short tale (CR - ages 9 and 13)341 Provide an example o language and explain its eect on the reader (CR - age 13)337 (CR - ages 9 and 13)Provide relevant inormation about the subject o a biographical sketch and explain why it is important329 Recognize a supporting detail rom a scientic description (MC)319 Provide an example to illustrate the author's device or creating a mood (CR - age 13)316 Read a highly detailed schedule to locate specic inormation (MC - age 13)300292 Provide a description that refects the main idea o a science passage (CR - ages 9 and 13)281 Iner the meaning o a supporting idea in a biographical sketch (MC - ages 9 and 13)281 Use understanding o a poem to recognize the best description o the poem's speaker (MC)276 Recognize the main point o a scientic passage (MC - age 13)273 Recognize an explicitly stated purpose in a process description (MC - age 13)269 Recognize the meaning o a word as used in a document (MC - age 13)265 Recognize a causal relation in a historical description (MC - age 13)258 Generalize rom details to recognize the meaning o a description (MC - ages 9 and 13)250 Recognize the main purpose o a description o a process (MC - ages 9 and 13)250248 Summarize the main ideas in an expository passage to provide a description (CR - ages 9 and 13)230 Support an opinion about a story using details (CR - ages 9 and 13)224 Recognize an explicitly stated reason in a highly detailed description (MC)216//0
Recognize a character's eeling in a short narrative passage (MC - age 13)
CR Constructed-response question MC Multiple-choice question
NOTE: Ages in parentheses indicate a cross-age question. The position o a question on the scale represents the scale score attained by students who had a 65 percent probability o successully answering aconstructed-response question, or a 74 percent probability o correctly answering a our-option multiple-choice question. For constructed-response questions, the question description represents students
perormance rated as completely correct. Scores associated with the three perormance levels reported or age 17 are boxed.
SOURCE: U.S. Department o Education, Institute o Education Sciences, National Center or Education Statistics, National Assessment o Educational Progress (NAEP), 2012 Long-Term Trend Reading Assessment.
TRENDS IN ACADEMIC PROGRESS 2012
7/28/2019 Trends in Academic Progress
16/60
PERFORMANCE LEVELS
Two-thirds or more of 13- and 17-year-olds are able to make text-based generalizations
Perormance levels provide another perspective or interpreting longterm trend results. Changes in the
percentages at or above each perormance level refect changes in the proportion o students who demon-
strated the knowledge and skills associated with that level in responding to assessment questions.
Sixtysix percent o 13yearolds and 82 percent o 17yearolds perormed at a level o 250 or above on thereading scale in 2012 (fgure 6). Students at this level demonstrated the ability to search or specic inorma-
tion, interrelate ideas, and make generalizations based on what they read. Twentytwo percent o 9yearolds
demonstrated similar abilities in 2012. At all three ages, the percentages o students perorming at or above
level 250 were higher in 2012 than in 1971.
Reading Performance-Level Descriptions
The skills demonstrated by students at each reading perormance level are described below.
The ve perormance levels are applicable at all three age groups; however, the likelihood
o attaining higher perormance levels is related to a students age. The perormance level
results presented or each age are those that are most likely to show signicant change across the assessment years. For this reason, only three perormance levels are discussed or each
age. See the Technical Notes or inormation about how the levels were set.Reported
for ageLEVEL 350: Learn From Specialized Reading Materials
Readers at this level can extend and restructure the ideas presented in specialized and
complex texts. Examples include scientic materials, literary essays, and historical docu-
ments. Readers are also able to understand the links between ideas, even when those links
are not explicitly stated, and to make appropriate generalizations. Perormance at this level
suggests the ability to synthesize and learn rom specialized reading materials.
17
LEVEL 300: Understand Complicated Information
Readers at this level can understand complicated literary and inormational passages,
including material about topics they study at school. They can also analyze and integrateless amiliar material about topics they study at school as well as provide reactions to and
explanations o the text as a whole. Perormance at this level suggests the ability to nd,
understand, summarize, and explain relatively complicated inormation.
17
13
LEVEL 250: Interrelate Ideas and Make Generalizations
Readers at this level use intermediate skills and strategies to search or, locate, and organize
the inormation they nd in relatively lengthy passages and can recognize paraphrases o
what they have read. They can also make inerences and reach generalizations about main
ideas and the authors purpose rom passages dealing with literature, science, and social
studies. Perormance at this level suggests the ability to search or specic inormation,
interrelate ideas, and make generalizations.
17
13
9
LEVEL 200: Demonstrate Partially Developed Skills and UnderstandingReaders at this level can locate and identiy acts rom simple inormational paragraphs,
stories, and news articles. In addition, they can combine ideas and make inerences based on
short, uncomplicated passages. Perormance at this level suggests the ability to understand
specic or sequentially related inormation.
13
9
LEVEL 150: Carry Out Simple, Discrete Reading Tasks
Readers at this level can ollow brie written directions. They can also select words, phrases,
or sentences to describe a simple picture and can interpret simple written clues to identiy a
common object. Perormance at this level suggests the ability to carry out simple, discrete
reading tasks.
9
4
7/28/2019 Trends in Academic Progress
17/60
PERFORMANCE LEVELS
Figure 6. Trend in NAEP reading performance-level results for 9-, 13-, and 17-year-old students
Age 9
Age 13
Age 17
* Signicantly diferent (p< .05) rom 2012.
SOURCE: U.S. Department o Education, Institute o Education Sciences, National Center or Education Statistics, National Assessment o Educational Progress (NAEP), various years,
19712012 Long-Term Trend Readin g Assessments.
NOTE: The revised assessment ormat introduced more current assessment procedures and content.
TRENDS IN ACADEMIC PROGRESS 2012
7/28/2019 Trends in Academic Progress
18/60
SOURCE: U.S. Department o Education, Institute o Education Sciences, National Center or Education Statistics, National Assessment o Educational Progress (NAEP), various years,
19712012 Long-Term Trend Reading Assessments.
THE NATIONS REPORT CARD
RACIAL/ETHNIC GAPS
Racial/ethnic score gaps narrow at all three ages
Even though White students continued to score 21 or more points higher on average than Black and
Hispanic students in 2012, the White Black and White Hispanic gaps narrowed in comparison to the
gaps in the 1970s at all three ages. The White Black score gaps or 9 and 17yearolds in 2012 were
nearly hal the size o the gaps in 1971.
Black and Hispanic 9-year-olds make larger gains than White studentsThe score gaps between White and Black students and between White and Hispanic students at age 9
narrowed rom the 1970s because Black and Hispanic students made larger gains than did White stu-
dents (fgures 7 and 8). The average score or Black students was 36 points higher in 2012 than in 1971
(206 170) and the score or White students was 15 points higher (229 214). The average score or
Hispanic students increased 25 points rom 1975, and the score or White students increased 12 points.
Figure 7. Trend in NAEP reading average scores and score gaps for White and Black 9-year-old students
* Signicantly diferent (p< .05) rom 2012.NOTE: Black includes Arican American. Race categories exclude Hispanic origin. Score gaps are calculated based on diferences
between unrounded average scores.
The White
Black score
gap narrowed
21 pointssince 1971.
Figure 8. Trend in NAEP reading average scores and score gaps for White and Hispanic 9-year-old students
* Signicantly diferent (p< .05) rom 2012.NOTE: White excludes students o Hispanic origin. Hispanic includes Latino. Results are not available or Hispanic students in
1971 because Hispanic was not reported as a separate category at that time. Score gaps are calculated based on diferences
between unrounded average scores.
The White
Hispanic score
gap narrowed
about 13 pointssince 1975.
6
7/28/2019 Trends in Academic Progress
19/60
RACIAL/ETHNIC GAPS
Thirteen-year-old Hispanic students make long- and short-term gainsThe racial/ethnic score gap trends at age 13 are similar to those at age 9. Black and Hispanic students
both made larger gains rom the 1970s than White students, leading to a narrowing o the score gaps
in 2012 (fgures 9 and 10). Hispanic 13yearolds are the only racial/ethnic group to make shortterm
reading score gains. The White Hispanic gap narrowed 5 points since 2008.
Figure 9. Trend in NAEP reading average scores and score gaps for White and Black 13-year-old students
* Signicantly diferent (p< .05) rom 2012.NOTE: Black includes Arican American. Race categories exclude Hispanic origin. Score gaps are calculated based on diferences
between unrounded average scores.
The White
Black score
gap narrowed
16 pointssince 1971.
Figure 10. Trend in NAEP reading average scores and score gaps for White and Hispanic 13-year-old students
* Signicantly diferent (p< .05) rom 2012.
SOURCE: U.S. Department o Education, Institute o Education Sciences, National Center or Education Statistics, National Assessment o Educational Progress (NAEP), various years,
19712012 Long-Term Trend Readin g Assessments.
NOTE: White excludes students o Hispanic origin. Hispanic includes Latino. Results are not available or Hispanic students in
1971 because Hispanic was not reported as a separate category at that time. Score gaps are calculated based on diferences
between unrounded average scores.
The White
Hispanic score
gap narrowed9 pointssince 1975.
TRENDS IN ACADEMIC PROGRESS 2012
7/28/2019 Trends in Academic Progress
20/60
SOURCE: U.S. Department o Education, Institute o Education Sciences, National Center or Education Statistics, National Assessment o Educational Progress (NAEP), various years,
19712012 Long-Term Trend Reading Assessments.
THE NATIONS REPORT CARD
RACIAL/ETHNIC GAPS
White, Black, and Hispanic 17-year-olds show improvement since the 1970sAverage reading scores or 17yearolds increased 4 points rom the rst assessment year or White
students, 30 points or Black students, and 21 points or Hispanic students (fgures 11 and 12). Larger
gains or Black and Hispanic students than or White students narrowed the White Black and
White Hispanic gaps to about hal o what they were in the 1970s.
The changing makeup o the student population is one reason why the overall average score or 17-
yearolds has not changed signicantly, even though student groups within the overall population aremaking gains. When an increase in the proportion o typically lower perorming students is accompa-
nied by a decrease in the proportion o higher perorming students, the overall average score can remain
unchanged even though the average scores or both higher and lower perorming groups increase. This
phenomenon is known as Simpsons paradox.
Figure 11. Trend in NAEP reading average scores and score gaps for White and Black 17-year-old students
* Signicantly diferent (p< .05) rom 2012.NOTE: Black includes Arican American. Race categories exclude Hispanic origin. Score gaps are calculated based on diferences
between unrounded average scores.
The White
Black score gap narrowed
27 points since 1971.
Figure 12. Trend in NAEP reading average scores and score gaps for White and Hispanic 17-year-old students
* Signicantly diferent (p< .05) rom 2012.NOTE: White excludes students o Hispanic origin. Hispanic includes Latino. Results are not available or Hispanic students in
1971 because Hispanic was not reported as a separate category at that time. Score gaps are calculated based on diferences
between unrounded average scores.
The White
Hispanic
score gap
narrowed about
20 pointssince 1975.
8
7/28/2019 Trends in Academic Progress
21/60
GENDER GAPS
Gender gap narrows from 1971 only at age 9
Female students continue to score higher on average in reading than male students at all three
ages in 2012 (fgure 13). A larger gain rom 1971 to 2012 or male students than or emale
students narrowed the score gap at age 9. Male students also made gains rom 1971 to 2012
at ages 13 and 17; however, the score gaps did not change signicantly.
Figure 13. Trend in NAEP reading average scores and score gaps for 9-, 13-, and 17-year-old students, by gender
Age 9
The gender gap
narrowed about
8 points since1971.
Age 13
Age 17
* Signicantly diferent (p< .05) rom 2012.
SOURCE: U.S. Department o Education, Institute o Education Sciences, National Center or Education Statistics, National Assessment o Educational Progress (NAEP), various years,
19712012 Long-Term Trend Readin g Assessments.
NOTE: Score gaps are calculated based on diferences between unrounded average scores.
TRENDS IN ACADEMIC PROGRESS 2012
7/28/2019 Trends in Academic Progress
22/60
SOURCE: U.S. Department o Education, Institute o Education Sciences, National Center or Education Statistics, National Assessment o Educational Progress (NAEP), various years,
19802012 Long-Term Trend Reading Assessments.
THE NATIONS REPORT CARD
PUBLIC/CATHOLIC SCHOOL GAPS
Thirteen-year-old public school students score higherthan in 2008
Inormation about the type o school students were attending was rst collected or the longterm trend
reading assessment in 1980. Results or private schools overall are not presented in this report because
participation rates ell below the required standard or reporting results in 2012. (See the Technical
Notes or more inormation.)Catholic school students have consistently had higher average scores than public school students since
that time. In 2012, Catholic school students scored 11 to 23 points higher on average than public school
students across the three age groups (fgure 14). The score gaps in 2012 did not dier signicantly
rom 1980.
As with overall average reading score results, the only age group to show improvement since 2008 was
13yearolds. In this case, only public school 13yearolds made signicant gains.
Figure 14. Trend in NAEP reading average scores and score gaps for 9-, 13-, and 17-year-old students, by type of school
Age 9
Age 13
See notes at end o gure.
20
7/28/2019 Trends in Academic Progress
23/60
PUBLIC/CATHOLIC SCHOOL GAPS
Figure 14. Trend in NAEP reading average scores and score gaps for 9-, 13-, and 17-year-old students,by type of schoolContinued
Age 17
SOURCE: U.S. Department o Education, Institute o Education Sciences, National Center or Education Statistics, National Assessment o Educational Progress (NAEP), various years,
19802012 Long-Term Trend Reading Assessments.
* Signicantly diferent (p< .05) rom 2012.NOTE: Score gaps are calculated based on diferences between unrounded average scores. Results are not shown or
private schools because the participation rate or private schools did not meet the minimum participation guidelines
or reporting in 2012. At age 17, results are not shown or Catholic schools in 1996 and 2004 (original and revised
assessment ormats) because the participation rates or Catholic schools did not meet the minimum participation
guidelines or reporting.
TRENDS IN ACADEMIC PROGRESS 2012
7/28/2019 Trends in Academic Progress
24/60
GRADE ATTENDED
Percentages of students in a grade below the one typicalfor their age increase
The longterm trend assessments are administered to samples o students dened by age rather than by
grade. Nineyearolds are typically in ourth grade, 13yearolds are typically in eighth grade, and 17year-
olds are typically in eleventh grade. Some students in each age group, however, are in a grade that is below
or above the grade that is typical or their age. For example, some 17yearolds are in the tenth or twelthgrade rather than the eleventh grade. Dierent actors may contribute to why students are in a lower or
higher grade than is typical or their age. Such actors could include students having started school a year
earlier or later than usual, having been held back a grade, or having skipped a grade.
For each o the three age groups, the percentage o students below the grade typical or their age was
larger in 2012 than in 1971 (table 1). At age 17, the percentage o students in twelth grade was smaller
in 2012 than in 1971.
Table 1. Percentage of students assessed in NAEP reading, by age group and grade attended: Various years, 19712012
Age group and grade attended 1971 1975 1980 1984 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1999 2004 2008 2012
Age 9
3rd grade or below 24* 23* 28* 34* 37 42* 43* 40* 33* 30* 36 38 374th grade1 75* 76* 72* 66* 63 58* 57* 60* 67* 69* 63 62 63
5th grade or above 1* 1* #* #* 1 # # # # # # # #
Age 13
7th grade or below 28* 28* 28* 35* 39 39 43* 44* 38 38 38 41 39
8th grade1 71* 72* 71* 64* 61 60 56* 56* 61 62 62 59 60
9th grade or above 1 1 1 # 1 # 1 # # # # # 1
Age 17
10th grade or below 14* 15* 14* 21 24 26* 28* 29* 32* 33* 25 26* 23
11th grade1 73 73 77* 70* 65* 65* 64* 63* 61* 63* 71 70* 73
12th grade 13* 12* 9* 9* 12* 9* 8* 7* 7* 4 4 4 4
# Rounds to zero.
* Signicantly diferent (p< .05) rom 2012. 1 Typical grade or age group.
NOTE: Results or 197199 are rom the original assessment ormat, and results or 200412 are rom the revised assessment ormat. Detail may not sum to totals because o rounding.
Nine, 13, and 17yearolds who were in the grade typical or their age scored higher on average in 2012
than students who were in a lower grade (fgure 15). The sample sizes in 2012 or 9 and 13yearolds in
grades higher than the grade typical or their age were too small to allow reporting on their perormance.
Scores were higher in 2012 than in 1971 or 9 and 13yearolds at or below their typical grade. The trend
results at age 17 were mixed. Seventeenyearolds who were in 10th grade or below had a higher aver-
age score in 2012 than in 1971, whereas 17yearolds in the twelth grade had a lower score.
SOURCE: U.S. Department o Education, Institute o Education Sciences, National Center or Education Statistics, National Assessment o Educational Progress (NAEP), various years,
19712012 Long-Term Trend Reading Assessments.
22 THE NATIONS REPORT CARD
7/28/2019 Trends in Academic Progress
25/60
SOURCE: U.S. Department o Education, Institute o Education Sciences, National Center or Education Statistics, National Assessment o Educational Progress (NAEP), various years,
19712012 Long-Term Trend Readin g Assessments.
* Signicantly diferent (p< .05) rom 2012.1 Typical grade or age group.
Figure 15. Trend in NAEP reading average scores for 9-, 13-, and 17-year-old students, by grade attended
Age 9
Age 13
Age 17
Seventeen-year
olds in twelfth
grade scored
12 points lowerthan in 1971.
-
NOTE: Trend results are not shown or 9-year-olds in 5th grade or above, or or 13-year-olds in 9th grade or above, because
reporting standards were not met or all o the assessment years.
GRADE ATTENDED
TRENDS IN ACADEMIC PROGRESS 2012
7/28/2019 Trends in Academic Progress
26/60
SOURCE: U.S. Department o Education, Institute o Education Sciences, National Center or Education Statistics, National Assessment o Educational Progress (NAEP),
2012 Long-Term Trend Reading Asse ssment.
THE NATIONS REPORT CARD
READING FOR FUN
Students who frequently read for fun score higher
Results rom previous NAEP reading assessments show students who read or un more
requently had higher average scores. Results rom the 2012 longterm trend assessment also
refect this pattern. At all three ages, students who reported reading or un almost daily or
once or twice a week scored higher than did students who reported reading or un a ew times
a year or less (fgure 16).
Age 9
Figure 16. Percentage of students and average scores in NAEP reading for 9-, 13-,and 17-year-olds, by how often they read for fun on their own time: 2012
Age 13
See note at end o gure.
24
7/28/2019 Trends in Academic Progress
27/60
Figure 16. Percentage of students and average scores in NAEP reading for 9-, 13-,and 17-year-olds, by how often they read for fun on their own time:2012Continued
Age 17
SOURCE: U.S. Department o Education, Institute o Education Sciences, National Center or Education Statistics, National Assessment o Educational Progress (NAEP),
2012 Long-Term Trend Reading Assessment.
NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because o rounding.
READING FOR FUN
TRENDS IN ACADEMIC PROGRESS 2012
7/28/2019 Trends in Academic Progress
28/60THE NATIONS REPORT CARD
READING FOR FUN
Smaller percentages of 13- and 17-year-olds read for fun
About the same percentage o 9yearolds reported reading or un daily in 2012 as in 1984
when this question was rst asked (fgure 17). For 13 and 17yearold students, however, the
percentages have decreased.
Figure 17. Trend in percentage of 9-, 13-, and 17-year-old students assessed in NAEP readingwho reported that they read for fun on their own time almost every day
Age 9
Age 13
See notes at end o gure.
SOURCE: U.S. Department o Education, Institute o Education Sciences, National Center or Education Statistics, National Assessment o Educational Progress (NAEP), various years,
19842012 Long-Term Trend Reading Assessments.
26
7/28/2019 Trends in Academic Progress
29/60
READING FOR FUN
SOURCE: U.S. Department o Education, Institute o Education Sciences, National Center or Education Statistics, National Assessment o Educational Progress (NAEP), various years,
19842012 Long-Term Trend Reading Assessments.
Figure 17. Trend in percentage of 9-, 13-, and 17-year-old students assessed in NAEP readingwho reported that they read for fun on their own time almost every dayContinued
Age 17
* Signicantly diferent (p< .05) rom 2012.NOTE: Results or 19842004 are rom the original assessment ormat, and results or 2008 and 2012 are
rom the revised assessment ormat (2004 revised assessment results are not available).
In general, higher percentages o White students than Black and Hispanic students reported in
2012 that they read or un almost daily (table 2). The one exception was at age 9 where there
was no signicant dierence in the percentages o White and Hispanic students reading or un
almost daily.
At ages 13 and 17, smaller percentages o White, Black, and Hispanic students reported reading
or un almost daily in 2012 as compared to 1984. At age 9, only the percentage o Black students
was smaller.
Table 2. Percentage of students assessed in NAEP reading who reported that they read for fun on their owntime almost every day, by age group and selected race/ethnicity categories: Various years, 19842012
Age group and race/ethnicity 1984 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1999 2004 2008 2012
Age 9
White 53 54 54 57 57 54 52 53 48* 53
Black 55* 58 54 55 59* 53 57 51 43 47
Hispanic 51 47 51 51 59 52 56 57 46* 52
Age 13
White 35* 37* 38* 36 37* 32 29 31 28 30
Black 34* 37* 31 36 17 31 33 26 23 23
Hispanic 32* 21 18 29 19 26 19 18
Age 17
White 31* 28* 35* 29* 33* 24 25 25 22 22
Black 31* 35* 20 15 16 21 22 14 19 17
Hispanic 26* 13 20 17 15 15
Reporting standards not met.
* Signicantly diferent (p< .05) rom 2012. NOTE: Results or 19842004 are rom the original assessment ormat, and results or 2008 and 2012 are rom the revised assessment ormat (2004 revised assessment ormat
results are not available). Black includes Arican American, and Hispanic includes Latino. Race categories exclude Hispanic origin.
TRENDS IN ACADEMIC PROGRESS 2012
7/28/2019 Trends in Academic Progress
30/60
28 THE NATIONS REPORT CARD
MATHEMATICS ASSESSMENT
The Long-Term TrendAssessment in MathematicsWhat does the assessment measure?The long-term trend mathematics assessment is designed to measure students knowledge o
mathematical acts, their understanding o basic measurement ormulas as applied in geometric
settings, and their ability to carry out computations using pencil and paper. Questions also assess
students ability to apply mathematics to daily living skills, such as those involving time and
money. Students were not allowed to use a calculator because a large portion o the assessment
measured their ability to perorm computations.
What did students do?
Students participating in the assessment responded to questions in three 15-minute sections.
Each section contained approximately 21 to 37 questions. The majority o questions students
answered were presented in a multiple-choice ormat. Some questions were administered at
more than one age. See more detailed inormation about the composition o the assessment in
the Technical Notes.
How did students perorm?
Results rom the 2012 NAEP long-term trend assessment show improvement in the mathematics
knowledge and skills demonstrated by 9- and 13-year-olds in comparison to students their age in
1973, but no signicant change in the overall perormance o 17-year-olds. Although results dier by
age group, there is a common pattern o improvement or lower perorming students. In some cases
these improvements have led to a narrowing o the racial/ethnic score gaps.
7/28/2019 Trends in Academic Progress
31/60
Thirteen-year-olds score higher than in all previousassessment years
The overall national trend in mathematics shows improvement at ages 9 and 13, but not at
age 17 (fgure 18). The average score or 9-year-olds was 25 points higher in 2012 than in 1973.
Thirteen-year-olds scored higher in 2012 than in all the previous assessment years, with a 19-
point gain rom 1973 and a 4-point gain rom 2008. The average score in 2012 or 17-year-oldswas not signicantly dierent rom the score in 1973.
Figure 18. Trend in NAEP mathematics average scores or 9-, 13-, and 17-year-old students
* Signicantly dierent (p< .05) rom 2012.Extrapolated data adjusting or the limited number o questions rom the 1973 mathematics assessment in common with
the assessments that ollowed.
1
SOURCE: U.S. Department o Education, Institute o Education Sciences, National Center or Education Statistics, National Assessment o Educational Progress (NAEP), various years,
19732012 LongTerm Trend Mathemat ics Assessments.
TRENDS IN ACADEMIC PROGRESS 2012
Thirteen-year-olds
were the only age
group to make score
gains rom 2008
to 2012.
AVERAGE SCORES
7/28/2019 Trends in Academic Progress
32/60
7/28/2019 Trends in Academic Progress
33/60
What 9-year-olds know and can do in mathematics
The item map below illustrates a range o mathematical skills associated with scores on the long-
term trend mathematics scale. Cut scores or the three perormance levels reported at age 9 are
highlighted in boxes on the scale. The descriptions o selected assessment questions indicate
what students need to do to receive credit or a correct answer. For example, 9-year-olds with a
score o 182 were likely to be able to identiy a symmetric shape. Nine-year-olds with a score o
259 were likely to be able to solve an application problem involving multiple operations.
Age 9 NAEP Mathematics Item Map
SOURCE: U.S. Department o Education, Institute o Education Sciences, National Center or Education Statistics, National Assessment o Educational Progress (NAEP),
2012 LongTerm Trend Mathematics Assessment.
Scale score Question description
500//298 Multiply two ractions (MC)291 Add two ractions with like denominators (MC - ages 13 and 17)284 Identiy a relationship shown on a number line (MC)280 Divide a three-digit number by a two-digit number (CR)273 Use and interpret number models (CR - age 13)271
Use the transitive property (MC - ages 13 and 17)262 Identiy a fgure based on relationship to other fgures (MC - age 13)259 Solve an application problem involving multiple operations (MC)254 Multiply a three-digit number by a single-digit number (MC - age 13)250248 Determine a simple probability rom a context (MC)244 Compute the perimeter o a square (MC - age 13)241 Model a relationship using a number sentence (MC)237 Convert units o length (CR)232 Calculate elapsed time (MC)228 Solve a problem involving conversion between units o volume (MC)226 Divide a two-digit number by a one-digit number (CR)222 Subtract a two-digit number rom a two-digit number (CR)211 Solve a story problem involving subtraction (CR)209 Identiy congruent triangles (MC)206 Identiy the true inequality (MC)200 Identiy whole number place value (MC)200190 Read and interpret a circle graph (MC - age 13)184 Solve a story problem involving multiplication (MC)182 Identiy a symmetric shape (MC - age 13)165 Translate number words to numerals (MC)158 Find the value o an unknown quantity in a number sentence (CR)150106//0
Identiy a polygon (MC)
CR Constructed-response question MC Multiple-choice question
NOTE: Ages in parentheses indicate a crossage question. The position o a question on the scale represents the scale score attained by students who had a 65 percent probability o
successully answering a constructedresponse question, a 77 percent probability o correctly answering a threeoption multiplechoice question, a 74 percent probability o correctly
answering a ouroption multiplechoice question, a 72 percent probability o correctly answering a veoption multiplechoice question, or a 71 percent probability o correctly answer-
ing a sixoption multiplechoice question. For constructedresponse questions, the question description represents students perormance rated as completely correct. Scores associated
with the three perormance levels reported or age 9 are boxed.
TRENDS IN ACADEMIC PROGRESS 2012
ITEM MAP
7/28/2019 Trends in Academic Progress
34/60
SOURCE: U.S. Department o Education, Institute o Education Sciences, National Center or Education Statistics, National Assessment o Educational Progress (NAEP), various years,
19782012 LongTerm Trend Mathemat ics Assessments.
PERCENTILE SCORES
Higher perorming 13-year-olds make short-term gains
The increase in the overall average score or 13-year-olds rom the 1970s to 2012 is refected at
all ve percentiles (fgure 20). The long-term gains made by lower perorming students at the
10th and 25th percentiles were larger than the gains or higher perorming students at the 75th
and 90th percentiles.
Short-term gains since 2008 were not as broad. The overall score increase is refected only orhigher perorming students at the 75th and 90th percentiles.
Figure 20. Trend in NAEP mathematics percentile scores or 13-year-old students
* Signicantly dierent (p< .05) rom 2012.
The 27-point gainsince 1978 at the
10th percentile was
larger than the gains
at the 75th and
90th percentiles.
32 THE NATIONS REPORT CARD
7/28/2019 Trends in Academic Progress
35/60
What 13-year-olds know and can do in mathematics
As shown in the item map below, 13-year-olds with a score o 236 were likely to be able to use
geometric properties to determine the measure o an angle in a set o intersecting lines. Students
with a score o 307 were likely to be able to successully write an improper raction as a decimal.
Age 13 NAEP Mathematics Item MapScale score Question description
500//340 Compare units o length (MC)337 Identiy ractional models (MC)320 Determine the percent given the part and the whole (MC - age 17)310 Rewrite an algebraic expression (MC - age 17)307 Write an improper raction as a decimal (CR)302 Compute the area o a square (CR)300 Add two ractions with unlike denominators (MC - age 17)300296 Use place value to identiy a decimal number (MC)291 Identiy a relationship between two unknown values (MC)287 Estimate length (MC - age 17)285 Use and interpret number models (CR - age 9)277 Read and interpret data rom a table (CR - age 17)271 Use the transitive property (MC - ages 9 and 17)268 Find actors o numbers (MC)260 Identiy a fgure based on relationship to other fgures (MC - age 9)257 Identiy a particular three-dimensional fgure (MC - age 17)255 Add two ractions with like denominators (MC - ages 9 and 17)254 Find the value o a variable that makes an equation true (CR)250248 Determine probability (MC)240
Compute the perimeter o a square (MC - age 9)236 Use geometric properties to determine angle measure (MC)231 Read and interpret data rom a bar graph (MC)224 Evaluate an algebraic expression or a given value (CR - age 17)216 Multiply a three-digit number by a single-digit number (MC - age 9)206 Subtract a two-digit number rom a two-digit number (CR)200186 Identiy a symmetric shape (MC - age 9)165 Read and interpret a circle graph (MC - age 9)158//0
Solve a problem in context (MC)
CR Constructed-response question MC Multiple-choice question
NOTE: Ages in parentheses indicate a crossage question. The position o a question on the scale represents the scale score attained by students who had a 65 percent probability o
successully answering a constructedresponse question, a 77 percent probability o correctly answering a threeoption multiplechoice question, a 74 percent probability o correctly
answering a ouroption multiplechoice question, a 72 percent probability o correctly answering a veoption multiplechoice question, or a 71 percent probability o correctly answer-
ing a sixoption multiplechoice question. For constructedresponse questions, the question description represents students perormance rated as completely correct. Scores associated
with the three perormance levels reported or age 13 are boxed.
TRENDS IN ACADEMIC PROGRESS 2012
ITEM MAP
SOURCE: U.S. Department o Education, Institute o Education Sciences, National Center or Education Statistics, National Assessment o Educational Progress (NAEP),
2012 LongTerm Trend Mathematics Assessment.
7/28/2019 Trends in Academic Progress
36/60
SOURCE: U.S. Department o Education, Institute o Education Sciences, National Center or Education Statistics, National Assessment o Educational Progress (NAEP), various years,
19782012 LongTerm Trend Mathemat ics Assessments.
PERCENTILE SCORES
Score gains or lower and middle perorming 17-year-olds
Lower and middle perorming 17-year-olds made gains since the 1970s even though the overall
average mathematics score or this age group did not change signicantly (fgure 21). Scores
or students at the 10th, 25th, and 50th percentiles were higher in 2012 than in 1978.
Figure 21. Trend in NAEP mathematics percentile scores or 17-year-old students
* Signicantly dierent (p< .05) rom 2012.
34 THE NATIONS REPORT CARD
7/28/2019 Trends in Academic Progress
37/60
What 17-year-olds know and can do in mathematics
As shown in the item map below, 17-year-olds with a score o 286 were likely to be able to
add two ractions with like denominators. Students with a score o 320 were likely to be
able to successully estimate an integer value or the square root o a number that is not
a perect square. Seventeen-year-olds with a score o 341 were likely to be able to analyze
a proportional relationship.
Age 17 NAEP Mathematics Item Map
Scale score Question description
500//394 Identiy a construction using a compass (MC)365 Rewrite an expression involving exponents and radicals (CR)360 Read and interpret data rom tables, charts, and graphs (MC)357 Determine a logical result rom a statement (MC)352 Compute the area o a circle (CR)350341 Analyze a proportional relationship (MC)338 Identiy an inequality rom its graph (MC)331 Find the median (MC)325 Determine the percent given the part and the whole (MC - age 13)320 Estimate a square root (CR)317 Compute the area o a square given its perimeter (MC)312 Add two ractions with unlike denominators (MC - age 13)308 Convert between units o weight (MC)304 Estimate length (MC - age 13)301 Estimate an outcome in a probability context (MC)300290 Use the transitive property (MC - ages 9 and 13)289 Rewrite an algebraic expression (MC - age 13)286 Add two ractions with like denominators (MC - ages 9 and 13)280 Find the quotient o two negative integers (MC)278 Identiy a particular three-dimensional fgure (MC - age 13)273 Determine a square root (MC)260 Convert between decimals and percents (MC)252 Evaluate an algebraic expression or a given value (CR - age 13)250239 Use congruence properties (CR)224//0
Identiy parallel lines (MC)
CR Constructed-response question MC Multiple-choice question
NOTE: Ages in parentheses indicate crossage questions. The position o a question on the scale represents the scale score attained by students who had a 65 percent probability o
successully answering a constructedresponse question, a 77 percent probability o correctly answering a threeoption multiplechoice question, a 74 percent probability o correctly
answering a ouroption multiplechoice question, a 72 percent probability o correctly answering a veoption multiplechoice question, or a 71 percent probability o correctly answer-
ing a sixoption multiplechoice question. For constructedresponse questions, the question description represents students perormance rated as completely correct. Scores associated
with the three perormance levels reported or age 17 are boxed.
SOURCE: U.S. Department o Education, Institute o Education Sciences, National Center or Education Statistics, National Assessment o Educational Progress (NAEP),
2012 LongTerm Trend Mathematics Assessment.
TRENDS IN ACADEMIC PROGRESS 2012
ITEM MAP
7/28/2019 Trends in Academic Progress
38/60
PERFORMANCE LEVELS
Almost one-hal o 9-year-olds and the majority o 13- and17-year-olds understand basic mathematical operations
Perormance levels provide another perspective or interpreting long-term trend results. Changes in the
percentages at or above each perormance level refect changes in the proportion o students who demon-
strated the knowledge and skills associated with that level in responding to assessment questions.
Forty-seven percent o 9-year-olds, 85 percent o 13-year-olds, and 96 percent o 17-year-olds perormed at
the level o 250 or higher in 2012 (fgure 22). Students at this level demonstrated an understanding o at leastbasic numerical operations. At all three ages, the percentages o students perorming at or above level 250
were higher in 2012 than in 1978.
Mathematics Perormance-Level Descriptions
The skills demonstrated by students at each mathematics perormance level are described
below. The ve perormance levels are applicable at all three age groups; however, the likeli-
hood o attaining higher perormance levels is related to a students age. The perormance-
level results presented or each age are those that are most likely to show signicant change
across the assessment years. For this reason, only three perormance levels are discussed or
each age. See the Technical Notes or inormation about how the levels were set.
LEVEL 350: Multistep Problem Solving and Algebra
Students at this level can apply a range o reasoning skills to solve multistep problems. They
can solve routine problems involving ractions and percents, recognize properties o basic
geometric gures, and work with exponents and square roots. They can solve a variety o
two-step problems using variables, identiy equivalent algebraic expressions, and solve linear
equations and inequalities. They are developing an understanding o unctions and coordinate
systems.
LEVEL 300: Moderately Complex Procedures and Reasoning
Students at this level are developing an understanding o number systems. They can compute
with decimals, simple ractions, and commonly encountered percents. They can identiy
geometric gures, measure lengths and angles, and calculate areas o rectangles. Thesestudents are also able to interpret simple inequalities, evaluate ormulas, and solve simple
linear equations. They can nd averages, make decisions based on inormation drawn rom
graphs, and use logical reasoning to solve problems. They are developing the skills to operate
with signed numbers, exponents, and square roots.
LEVEL 250: Numerical Operations and Beginning Problem Solving
Students at this level have an initial understanding o the our basic operations. They are able
to apply whole number addition and subtraction skills to one-step word problems and money
situations. In multiplication, they can nd the product o a two-digit and a one-digit number.
They can also compare inormation rom graphs and charts and are developing an ability to
analyze simple logical relations.
LEVEL 200: Beginning Skills and UnderstandingsStudents at this level have considerable understanding o two-digit numbers. They can add
two-digit numbers but are still developing an ability to regroup in subtraction. They know
some basic multiplication and division acts, recognize relations among coins, can read
inormation rom charts and graphs, and use simple measurement instruments. They are
developing some reasoning skills.
LEVEL 150: Simple Arithmetic Facts
Students at this level know some basic addition and subtraction acts, and most can add
two-digit numbers without regrouping. They recognize simple situations in which addition
and subtraction apply. They also are developing rudimentary classication skills.
36 THE NATIONS REPORT CARD
Reportedfor age
17
17
13
17
13
9
13
9
9
7/28/2019 Trends in Academic Progress
39/60
Figure 22. Trend in NAEP mathematics perormance-level results or 9-, 13-, and 17-year-old students
Age 9
Age 13
Age 17
* Signicantly dierent (p< .05) rom 2012.NOTE: The revised assessment ormat introduced more current assessment procedures and content.
SOURCE: U.S. Department o Education, Institute o Education Sciences, National Center or Education Statistics, National Assessment o Educational Progress (NAEP), various years,
19782012 LongTerm Trend Mathe matics Assessments.
TRENDS IN ACADEMIC PROGRESS 2012
PERFORMANCE LEVELS
7/28/2019 Trends in Academic Progress
40/60
SOURCE: U.S. Department o Education, Institute o Education Sciences, National Center or Education Statistics, National Assessment o Educational Progress (NAEP), various years,
19732012 LongTerm Trend Mathematics Assessments.
White Black score gap narrows at all three ages
Even though White students continued to score 25 or more points higher on average than Black students i
2012, the White Black gap narrowed in comparison to the 1970s at all three ages. The White Hispanic
gap also narrowed rom 1973 at ages 13 and 17, but did not change signicantly at age 9.
Black 9-year-olds make larger gains than White studentsThe 36-point gain made by Black 9-year-olds rom 1973 was larger than the gain made by White students,leading to a narrowing o the White Black score gap in 2012 (fgure 23). Hispanic students made a
32-point gain, but this was not signicantly dierent rom the gain or White students (fgure 24). Con-
sequently, the White Hispanic gap did not narrow signicantly even though it was numerically smaller.
Figure 23. Trend in NAEP mathematics average scores and score gaps or White and Black 9-year-old students
* Signicantly dierent (p< .05) rom 2012.Extrapolated data adjusting or the limited number o questions rom the 1973 mathematics assessment in common with the
assessments that ollowed.
1
The White
Black score
gap narrowed
10 pointssince 1973.
NOTE: Black includes Arican American. Race categories exclude Hispanic origin. Score gaps are calculated based on dierences
between unrounded average scores.
* Signicantly dierent (p< .05) rom 2012.Extrapolated data adjusting or the limited number o questions rom the 1973 mathematics assessment in common with the
assessments that ollowed.
Figure 24. Trend in NAEP mathematics average scores and score gaps or White and Hispanic 9-year-old students
1
NOTE: White excludes students o Hispanic origin. Hispanic includes Latino. Score gaps are calculated based on dierences
between unrounded average scores.
RACIAL/ETHNIC GAPS
38 THE NATIONS REPORT CARD
7/28/2019 Trends in Academic Progress
41/60
7/28/2019 Trends in Academic Progress
42/60
SOURCE: U.S. Department o Education, Institute o Education Sciences, National Center or Education Statistics, National Assessment o Educational Progress (NAEP), various years,
19732012 LongTerm Trend Mathemat ics Assessments.
White, Black, and Hispanic 17-year-olds show improvement since the 1970sWhite Black and White Hispanic gaps narrowed at age 17 because Black and Hispanic students made
larger gains rom 1973 than White students (fgures 27 and 28). Average mathematics scores or 17-year-olds increased 4 points rom the rst assessment year or White students, 18 points or Black students, and
17 points or Hispanic students.
The changing makeup o the student population is one reason why the overall average score or 17-year-olds
has not changed signicantly even though student groups within the overall population are making gains.When an increase in the proportion o typically lower perorming students is accompanied by a decrease in
the proportion o higher perorming students, the overall average score can remain unchanged even thoughthe average scores or both higher and lower perorming groups increase. This phenomenon is known as
Simpsons paradox.
Figure 27. Trend in NAEP mathematics average scores and score gaps or White and Black 17-year-old students
* Signicantly dierent (p< .05) rom 2012.1 Extrapolated data adjusting or the limited number o questions rom the 1973 mathematics assessment in common with the
assessments that ollowed.
The White
Black score
gap narrowed
14points
since 1973.
NOTE: Black includes Arican American. Race categories exclude Hispanic origin. Score gaps are calculated based on dierences
between unrounded average scores.
Figure 28. Trend in NAEP mathematics average scores and score gaps or White and Hispanic 17-year-old students
* Signicantly dierent (p< .05) rom 2012.
Extrapolated data adjusting or the limited number o questions rom the 1973 mathematics assessment in common with theassessments that ollowed.
1
The White
Hispanic score
gap narrowed
14 pointssince 1973.
NOTE: White excludes students o Hispanic origin. Hispanic includes Latino. Score gaps are calculated based on dierences
between unrounded average scores.
RACIAL/ETHNIC GAPS
40 THE NATIONS REPORT CARD
7/28/2019 Trends in Academic Progress
43/60TRENDS IN ACADEMIC PROGRESS 2012
GENDER GAPS
Gender gap or 17-year-olds narrows rom 1973
The 2012 reading results show emale students scoring higher on average than male students at all threeages, but this is not the case in mathematics. In 2012, there were no signicant gender gaps in mathematics
). At age 17, male students scored higher in mathematics than emale students.The gender gap in 2012 at age 17, however, was narrower than in 1973 due to the increase in the averageat ages 9 and 13 (fgure 29
score or emale students.
Trend in NAEP mathematics average scores and score gaps or 9-, 13-, and 17-year-old students, by genderFigure 29.
Age 9
Age 13
Age 17
Revised assessment format
Original assessment format
# Rounds to zero.Extrapolated data2
* Signicantly dierent (p< .05) rom 2012.1 Negative numbers indicate that the average score or male students was lower than the score or emale students.2 Extrapolated data adjusting or the limited number o questions rom the 1973 mathematics assessment in common with the assessments that ollowed.
The gender
gap narrowed
4points
since 1973.
NOTE: Score gaps are calculated based on dierences between unrounded average scores. Score dierences were not ound
to be statistically signicant at age 9 in 1973, 1986, 1990, 1992, 1994, 1999, 2004, 2008, and 2012; at age 13 in 1973, 1978,
1982, 1986, 1990, 1992, 1999, 2004 (revised assessment ormat), and 2012; and at age 17 in 1999.
SOURCE: U.S. Department o Education, Institute o Education Sciences, National Center or Education Statistics, National Assessment o Educational Progress (NAEP), various years,
19732012 LongTerm Trend Mathe matics Assessments.
7/28/2019 Trends in Academic Progress
44/60
SOURCE: U.S. Department o Education, Institute o Education Sciences, National Center or Education Statistics, National Assessment o Educational Progress (NAEP), various years,
19782012 LongTerm Trend Mathe matics Assessments.
PUBLIC/CATHOLIC SCHOOL GAPS
Score gap between public and Catholic school studentswidens at age 17
Inormation about the type o school students attend was rst collected or the long-term trend
mathematics assessment in 1978. In most assessment years since then, Catholic school students
have had higher average scores than public school students. In 2012, Catholic school students
scored 7 to 20 points higher on average than public school students across the three age groups(fgure 30).
Both public and Catholic school students scored higher in 2012 than in 1978 at all three ages. Short-
term gains rom 2008 were only seen or 13-year-old students in public schools and 17-year-old
students in Catholic schools. In the case o 17-year-olds, the increase or Catholic school students
led to a widening o the score gap.
This report presents results only or public and Catholic school students because private school
participation rates overall ell below the required standard or reporting results in 2012. (See the
Technical Notes or more inormation.)
Figure 30. Trend in NAEP mathematics average scores and score gaps or 9-, 13-, and 17-year-old students, by
type o schoolAge 9
Age 13
See notes at end o gure.
42 THE NATIONS REPORT CARD
7/28/2019 Trends in Academic Progress
45/60TRENDS IN ACADEMIC PROGRESS 2012
PUBLIC/CATHOLIC SCHOOL GAPS
Trend in NAEP mathematics average scores and score gaps or 9-, 13-, and 17-year-old students, byFigure 30.type o schoolContinued
Age 17
* Signicantly dierent (p< .05) rom 2012.
SOURCE: U.S. Department o Education, Institute o Education Sciences, National Center or Education Statistics, National Assessment o Educational Progress (NAEP), various years,
19782012 LongTerm Trend Mathe matics Assessments.
The score
gap between
17 year-old
Catholic and
public school
students widened
10 pointssince 1978.
-
NOTE: Score gaps are calculated based on dierences between unrounded average scores. Results are not shown or
private schools because the participation rate or private schools did not meet the minimum participation guidelines
or reporting in 2012. At age 17, results are not shown or Catholic schools in 1996 and 2004 (original and revised
assessment ormats) because the participation rates or Catholic schools did not meet the minimum participation
guidelines or reporting. Score dierences were not ound to be statistically signicant at age 9 in 1990 and 2004
(original assessment ormat), at age 13 in 1986, and at age 17 in 1990 and 1999.
7/28/2019 Trends in Academic Progress
46/60
Thirteen- and 17-year-olds whose parents did not fnish high schoolscore higher than in 1978
Students participating in the long-term trend assessment responded to a short section o background
questions that included questions about the highest level o education completed by their parents. Students
selected one o ve response options or each parent:
Didnotnishhighschool Graduatedfromhighschool Someeducationafterhighschool Graduatedfromcollege Dontknow
Results are presented or the highest level o education or either parent. Nine-year-olds were not asked the
question because they are oten unsure about their parents education level.
Students whose parents have completed higher levels o education generally score higher than those whose
parents completed lower levels. In 2012, both 13- and 17-year-olds who reported their parents either did not
nish high school or graduated rom high school scored lower on average than students reporting higher levels
o parental education. Furthermore, students whose parents graduated rom college scored higher than those
reporting lower levels o parental education.
Thirteen-year-olds made long-term gains rom 1978 regardless o the highest level o education they reported
or their parents (fgure 31). The only short-term gain rom 2008 was made by 13-year-olds who indicated that
at least one parent graduated rom college. At age 17, the average score decreased rom 2008 to 2012 or stu-
dents who reported that high school graduation was the highest level o education completed by either parent.
Figure 31. Trend in NAEP mathematics average scores or 13- and 17-year-old students, by highest levelo parental education
Age 13
See note at end o gure.
Thirteen-year
olds whose
parents did
not fnish high
school scored
21 points higherthan in 1978.
-
PARENTAL EDUCATION
SOURCE: U.S. Department o Education, Institute o Education Sciences, National Center or Education Statistics, National Assessment o Educational Progress (NAEP), various years,
19782012 LongTerm Trend Mathemat ics Assessments.
44 THE NATIONS REPORT CARD
7/28/2019 Trends in Academic Progress
47/60TRENDS IN ACADEMIC PROGRESS 2012
PARENTAL EDUCATION
Figure 31. Trend in NAEP mathematics average scores or 13- and 17-year-old students, by highest levelo parental educationContinued
Age 17
* Signicantly dierent (p< .05) rom 2012.
Seventeen
olds whose
parents did
not fnish h
school sco
10 pointshigher tha
in 1978.
SOURCE: U.S. Department o Education, Institute o Education Sciences, National Center or Education Statistics, National Assessment o Educational Progress (NAEP), various years,
19782012 LongTerm Trend Mathematics Asse ssments.
7/28/2019 Trends in Academic Progress
48/60
SOURCE: U.S. Department o Education, Institute o Education Sciences, National Center or Education Statistics, National Assessment o Educational Progress (NAEP),
2012 LongTerm Trend Mathematics Assessment.
COURSETAKING
Thirteen-year-olds taking a regular mathematics coursescore lower than those taking algebra
Implicit in the recent push or higher academic standards is the hope that more challenging course-
work will prepare students or their uture education and careers. Inormation about coursetaking
collected as part o the long-term trend mathematics assessment refects some movement in that
direction. Thirteen-year-olds were asked, What kind o mathematics are you taking this year? andwere given the ollowing ve response options:
Iamnottakingmathematicsthisyear RegularmathematicsPre-algebraAlgebraOther
As might be expected, students engaging in more challenging mathematics coursework tend to
perorm higher than those taking lower level courses. In 2012, students taking a regular mathematics
course scored lower on average than those who reported taking pre-algebra or algebra (fgure 32).
Students taking algebra also scored higher than those taking pre-algebra.
Figure 32. Percentage o students and average scores in NAEP mathematics or 13-year-olds,by type o mathematics taken during the school year: 2012
NOTE: An average score is not shown or students who selected the not taking mathematics response because the sample size was insufcient
to permit a reliable estimate. Detail may not sum to totals because results are not shown or students who reported not taking mathematics.
46 THE NATIONS REPORT CARD
7/28/2019 Trends in Academic Progress
49/60TRENDS IN ACADEMIC PROGRESS 2012
COURSETAKING
Percentage o 13-year-olds taking algebra increasing
NAEP rst collected inormation on mathematics coursetaking at age 13 in 1986. Since that time,
the percentage o 13-year-olds taking algebra has doubled and the percentage taking pre-algebra
has also increased (fgure 33). NCES recently releasedAlgebra I and Geometry Curricula: Results From
. This study explored dierences in thethe 2005 High School Transcript Mathematics Curriculum Study
content o algebra I and geometry courses. The study also examined the accuracy o school course
titles and descriptions in relation to the rigor o what is taught in algebra I and geometry. The
results o the study are available at http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/hsts/math_curriculum/.
Figure 33. Trend in percentage o 13-year-old students assessed in NAEP mathematics,by type o mathematics taken during the school year
# Rounds to zero.
* Signicantly dierent (p< .05) rom 2012.NOTE: Results or 19862004 are rom the original assessment ormat, and results or 2008 and 2012 are rom the revised assessment
ormat (2004 revised assessment ormat results are not available). Detail may not sum to totals because o rounding.
SOURCE: U.S. Department o Education, Institute o Education Sciences, National Center or Education Statistics, National Assessment o Educational Progress (NAEP), various years,
19862012 LongTerm Trend Mathematics Assessments.
http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/hsts/math_curriculum/http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/hsts/math_curriculum/7/28/2019 Trends in Academic Progress
50/60
SOURCE: U.S. Department o Education, Institute o Education Sciences, National Center or Education Statistics, National Assessment o Educational Progress (NAEP),
2012 LongTerm Trend Mathematics Assessment.
COURSETAKING
Seventeen-year-olds taking calculus score higher
Seventeen-year-olds were asked, Counting what you are taking now, have you ever taken any o
the ollowing mathematics courses? The highest level mathematics course was determined
based on students selections rom the ollowing responses:
General,business,orconsumermathematics Pre-algebraorintroductiontoalgebra First-yearalgebraSecond-yearalgebraGeometryTrigonometryPre-calculusorcalculus
As with the pattern at age 13, the more rigorous the coursework, the higher the average
mathematics score or 17-year-olds (fgure 34). In 2012, students who had taken pre-calculus or
calculus scored higher on average than students who selected any o the other options as the
highest level course taken. Second-year algebra or trigonometry was the highest mathematics
course reported by over one-hal o 17-year-olds; the average score or these students was higher
than the scores or students who reported taking other courses, with the exception o pre-calculusor calculus. The average score or students whose highest level course was pre-algebra or general
mathematics was lower than the scores or students taking any o the other courses.
Figure 34. Percentage o students and average scores in NAEP mathematics or17-year-olds, by highest level mathematics course ever taken: 2012
NOTE: The prealgebra or general mathematics response category includes prealgebra or introduction to algebra, general,
business, or consumer mathematics, and students who did not take any o the listed courses. The other response category
includes students or whom the highest level mathematics course could not be determined due to missing or inconsistent responses.
Detail may not sum to totals because o rounding.
48 THE NATIONS REPORT CARD
7/28/2019 Trends in Academic Progress
51/60
SOURCE: U.S. Department o Education, Institute o Education Sciences, National Center or Education Statistics, National Assessment o Educational Progress (NAEP), various years,
19782012 LongTerm Trend Mathe matics Assessments.
TRENDS IN ACADEMIC PROGRESS 2012
COURSETAKING
Percentage o 17-year-olds taking calculus increasing
The percentage o 17-year-olds taking pre-calculus or calculus more than tripled rom 1978 to
2012 (fgure 35). The percentage o students whose highest level mathematics course was
second-year algebra or trigonometry also increased in comparison to 1978.
Figure 35. Trend in percentage o 17-year-old students assessed in NAEP mathematics,
by highest level mathematics course ever taken
* Signicantly dierent (p< .05) rom 2012.NOTE: The prealgebra or general mathematics response category includes prealgebra or i