Introduction

Today I am releasing the results of the 2007 reading and mathematics assessments from the National Assessment of Educational Progress for 11 urban school districts. We call these Trial Urban District Assessments, or TUDAs. These assessments were given earlier this year to 4th- and 8th-grade students at the same time as the national- and state-level assessments.

The Nation’s Report Card: 2007 Trial Urban District Assessment in Reading
The Nation’s Report Card: 2007 Trial Urban District Assessment in Mathematics

Background of the 2007 TUDA Mathematics and Reading Assessments

The TUDA program is a collaboration involving the National Center for Education Statistics, the National Assessment Governing Board, and the Council of the Great City Schools. TUDA was designed to measure performance of public school students at the school district level. TUDA is not yet a permanent part of NAEP.

In 2007, 11 districts from around the country were invited to participate in the program. The TUDA assessments began in 2002 with the participation of Atlanta, Chicago, Houston, Los Angeles, and New York City, as well as the District of Columbia. In 2003, Boston, Charlotte-Mecklenburg, Cleveland, and San Diego joined, and Austin was added in 2005. Participation in TUDA is voluntary.

Overview of the Trial Urban District Assessment (TUDA)

TUDA was administered as part of the regular NAEP assessment. Samples that ranged from about 900 to 2,800 students per district per grade participated in the assessments. Unlike the national assessment, which includes public and private school students, TUDA assesses public school students only.

Average scores for both the fourth and eighth grades are presented on a single 0 to 500 point scale for each assessment. These scores measure what students know and can do.

Results are also reported according to three achievement levels established by the National Assessment Governing Board. These levels set standards for what students should know and should be able to do. The three achievement levels are Basic, Proficient, and Advanced. Ultimately, the goal is to have all students performing at or above the Proficient level.

In reporting these results, we compare the districts to each other and to both public school students nationally and to those in large central cities-those having a population of 250,000 or more. We make this comparison because the demographic makeup of these 65 large central cities is closer to the TUDA district populations than is the nation as a whole.

Demographic Context

TUDA districts vary widely in demographic composition, both from each other and the nation. For example, in the reading assessment, Black students made up about 17 percent of fourth-graders in public schools across the nation, but in the districts the percentages range from 11 percent in Los Angeles and San Diego to 86 percent in the District of Columbia. Hispanic students, in turn, made up about 20 percent of the fourth-grade population nationally, but ranged from 4 percent in Atlanta to 75 percent in Los Angeles.

Urban districts also tend to have larger percentages of lower-income students, as measured by eligibility for the National School Lunch Program. The percentage nationally was 45 percent, but for the districts it ranged from 48 percent in Charlotte to 100 percent in Cleveland. The urban districts also differ from the nation in the percentages of students who are English language learners or students with disabilities, two historically lower-performing student groups. For example, the percentage of fourth-grade students who were English language learners nationally in 2007 was 11 percent, but in the TUDA districts it ranged from 3 percent in Atlanta to 48 percent in Los Angeles. For students with disabilities, the national percentage was 14 percent, while the district range was 10 percent in Atlanta to 21 percent in Boston.

NAEP allows accommodations for both English language learners and students with disabilities, if required to participate. Even with accommodations, some students are excluded from NAEP, based on the decision of school officials, relying on NAEP guidelines and local practices. While the effect of exclusion on average performance is not precisely known, comparisons of performance results across districts could be affected if exclusion rates are comparatively high or vary widely over time. Exclusion rates for the districts vary. For example, the national exclusion rate for fourth-grade reading in 2007 was 6 percent, but in the TUDA districts exclusion rates ranged from 3 to 20 percent. Appendix tables A-2 and A-3 in the Report Cards display the percentages of students accommodated and excluded in each district.

In considering NAEP results in reading and mathematics, it is important to keep in mind that all NAEP scores are based on samples of students. For this reason, there is a margin of error associated with each score or percentage. When comparing scores and other NAEP results, I only cite differences that are larger than the margin of error.

READING

Trend in Reading Scores, Grade 4

In the nation as a whole and in large central city schools across the nation, scores were higher in 2007 than in either the first assessment in 2002 or the last assessment in 2005. Since the first assessment, reading scores for fourth-graders increased in four of the six districts that participated in both years-Atlanta, Chicago, the District of Columbia, and New York City.

Comparing 2007 scores to 2005, Atlanta and the District of Columbia showed gains. In Houston, the average score declined. Scores in the other eight districts did not change significantly from 2005 to 2007.

In terms of percentages of students at or above the Basic achievement level, in comparison to large central city students nationally, the percentages in three districts were higher, three were not significantly different, and five were lower. These percentages ranged from a high of about 66 percent in Charlotte-Mecklenburg to a low of about 39 percent in Cleveland. The percentages at or above Proficient in these districts ranged from about 35 percent in Charlotte-Mecklenburg to about 9 percent in Cleveland.

Nation - District Gaps Narrower for Lower-Income Students, Grade 4

As noted earlier, NCES uses eligibility for the National School Lunch Program as a measure of income. Students eligible for free or reduced-price lunches are considered lower-income.

Unlike the nation as a whole, lower-income students constitute a majority of students in almost all the TUDA districts, frequently a large majority. Comparing the performance of lower-income students in the districts with those in the nation and large central cities can be more meaningful than comparisons of results for all students.

The performance gaps between the nation and the urban school districts tend to be smaller when only lower-income students are compared. In Cleveland, for example, the gap for lower-income students was 15 points less than the gap for all students. In New York City, lower-income students in that district performed above lower-income students in the nation as a whole.

White - Black Score Gaps, Grade 4

At the national level, the reading performance gap between Black and White students was 27 points in 2007. Among the 11 districts, the gaps range from 23 points in Cleveland to 67 points in the District of Columbia. The largest gaps tend to occur in those districts where White students outperform White students nationally.

White - Hispanic Score Gaps, Grade 4

The White-Hispanic score gap in the nation was 26 points in 2007, while the district gaps ranged from 15 points in Cleveland to 52 points for the District of Columbia. (In Atlanta, the Hispanic sample size at grade 4 was not large enough to report results.)