Skip to main content

Breadcrumb

Home arrow_forward_ios Information on IES-Funded Research arrow_forward_ios Evaluation of NAEP Achievement Leve ...
Home arrow_forward_ios ... arrow_forward_ios Evaluation of NAEP Achievement Leve ...
Information on IES-Funded Research
Contract Closed

Evaluation of NAEP Achievement Levels for Mathematics and Reading

NCEE
Program: Other
Award amount: $1,256,345
Awardee:
National Research Council
Award period: 2 years 7 months (09/01/2014 - 04/01/2017)
Contract number: ED-IES-14-C-0124

Purpose

Under the provisions of the Education Sciences Reform Act (P.L. 107-279), the Secretary of the U.S. Department of Education (ED) is required to provide for continuing review of the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP). The law identifies the issues to be addressed in the reviews, one of which includes the requirement to evaluate whether the NAEP achievement levels, established by the National Assessment Governing Board (NAGB), are "reasonable, valid, reliable and informative to the public." Section 303(e)(2)(C) of the Education Sciences Reform Act further states that NAEP achievement levels shall be used on a trial basis until the Commissioner of the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) determines, as a result of the evaluation, that such levels are "reasonable, valid, and informative to the public."

This study provided an independent and objective evaluation of the NAEP achievement levels, with the intention of providing the NCES Commissioner with information necessary to inform the decision about whether the current trial status of the NAEP achievement levels can be removed or whether they should remain in trial status.

Project Activities

Research plan

  • How "reasonable, valid, reliable and informative to the public" are the NAEP achievement levels for mathematics and reading?

Structured Abstract

Research design and methods

This study focused on the achievement levels used in reporting NAEP results for the reading and mathematics assessments in grades 4, 8, and 12. Specifically, the study team reviewed developments over the past decade in the ways achievement levels for NAEP are set and used, and then evaluated whether the resulting achievement levels were "reasonable, valid, reliable, and informative to the public." The study relied on an independent committee of experts with a broad range of expertise related to assessment, statistics, social science, and education policy. The project received oversight from the Board on Testing and Assessment and the Committee on National Statistics of the National Research Council.

Key outcomes

  • The procedures used by the National Assessment Governing Board for setting the achievement levels in 1992 are well documented. The documentation includes the kinds of evidence called for in the Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing in place at the time and currently and was in line with the research and knowledge base at the time.
  • The available documentation of the 1992 standard settings in reading and mathematics include the types of reliability analyses called for in the Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing that were in place at the time and those that are currently in place. The evidence that resulted from these analyses, however, showed considerable variability among panelists' cut-score judgments: the expected pattern of decreasing variability among panelists across the rounds was not consistently achieved; and panelists' cut-score estimates were not consistent over different item formats and different levels of item difficulty. These issues were not resolved before achievement-level results were released to the public.
  • The studies conducted to assess content validity are in line with those called for in the Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing in place in 1992 and currently in 2016. The results of these studies suggested that changes in the achievement-level descriptors (ALDs) were needed, and they were subsequently made. These changes may have better aligned the descriptors to the framework and exemplar items, but as a consequence, the final ALDs were not the ones used to set the cut-scores. Since 1992, there have been additional changes to the frameworks, the item pools, the assessments, and studies to identify needed revisions to the ALDs. But, to date, there has been no effort to set new cut-scores using the most current ALDs.
  • The National Assessment of Educational Progress achievement levels are widely disseminated to and used by many audiences, but the interpretive guidance about the meaning and appropriate uses of those levels provided to users is inconsistent and piecemeal. Without appropriate guidance, misuses are likely.

People and institutions involved

IES program contact(s)

Jonathan Jacobson

Branch Chief for Knowledge Synthesis
NCEE

Products and publications

A report, titled Evaluation of the Achievement Levels for Mathematics and Reading on the National Assessment of Educational Progress, was released in April 2017.

Questions about this project?

To answer additional questions about this project or provide feedback, please contact the program officer.

 

Share

Icon to link to Facebook social media siteIcon to link to X social media siteIcon to link to LinkedIn social media siteIcon to copy link value

Questions about this project?

To answer additional questions about this project or provide feedback, please contact the program officer.

 

icon-dot-govicon-https icon-quote