"Evaluation of the Achievement Levels for Mathematics and Reading on the National Assessment of Educational Progress" ed. by Christopher Edley, Jr., and Judith A. Koenig
Committee on National Statistics; Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education; National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine
NAS Press | 2016 | ISBN: 0309438179 9780309438179 | 266 pages | PDF | 15 MB
Committee on National Statistics; Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education; National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine
NAS Press | 2016 | ISBN: 0309438179 9780309438179 | 266 pages | PDF | 15 MB
This volume evaluates the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) student achievement levels in reading and mathematics in grades 4, 8, and 12 to determine whether the achievement levels are reasonable, reliable, valid, and informative to the public, and recommends ways that the setting and use of achievement levels can be improved.
Since 1969, the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) has been providing policymakers, educators, and the public with reports on academic performance and progress of the nation’s students. The assessment is given periodically in a variety of subjects: mathematics, reading, writing, science, the arts, civics, economics, geography, U.S. history, and technology and engineering literacy. NAEP is given to representative samples of students across the U.S. to assess the educational progress of the nation as a whole.
Since 1992, NAEP results have been reported in relation to three achievement levels: basic, proficient, and advanced. However, the use of achievement levels has provoked controversy and disagreement, and evaluators have identified numerous concerns.
Contents
Summary
1 Introduction
2 Setting Achievement Levels: History
3 Setting Achievement Levels: NAEP Process
4 Reliability of the Achievement Levels
5 Validity of the Achievement Levels
6 Interpretations and Uses of NAEP Achievement Levels
7 Setting New Standards: Considerations
8 Conclusions and Recommendations
References
Appendix A: Agenda for Public Forum
Appendix B: Biographical Sketches of Committee Members and Staff
true PDF with TOC BookMarkLinks