The NAEP test is often referred to as “The Nation’s Report Card”. It serves in that role because it is one of the few exams used in all 50 states. Since the Minnesota Comprehensive Assessments (MCAs) are unique to MN – and each of the other states have their own math, reading and science tests – based on their own state standards, the NAEP serves as a common measure across all states to enable us to do state-to-state comparisons.
In the current political climate where the overuse and misuse of standardized tests is being hotly debated, NAEP rises above the criticism in many ways. First, the NAEP test is not used at each grade; only grades 4, 8 and 12 are tested. NAEP also uses a random sampling approach in each state, so even at the targeted grades, only about 2500 students are tested at each grade level on each topic (MN has approximately 62,000 students at each grade). By using this approach, NAEP can establish a statistically accurate rating of each state in mathematics and reading, yet the vast majority of students will never be inconvenienced by having to take the exam. Finally, the NAEP exam in a given subject such as math is only administered every 2 years. Since the NAEP math test has been administered since 1973, it provides long-term trends.
However, the NAEP test is not without criticism. Currently in mathematics nationally, between 36 and 40 percent of students at the 4th and 8th grades are scoring at or above the “Proficient” level on NAEP. While a test that is rigorous is often held in high regard, we don’t really have evidence that the scale that NAEP is built on is a realistic expectation for most students. And that has a ripple effect on the messages that are sent out regarding the results and the performance of schools. Legislation and school budget allocations often reflect decisions based on standardized test results.
As the current results (2015) are released there is often a rush to “claim or blame” policies and political leaders for their role in the results. And this year is no exception (see Diane Ravitch’s comments: http://dianeravitch.net/2015/10/28/naep-scores-released-today-showing-the-fiasco-of-nclb-and-race-to-the-top/). But the reality is that when an 8th grade student participates in the exam, the knowledge that they bring to that test reflects their learning from Kindergarten to grade 8 and it is not likely that the NAEP results are sensitive to recent policy or leadership changes.
Historical NAEP results:
Chad Aldeman wrote an interesting article regarding the 2015 NAEP results – interesting from the perspective that it was written prior to the results being released. His wise advice is to pay more attention to long term trends than to what happens over the two year span between consecutive tests. His article and a link to long term trends can be found here:
http://morganpolikoff.com/2015/10/06/friends-dont-let-friends-misuse-
https://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=2013456
Aldeman points out the following national trends of point-gains over time:
4th grade math
- All students: +25*
- White students: +27*
- Black students: +36*
- Hispanic students: +32*
8th grade math
- All students: +19*
- White students: +19*
- Black students: +36*
- Hispanic students: +32*
12th grade math
- All students: +2
- White students: +4*
- Black students: +18*
- Hispanic students: +17*
The 2015 NAEP Results:
Results for the 2015 NAEP mathematics performance at grades 4 and 8 were just released and the results for grade 12 will be released in 2016.
National Mathematics Results:
At grade 4 nationally, 40% of students were at or above proficient.
At grade 8 nationally, 33% of students were at or above proficient.
MN Mathematics Performance:
At grade 4 in MN, 53% of students were at or above proficient.
At grade 8 in MN, 48% of students were at or above proficient.
MN ranks second only to Massachusetts and has held a similar location for many years.
So when the 2015 results show a plateau in growth in mathematics, or a one to two point drop (as MN experienced this year) it needs to be placed in that long term perspective. MN, like the other states, has its challenges such as addressing the achievement gap, but also has much to celebrate in its long-term achievement and state ranking. SciMathMN looks forward to partnering with MN education leaders to maintain and improve our K-12 mathematics performance.
Images are from the NAEP Website: http://www.nationsreportcard.gov/reading_math_2015/#?grade=4
Contributed by Mike Lindstrom Ed.D.