• Introduction
• Achievement Levels Provide Standards for Student Performance
• NAEP 2003 Reading Assessment Design
• Average Fourth- and Eighth-Grade Reading Scores Show Little Change
• How Well Did Students Perform in 2003?
• Higher Percentages of Fourth- and Eighth-Graders Performed at or Above Proficient in 2003 Compared to 1992
• Trends in Percentiles Differ by Grade Level
• How States Performed in Reading
• How Various Groups of Students Performed in Reading

Since 1969, the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) has been an ongoing nationally representative indicator of what American students know and can do in major academic subjects. Over the years, NAEP has measured students' achievement in many subjects, including reading, mathematics, science, writing, U.S. history, geography, civics, and the arts. In 2003, NAEP conducted a national and state assessment in reading at grades 4 and 8. NAEP is a project of the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) within the Institute of Education Sciences of the U.S. Department of Education, and is overseen by the National Assessment Governing Board (NAGB).

Beginning in 2002, the NAEP national sample was obtained by aggregating the samples from each state, rather than by obtaining an independently selected national sample. As a consequence, the size of the national sample increased, and smaller differences between years or between types of students were found to be statistically significant than would have been detected in previous assessments. In keeping with past practice, all statistically significant differences are indicated in the current report.

The results presented in this report distinguish between two different reporting samples that reflect a change in administration procedures. The more recent results are based on administration procedures in which testing accommodations (e.g., extended time, small group testing) were permitted for students with disabilities (SD) and limited-English-proficient (LEP) students. Accommodations were not permitted in 1992 or 1994. Comparisons between results from 2003 and those from assessment years in which both types of administration procedures were used (in 1998 and 2000 at grade 4 and in 1998 at grade 8) are discussed based on the results when accommodations were permitted, even though significant differences in results when accommodations were not permitted may be noted in the figures and tables.

Achievement levels are performance standards set by NAGB to provide a context for interpreting student performance on NAEP. These performance standards, based on recommendations from broadly representative panels of educators and members of the public, are used to report what students should know and be able to do at the Basic, Proficient, and Advanced levels of performance in each subject area and at each grade assessed.*

The minimum scale scores for achievement levels are as follows:

As provided by law, NCES, upon review of a congressionally mandated evaluation of NAEP, has determined that achievement levels are to be used on a trial basis and should be interpreted and used with caution. However, both NCES and NAGB believe that these performance standards are useful for understanding trends in student achievement. NAEP achievement levels have been widely used by national and state officials.

The NAEP reading framework, which defines the content for the 1992–2003 assessments, was developed through a comprehensive national consultative process and adopted by NAGB. The reading framework is organized along two dimensions, the context for reading and the aspect of reading. The context dimension is divided into three areas that characterize the purposes for reading: reading for literary experience, reading for information, and reading to perform a task. All three contexts are assessed at grade 8, but reading to perform a task is not assessed at grade 4. The aspects of reading, which define the types of comprehension questions used in the assessments, include forming a general understanding, developing interpretation, making reader/text connections, and examining content and structure. The complete framework is available on the NAGB web site (http://www.nagb.org/pubs/pubs.html).

Results from the 2003 reading assessment are reported for the nation and states at grades 4 and 8. The national results are based on a representative sample of students in both public schools and nonpublic schools, while the state results are based only on public school students.

It is NAEP's intent to assess all selected students from the target population. Before 1998, no testing accommodations were provided to SD and LEP students who participated in the NAEP reading assessments. In 1998 and 2000 (at fourth grade only), NAEP was administered to two reporting samples—"accommodations not permitted" and "accommodations permitted." Beginning in 2002, the NAEP reading assessment adopted the new "accommodations permitted" procedure as its only administration procedure, and thus had only one reporting sample as in reading assessment years prior to 1998.

Because the representativeness of samples is ultimately a validity issue, NCES has commissioned studies of the impact of assessment accommodations on overall scores. One paper that explores the impact of two possible scenarios on NAEP is available on the NAEP web site (http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/pdf/main2002/statmeth.pdf).

No significant change was detected between 2002 and 2003 in the average score for fourth-graders (figure A). The average fourth-grade score in 2003 was not found to differ significantly from that in 1992. The average reading score for eighth-graders decreased by 1 point between 2002 and 2003; however, the score in 2003 was higher than that in 1992. (Differences are discussed in this report only if they were found to be statistically significant.)

Figure A. Average reading scores, grades 4 and 8: 1992–2003

Thirty-one percent of fourth-graders and 32 percent of eighth-graders performed at or above the Proficient level in 2003. The percentage of students performing at or above the Basic level in 2003 was 63 percent at grade 4 and 74 percent at grade 8.

The percentages of students performing at or above the Proficient level were higher in 2003 than in 1992 at both grades 4 and 8. No significant change was detected in the percentage of fourth-graders at or above Basic from 2002 to 2003, and the percentage of fourth-graders at or above Basic in 2003 was not found to differ significantly from that in 1992. The percentage of eighth-graders at or above Basic decreased by 1 point between 2002 and 2003, but was higher in 2003 than in 1992.

Looking at changes in scores for students at lower, middle, and higher performance levels gives a more complete picture of student progress. An examination of scores at different percentiles on the 0–500 reading scale at each grade indicates whether or not the changes seen in the national average score results are reflected in the performance of lower-, middle-, and higher-performing students.

The percentile indicates the percentage of students whose scores fell below a particular score. For example, 25 percent of assessed students' scores fell below the 25th percentile score and 75 percent fell below the 75th percentile score.

There was a 1-point increase in the fourth-grade reading score at the 90th percentile between 2002 and 2003, and the score in 2003 was not found to be significantly different from that in 1992. The score at the 75th percentile for fourth-graders showed no significant change since 2002, but was higher in 2003 than in 1992.

There were decreases in eighth-grade scores at the 10th and 25th percentiles from 2002 to 2003. Scores at the 10th, 25th, 50th, and 75th percentiles were higher in 2003 than in 1992.

In addition to national results, the 2003 reading assessment collected performance data for fourth- and eighth-graders who attended public schools in states and other jurisdictions that participated. In 2003, all 50 states and 3 other jurisdictions participated at grades 4 and 8.

Among the 46 states and jurisdictions that participated in both the 2002 and 2003 fourth-grade assessments, 1 showed an increase in the average reading score and 1 showed a decrease. Of the 42 states and jurisdictions that participated in both the 1992 and 2003 fourth-grade assessments, 13 showed increases and 5 showed declines in average scores.

At grade 8, of 44 states and jurisdictions that participated in both 2002 and 2003, 1 showed a gain and 6 showed declines in average scores. Of the 39 states and jurisdictions that participated in both 1998 (when accommodations were permitted) and 2003, 8 showed increases and 7 showed declines in average scores.

In 2003, 28 of the 53 states and other jurisdictions that participated at grade 4 had average scores that were higher than the national average, 11 had scores that were not found to differ significantly from the national average, and 14 had average scores that were lower than the average score for the nation.

Of the 53 states and other jurisdictions that participated in 2003 at grade 8, 31 had average scores that were higher than the national average, 6 had average scores that were not found to differ significantly from the national average, and 16 had average scores that were lower than the national average score.

At grade 4, 24 states and other jurisdictions had higher percentages of students at or above Proficient than the nation, 16 had percentages that were not found to be statistically different from the nation, and 13 had percentages that were lower than the nation.

At grade 8, 25 states and other jurisdictions had higher percentages of students at or above Proficient than the nation, 11 had percentages that were not found to be significantly different from the nation, and 17 had percentages that were lower than the nation.

Of the 46 states and other jurisdictions that participated in both the 2002 and 2003 fourth-grade reading assessments, 1 showed an increase and 1 showed a decrease in the percentage of students at or above Proficient. The percentage of fourth-graders at or above Proficient increased in 17 of the 42 states and jurisdictions that participated in both the 1992 and 2003 assessments, and none showed a decline since 1992.

Of the 44 states and jurisdictions that participated in the 2002 and 2003 eighth-grade reading assessments, 1 showed an increase and 2 showed declines in the percentage of students at or above Proficient. Between 1998 (when accommodations were permitted) and 2003, the percentage of eighth-graders performing at or above Proficient increased in 5 of the 39 states and jurisdictions that participated in both years, and 1 showed a decline.

In addition to reporting on overall students' performance on its assessments, NAEP also reports on the performance of various subgroups of students. The reading performance of subgroups of students in 2003 indicates whether they have progressed since earlier assessments and allows for comparisons with the performance of other subgroups in 2003.

When reading these subgroup results, it is important to keep in mind that there is no simple, cause-and-effect relationship between membership in a subgroup and achievement in NAEP. A complex mix of educational and socioeconomic factors may interact to affect student performance.

Average reading scores by gender. No statistically significant changes were detected in average scores of male or female fourth-graders between 2002 and 2003, or between 1992 and 2003. The average reading score for male eighth-graders declined 2 points between 2002 and 2003; the average score in 2003 was higher than in 1992 (figure B). The average score for female eighth-graders in 2003 was not found to differ significantly from the scores in any of the previous assessment years. Female students scored higher on average than male students at both grades 4 and 8.

Average reading score gaps between males and females. In 2003, female students scored higher on average than male students by 7 points at grade 4 and by 11 points at grade 8. No statistically significant change was detected in the gender gaps between 2002 and 2003, and the fourth- and eighth-grade gaps observed in 2003 were not found to be significantly different from those in 1992.

Achievement-level results by gender. At grade 4, no significant change was detected from 2002 to 2003 in the percentages of male or female students performing at or above the Basic and Proficient levels, and the percentages in 2003 were not found to differ significantly from those in 1992 for either subgroup.

At grade 8, the percentage of male students at or above Proficient was higher in 2003 than in 1992. There was no significant difference detected in the percentage of female eighth-graders at or above Proficient in 2003 in comparison to any of the previous assessments. The percentages of both male and female students at or above Basic declined from 2002 to 2003, but both percentages were higher in 2003 than in 1992.

Figure B. Average reading scale scores, by gender, grades 4 and 8: 1992–2003

Average reading scores by race/ethnicity. There were no significant changes detected since 2002 in the average scores for any of the racial/ethnic groups at either grade 4 or grade 8. The average scores for White, Black, and Asian/Pacific Islander fourth-graders were higher in 2003 than in 1992. The average scores for White, Black, and Hispanic eighth-graders were also higher in 2003 than in 1992 (figure C). The apparent decrease in the average score for American Indian/Alaska Native students in 2003 was not found to be statistically significant at either grade 4 or grade 8.

In 2003, White students and Asian/Pacific Islander students outperformed Black, Hispanic, and American Indian/Alaska Native students on average at both grades 4 and 8. At grade 4, White students also scored higher on average than Asian/Pacific Islander students, and Hispanic students scored higher on average than Black students. There were no significant differences detected at grade 8 between the average scores for White and Asian/Pacific Islander students or between the average scores for Hispanic and Black students.

Average reading score gaps between selected racial/ethnic subgroups. At both grades 4 and 8, the average score gaps between White and Black students and between White and Hispanic students in 2003 were not found to differ significantly from those in 2002 or 1992.

Achievement-level results by race/ethnicity. At both grades 4 and 8, there were no significant changes detected in the percentages of students at or above the Basic and Proficient levels within any of the racial/ethnic subgroups since 2002. At grade 4, the percentages of White, Black, and Asian/Pacific Islander students at or above Proficient were higher in 2003 than in 1992. Also, the percentages of White and Black students at or above Basic were higher in 2003 compared to 1992. No significant changes were detected in the percentages of Hispanic students at or above Basic or Proficient in 2003 compared to 1992. At grade 8, the percentages of White students and Black students at or above the Basic and Proficient levels were higher in 2003 than in 1992. A higher percentage of Hispanic students scored at or above Basic in 2003 than in 1992.

Figure C. Average reading scale scores, by selected race/ethnicity, grades 4 and 8: 1992–2003

Average reading scores by students' eligibility for free/reduced-price school lunch. NAEP collects data on students' eligibility for free/reduced-price lunch as an indicator of family economic status. Eligibility for free and reduced-price lunches is determined by students' family income in relation to the federally established poverty level. Free lunch qualification is set at 130 percent of the poverty level, and reduced-price lunch qualification is set between 130 and 185 percent of the poverty level. Information regarding students' eligibility in 2003 was not available for 10 percent of fourth-graders and 11 percent of eighth-graders, either because their school did not participate in the National School Lunch Program or for other reasons.

At grade 4, average scores were higher in 2003 than in 1998 for students who were eligible for free/reduced-price lunch and for students who were not eligible, but showed no significant change between 2002 and 2003.

At grade 8, the average score for students who were eligible for free/reduced-price lunch showed a decrease between 2002 and 2003. Average scores in 2003 were not found to differ significantly from those in 1998 for students who were eligible for free/reduced-price lunch or for students who were not eligible.

Results broken down by students' eligibility for free lunch and eligibility for reduced-price lunch are available on the NAEP web site (http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/nde). The average reading scores for fourth- and eighth-graders who were eligible for free lunch were lower than the scores for students who were eligible for reduced-price lunch, and both were lower than the scores for students who were not eligible.

Achievement-level results by students' eligibility for free/reduced-price lunch. The percentages of fourth-graders at or above Basic were higher in 2003 than 1998 for students who were eligible and for students who were not eligible for free/reduced-price lunch. For those students who were eligible, the percentage at or above Proficient was higher in 2003 than in 1998.

At grade 8, the percentage of students at or above Basic decreased between 2002 and 2003 for students who were eligible, but the percentage at or above Basic in 2003 was not found to differ significantly from that in 1998.

Average reading score gaps between students who were eligible and those who were not eligible for free/reduced-price lunch. At grade 4, the average score gap between students who were eligible and students who were not eligible for free/reduced-price lunch in 2003 was not found to be significantly different from the gap in either 1998 or 2002. At grade 8, the gap in 2003 was larger than in 2002 but was not found to be significantly different from 1998.

*The NAEP achievement levels are as follows: Basic denotes partial mastery of prerequisite knowledge and skills that are fundamental for proficient work at each grade. Proficient 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 signifies superior performance. Detailed descriptions of the NAEP reading achievement levels can be found on the NAGB web site (http://www.nagb.org/pubs/pubs.html).