The National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) has released two reports based on the 2018 NAEP Oral Reading Fluency (ORF) study: a brief highlights report and a longer statistical analysis report. This statistical report presents detailed information about the 2018 NAEP ORF study, the first such NAEP study since 2002. The study was administered to a nationally representative sample of over 1,800 fourth-graders from 180 public schools. Students who participated in the study first completed the NAEP fourth-grade reading assessment. Then they read four short passages out loud to assess their oral reading fluency (i.e., the ability to read text aloud with speed, accuracy, and proper expression) as well as two kinds of word lists to assess their foundational skills (i.e., word reading and phonological decoding). Both the NAEP reading tasks and oral reading tasks were administered to students digitally, with student responses recorded on tablets.

The results indicate that for an estimated 1.3 million public school fourth-graders (36 percent) who performed below the NAEP Basic achievement level in reading in 2018, and in particular for an estimated 420,000 fourth-graders whose performance placed them in the lowest third of the below NAEP Basic level, fluent reading of connected text, such as paragraphs, is a major challenge. The challenge with fluency and foundational skills is particularly pronounced among Black and Hispanic students. These students read a passage at half the rate of a NAEP Proficient fourth-grader; misread 1 out of every 6 words, which are more likely to be content words that are important for comprehension, not function words (e.g., the, and, on); focus on individual words or phrases instead of the meanings of sentences and passages; read in a monotone voice, indicating lack of text comprehension; and show little knowledge of spelling-sound correspondence.

The National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) has released two reports based on the 2018 NAEP Oral Reading Fluency (ORF) study: a brief highlights report and a longer statistical analysis report. This highlights report presents the key concepts and findings of the 2018 NAEP ORF study, the first such NAEP study since 2002. The study was administered to a nationally representative sample of over 1,800 fourth-graders from 180 public schools. Students who participated in the study first completed the NAEP fourth-grade reading assessment. Then they read four short passages out loud to assess their oral reading fluency (i.e., the ability to read text aloud with speed, accuracy, and proper expression) as well as two kinds of word lists to assess their foundational skills (i.e., word reading and phonological decoding). Both the NAEP reading tasks and oral reading tasks were administered to students digitally, with student responses recorded on tablets.

The results indicate that for an estimated 1.3 million public school fourth-graders (36 percent) who performed below the NAEP Basic achievement level in reading in 2018, and in particular for an estimated 420,000 fourth-graders whose performance placed them in the lowest third of the below NAEP Basic level, fluent reading of connected text, such as paragraphs, is a major challenge. The challenge with fluency and foundational skills is particularly pronounced among Black and Hispanic students. These students read a passage at half the rate of a NAEP Proficient fourth-grader; misread 1 out of every 6 words, which are more likely to be content words that are important for comprehension, not function words (e.g., the, and, on); focus on individual words or phrases instead of the meanings of sentences and passages; read in a monotone voice, indicating lack of text comprehension; and show little knowledge of spelling-sound correspondence.

This statistical analysis report presents key findings and other data highlights from School-Level Finance Survey (SLFS) in school years 2015-16 and 2016-17. The report focuses on (1) the completeness and comparability of SLFS data and (2) how the SLFS can be utilized to evaluate differences in resource allocation (as measured by school-level expenditures) across schools, school districts, and states.

In discussing the findings, the report presents district- and state-aggregated information on school-level expenditure data collected through the SLFS, including:

• universe coverage and survey item response rates, by state;
• comparison of SLFS finance data with comparable state-level finance data collected through the National Public Education Financial Survey (NPEFS); and
• statistics on a wide variety of school-level expenditures (and school-level expenditures per pupil), by school characteristics such as urbanicity and school poverty indicators such as Title I eligibility.

The report also includes an assortment of tables and figures to support its key findings on school-level expenditures collected through the SLFS.

These online Highlights reports present an overview of results from the NAEP 2018 civics, geography, and U.S. history reports. The reports include national results on the performance of eighth-grade students. Results are presented in terms of average scale scores and as percentages of students performing at or above the three NAEP achievement levels: NAEP Basic, NAEP Proficient, and NAEP Advanced. In addition to overall scores, results are reported by racial/ethnic groups, gender, type of school, and other demographic groups.

There was no significant change in the 2018 average civics score for eighth-grade students compared to the score in 2014. Reflecting the relatively stable overall average score since 2014, there were no significant changes in the scores of students at any of the selected percentile levels or for any of the major student groups that NAEP reports on. The 2018 average civics score was higher than the score in 1998. In addition, the scores of lower-performing students (those at the 10th and 25th percentiles) in 2018 were also higher than in 1998.

The 2018 average geography score for eighth-grade students was lower than in 2014. In 2018, scores for lower-performing students at the 10th and 25th percentiles decreased compared to scores in 2014, while the scores for middle- and higher-performing students remained relatively stable. There was no significant change in the 2018 score compared to the score from the first assessment in 1994; however, scores for higher-performing students (those at the 75th and 90th percentiles) were lower than in 1994.

In 2018, the average U.S. history score for eighth-grade students was lower than in 2014. Students at all selected percentile levels other than those at the highest level (those at the 90th percentile) saw a decrease in their scores. Compared to the score in the first assessment year in 1994, the 2018 average U.S. history score was 4 points higher. Students across performance levels made gains compared to 1994 except those at the 90th percentile, where there was no significant change in the score for these highest-performing students.

Highlighted results include responses of students and teachers to survey questionnaires designed to collect information about students’ educational experiences and opportunities to learn both in and outside of the classroom. In addition, the report includes sample questions from the assessments to help illustrate the types of knowledge and skills measured in civics, geography, and U.S. history.

These online Highlights present overviews of results from the NAEP 2019 mathematics report and the 2019 reading report. Highlighted results include key findings for the nation, states/jurisdictions, and the 27 districts that participated in the Trial Urban District Assessment (TUDA) at grades 4 and 8. Results are presented in terms of average scale scores and as percentages of students performing at the three NAEP achievement levels: NAEP Basic, NAEP Proficient, and NAEP Advanced. Highlighted results include performance data for demographic student groups, five selected percentiles, and NAEP survey questionnaires.

The 2019 average scores were higher for grade 4 mathematics, lower for grade 8 mathematics, and lower at both grades for reading compared to averages scores in 2017. Over the long term, however, the national average scores in both subjects were higher for both grades compared to the initial assessment years (1990 for mathematics and 1992 for reading). At the state level, average mathematics scores were mainly steady across states/jurisdictions at both grades since 2017: at grade 4, scores were higher in nine and lower in 3 states/jurisdictions. Average reading scores were lower compared to 2017 in 17 states/jurisdictions at grade 4 and in 31 states/jurisdictions at grade 8; one state/jurisdiction at each grade had a score increase since 2017.

Average mathematics and reading scores across the participating TUDA districts were relatively stable since 2017: mathematics scores increased in five TUDA districts at grade 4 and in four districts at grade 8; one district at grade 4 and three districts at grade 8 had lower mathematics scores since 2017. Only one TUDA district had a higher reading score in 2019 compared to 2017. Reading scores were lower compared in 2017 in three districts at grade 4 and in 11 districts at grade 8.

Highlighted results include responses of students and teachers to survey questionnaires designed to collect information about students’ educational experiences and opportunities to learn both in and outside of the classroom.

Full results for each subject are available in the 2019 NAEP Mathematics Report and the 2019 NAEP Reading Report.

The National Indian Education Study (NIES) is designed to describe the condition of education for fourth- and eighth-grade American Indian and Alaska Native (AI/AN) students in the United States. NIES is conducted under the direction of the National Center for Education Statistics on behalf of the U.S. Department of Education’s Office of Indian Education.

This follow-up report focuses on two major concerns that have been raised throughout the first decade of NIES:

• What contextual factors are associated with higher- and lower-performing AI/AN students on NAEP mathematics and reading assessments?
• How do AI/AN students see themselves in terms of their Native languages, culture, and aspirations for the future?

The results presented in this report are focused on the responses of fourth- and eighth-grade AI/AN students to selected survey questions. Approximately 8,500 fourth-graders and 8,200 eighth-graders participated in the NIES 2015 student survey. The survey results displayed are reported as percentages of AI/AN students attending schools that varied in the proportion of AI/AN students within their student population—low AI/AN density public schools (less than 25 percent of students were AI/AN), high AI/AN density public schools (25 percent or more of students were AI/AN), or Bureau of Indian Education (BIE) schools.

This online highlights presents an overview of results from the NAEP 2018 Technology and Engineering Literacy (TEL) report. The report includes national results on the performance of eighth-grade students. Results are presented in terms of average scale scores and as percentages of students performing at or above the three NAEP achievement levels: NAEP Basic, NAEP Proficient, and NAEP Advanced. In addition to overall scores, results are reported by racial/ethnic groups, gender, type of school, and other demographic groups.

In 2018, eighth-grade students scored higher on average in TEL overall compared to 2014, the previous assessment year. Average scores were also higher in all three TEL content areas (Technology and Society, Design and Systems, and Information and Communication Technology) and in all three TEL practices (Understanding Technological Principles, Developing Solutions and Achieving Goals, and Communicating and Collaborating). Compared to 2014, overall TEL scores in 2018 were higher for middle- (50th percentile) and higher- (75th and 90th percentiles) performing eighth-grade students; middle- and higher-performing students also scored higher in all three content areas and all three practices. In 2018, scores for several student groups were higher in TEL overall as well as in each of the content areas and practices in comparison to 2014. Female students scored higher than male students in TEL overall in 2018; female students also scored higher than their male peers in more content areas and practices compared to 2014.

Results are also reported based on students’ responses to a survey questionnaire about their technology and engineering learning experiences in and outside of school. The report includes detailed descriptions of released scenario-based tasks and discrete questions to help illustrate the types of technology and engineering skills measured as part of the NAEP TEL assessment.

Full results are available in the 2018 NAEP Technology and Engineering Literacy (TEL) Report Card.