The National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), administered regularly in a number of subjects since 1969, has two major goals: to assess student performance reflecting current educational and assessment practices; and to measure change in student performance reliably over time. To address these goals, the NAEP includes a main assessment and a long-term trend assessment. The assessments are administered to separate samples of students at separate times, use separate instrumentation, and measure different educational content. Consequently, results from the assessments should not be compared. Both assessments excluded certain subgroups of students identified as "special needs students," including students with disabilities and students with limited English proficiency. In 1998, 2000, and 2001, the main NAEP assessment provided a separate assessment with provisions made for accommodations for these students.

Main NAEP

Indicators 11, 12, 13, and 14 are based on the main NAEP. The main NAEP periodically assesses students' performance in several subjects, following the curriculum frameworks developed by the National Assessment Governing Board (NAGB) and using the latest advances in assessment methodology. NAGB develops the frameworks using standards developed within the field, using a consensus process involving educators, subject-matter experts, and other interested citizens.

The content and nature of the main NAEP evolves to match instructional practices, so the ability to measure change reliably over time is limited. As standards for instruction and curriculum change, so does the main NAEP. As a result, data from different assessments are not always comparable. Recent NAEP main assessment instruments have typically been kept stable for short periods of time, allowing for a comparison across time in mathematics, science, and reading. Assessment instruments from 1990 to 2001 were developed using the same framework; they share a common set of tasks; and the populations of students were sampled and assessed using comparable procedures. For some subjects that are not assessed frequently, such as civics and the arts, no trend data are available.

Main NAEP results are reported in terms of predetermined achievement levels. Each assessment reflects current standards of performance in each subject. The achievement levels define what students who are performing at Basic, Proficient, and Advanced levels of achievement should know and be able to do. NAGB establishes achievement levels whenever a new main NAEP framework is adopted. These achievement levels have undergone several evaluations but remain developmental in nature and continue to be used on a trial basis. Until the Commissioner of NCES determines that the levels are reasonable, valid, and informative to the public, they should be interpreted and used with caution. The policy definitions of the achievement levels that apply across all grades and subject areas are as follows:

• Basic: This level denotes partial mastery of prerequisite knowledge and skills that are fundamental for proficient work at each grade.
• Proficient: This level represents solid academic performance for each grade assessed. Students reaching this level have demonstrated competency over challenging subject matter, including subject-matter knowledge, application of such knowledge to real-world situations, and analytical skills appropriate to the subject matter.
• Advanced: This level signifies superior performance.

Main NAEP Mathematics Coursetaking

The main NAEP assessments included questions asking students in grades 8 and 12 about their course-taking patterns. In 8th grade, students reported on the mathematics course they were currently taking. For reporting purposes, courses were grouped into lower level (group 1) courses and higher level (group 2) courses. Group 1 courses include 8th-grade mathematics and prealgebra. Group 2 courses include algebra I, algebra II, geometry, and integrated or sequential mathematics.

In grade 12, students reported on the courses they had taken in grades 9 through 12 and the year they had taken each course. For reporting purposes, course-taking patterns were grouped into three levels: low level, middle level, and high level. Low-level coursetaking included students who had taken no mathematics courses or had taken only courses among the following: general mathematics, business mathematics, applied mathematics, and introduction to algebra. Middle-level coursetaking included students who took algebra I in grade 9 and geometry in grade 10 but had not taken the most advanced courses, including trigonometry, precalculus, statistics, or calculus. High-level coursetaking included students who took one or more among the following: trigonometry, precalculus, statistics, discrete or finite mathematics, and calculus. The three levels equate roughly with the mathematics pipeline detailed in supplemental note 6. Low-level courses are roughly equivalent to the nonacademic or low academic levels. Middle-level courses are roughly equivalent to the middle academic levels, and high-level courses are roughly equivalent to the advanced academic levels.