Table of Contents  |  Search Technical Documentation  |  References

NAEP Sample Design → Sample Design for the 2000 Assessment → National Main Assessment Sample Design in 2000 → Student Sample Selection for the 2000 National Main Assessment → Students Excluded from the 2000 National Main Assessment

NAEP Technical DocumentationStudents Excluded from the 2000 National Main Assessment

			Determining the SD/LEP Student's Capability to Participate in the Assessment Weighted Percentages of Students Excluded (S2) Weighted Percentages of Students Excluded (S3)

In NAEP assessments, some students have been excluded from the assessment because school officials believed that either they could not participate meaningfully in the assessment or that they could not participate without assessment accommodations that the program did not, at the time, make available. These students fall into the general categories of students with disabilities (SD) and limited-English-proficient students (LEP). Some identified students fall within both of these categories.

For the 2000 assessment, schools were asked to complete a questionnaire for each student identified as having a disability or its equivalent (SD) and/or being limited English proficient (LEP). School personnel determined if any of these students should be excluded from the assessment as shown on the web page titled Determining the SD/LEP Student's Capability to Participate in the Assessment.

The tables titled Weighted Percentages of Students Excluded (S2) and Weighted Percentages of Students Excluded (S3) show rates of excluded SD/LEP students from the S2 and S3 samples. As the web page titled Sample Type Assignment to Schools explains, students in sample type 2 (S2) schools were not offered accommodations, whereas students in sample type 3 (S3) schools were offered accommodations. The two tables show the distributions of excluded students by reason for exclusion. The dominant reason for exclusion from NAEP across all grades and subjects was a student disability. The proportion attributable to student disability increased with grade, whereas the proportion attributable to limited English proficiency, the second reason, decreased with grade.

The table Student Exclusion Rates by School Type summarizes the overall rates of exclusion for each reporting population, grade, subject, and school type. As expected, the exclusion rates for the R3 reporting population are significantly lower than those for the R2 reporting population because accommodations were offered to students in the R3 population if necessary. It also shows that the exclusion rates for the private schools, which generally have very few SD or LEP students, are much lower than for the public schools. The exclusion rates for the grade 12 samples are significantly lower than those for the grades 4 and 8 samples.

Printer-friendly Version