|
1996 Science Performance Standards
Achievement Level Results:
 National and Regional Comparisons |
|
||
| The NAEP 1996 Assessment gathered detailed information about the science knowledge and skills of the nation’s fourth-, eighth-, and twelfth-grade students.
This chapter offers detailed descriptions of the science achievement levels for the nation, for major regions within the nation, and for major subpopulations (e.g., males and females). The 1996 science findings showed a number of consistent patterns. At all three grades, racial and ethnic groups showed large differences in achievement level attainment. Also at all three grades, higher levels of parental education were generally associated with students’ attainment of higher achievement levels. Finally, at all three grades, groups of students who may be low in socioeconomic status or otherwise "at risk" -- specifically, those receiving Title I services and those eligible for free or reduced-price lunches -- attained lower achievement levels than other students. Other patterns such as gender differences in achievement level attainment were less consistent. National Results Nationally, as Figure 1 shows, 3 percent of students at grades 4, 8, and 12 performed at the Advanced level. The percentage of students performing at or above the Proficient level was 29 percent at grades 4 and 8 and 21 percent at grade 12. Those at or above the Basic level represented 67 percent of students in grade 4, 61 percent of students in grade 8, and 57 percent of students in grade 12. Regional Results For reporting purposes, the nation was divided into four regions: Northeast, Southeast, Central, and West. Each state was assigned to a region, as was the District of Columbia. (The NCES companion report provides a description of each region.) Regional differences in performance have typically been found across the various subjects NAEP has assessed (science, mathematics, reading, writing, history, geography, and others). As Table 3 indicates, the 1996 Science Assessment results also revealed regional differences in performance. In general, compared with students in the Southeast and West, a higher percentage of students in the Northeast and Central regions attained higher achievement levels. In particular, proportionally more students attending schools in the Central region were at or above the Proficient level than was true of students in the Southeast. At grades 4 and 12, a greater percentage of students attending schools in the Northeast were also at or above the Proficient level when compared with students in the Southeast. At all three grades, compared with students in the Southeast, greater percentages of students in the Central region reached the Basic level. At grades 4 and 12, a similar pattern appeared when students in the Northeast were compared with those in the Southeast. At grade 12, students in the Central region significantly outperformed those in the West at the Basic and Proficient levels. Performance of Selected Subgroups The following sections of this chapter report results for selected demographic subgroups of fourth-, eighth-, and twelfth-grade students. The subgroups are classified by gender, race and ethnicity, level of parental education, type of school, Title I participation, and eligibility for the free or reduced-price lunch program. The results from the 1996 Science Assessment are consistent with NAEP results in other subjects, in that members of a subgroup vary considerably in achievement level attainment. Gender Are there differences in achievement levels attained by males and females? Table 4 and Figure 2 show the percentage of males and females performing at or above the three achievement levels, as well as those performing below the Basic level. Gender differences in achievement level attainment are evident in grades 4 and 12. At grade 4, a greater percentage of males than females was at or above the Proficient level. At grade 12, a greater percentage of males than females was at or above each of the three levels -- Advanced, Proficient, and Basic. No significant differences between males and females were found at grade 8. Race/Ethnicity How do the achievement level attainments of students from different racial and ethnic groups compare? Table 5 presents the 1996 science achievement levels attained by students in the following racial and ethnic categories: White, Black, Hispanic, Asian/Pacific Islander, and American Indian. (Students’ classification into these categories was based on their own identification of the racial or ethnic group to which they belong.) Figure 3 displays the performance of these groups with respect to the Proficient level only. Differences in achievement level attainment among the racial and ethnic groups were evident at all grade levels.1 Differences in students’ achievement level attainment must be interpreted with caution, however. Socioeconomic status, home environment, and available educational opportunities influence attainment and argue against oversimplified explanations.2 As shown in Table 5, at grade 4, the percentages of White, Asian/Pacific Islander, and American Indian students at or above the Basic and Proficient levels were greater than the percentages of Black and Hispanic students at or above these levels. At grade 8, several differences appeared. The percentages of White and Asian/Pacific Islander students at or above the Basic and Proficient levels were greater than the percentages of Black and Hispanic students at these levels. The percentage of American Indian students at or above the Basic level was greater than the percentages of Black and Hispanic students at this level. Finally, the percentage of Hispanic students at or above the Basic and Proficient levels was greater than the percentage of Black students. At grade 12, the percentage of White students at the Advanced level was greater than the percentage of Hispanic students, and the percentages of White and Asian/Pacific Islander students at or above Basic or Proficient levels were greater than the percentages of Black and Hispanic students at these levels. Parents’ Highest Education Level Students who participated in the NAEP Science Assessment were asked to indicate the highest level of education attained by each parent by selecting one of the following categories: Did Not Finish High School, Graduated from High School, Some Education after High School, Graduated from College, and "I Don’t Know." Students were classified by the highest educational level they reported either of their parents attaining. If a student reported that one parent graduated from college and the other from high school, for example, that student’s achievement level attainment is shown in the Graduated from College subgroup. Thirty-three percent of fourth-grade students, 9 percent of eighth-grade students, and 3 percent of twelfth-grade students reported not knowing the educational level of either parent. At all three grades, as Table 6 and Figure 4 show, higher levels of parental education were associated with attainment of higher achievement levels. At grade 4, three significant results were evident. First, a greater percentage of students who reported that a parent had graduated from college was at the Advanced level than was true of students who reported that a parent had graduated from high school. Second, greater percentages of students who reported that a parent had some education after high school were at or above the Basic and Proficient levels compared with those students who reported that neither parent finished high school or that at least one parent graduated from high school. Third, greater percentages of students who reported that a parent had graduated from college were at or above the Basic and Proficient levels than was true for students who reported that neither parent finished high school or that one parent had graduated from high school. Essentially, the same pattern of relationships between parents’ education and students’ achievement levels existed at grade 8. The pattern was more pronounced at grade 12 where the significant relationships are even more numerous at the Basic and Proficient levels. For instance, greater percentages of students reporting a parent who graduated from college were at or above the Basic or the Proficient levels than was true of students whose parents had some education after high school, graduated from high school, or did not finish high school. Type of School Approximately 90 percent of the nation’s fourth-, eighth-, and twelfth-grade students attend public schools. The remainder attend Catholic and other private schools (i.e., nonpublic schools). Figure 5 displays science achievement level attainment by type of school students attend. At all grade levels in 1996, students attending nonpublic schools attained higher achievement levels than those attending public schools. However, the relationship between school type and achievement level attainment was less pronounced at grades 8 and 12 than at grade 4. At grade 4, the percentages of students at or above all three achievement levels -- Advanced, Proficient, and Basic -- were greater for students attending nonpublic schools than for students attending public schools. Also at grade 4, students attending both Catholic and other nonpublic schools outperformed students attending public schools at the Basic and Proficient levels. At grade 8, there were significant differences between the percentages of student at or above the Basic and Proficient levels for student attending nonpublic schools than for students attending public schools. In addition, grade 8 Catholic school students performed significantly better than public school students at the Basic and Proficient levels. Similarly, grade 12 nonpublic school students outperformed public school students at the Basic level. Caution should be taken not to use these comparisons to make simplistic inferences about the relative effectiveness of public and nonpublic schools. Differences in achievement level attainment by students in public and nonpublic schools may be related in part to socioeconomic or sociological factors, such as parental education or parents’ involvement in their children’s education. Participation in Title I The Improving America’s Schools Act of 19943 reauthorized the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (ESEA). Title I, Part A, of ESEA provides local education agencies with financial assistance to meet the educational needs of children performing below grade level and who are economically disadvantaged.4 Title I programs are designed to help disadvantaged students meet challenging academic performance standards. They assist schools in improving teaching and learning and in providing students with opportunities to acquire the knowledge and skills outlined in their state’s curriculum content and performance standards. Typically, Title I funds are used for reading and mathematics. All children in schools located in high-poverty areas may benefit from participation in schoolwide Title I programs. Title I funding supports state and local education reform efforts and promotes the coordination of resources to improve education for all students. Nationally, 22 percent of fourth-grade students and 12 percent of eighth-grade students received Title I services during the 1995-96 academic year. As Table 7 indicates, smaller percentages of these students attained higher achievement levels compared with other students. Because the program targets students performing below grade level, these results are not surprising. At grades 4 and 8, greater percentages of students who were not currently receiving Title I services were at or above the Basic, Proficient, and Advanced levels than was true of students who were receiving Title I services. At grade 12, a greater percentage of students who were not currently receiving Title I services was at or above the Basic level than was true of students who were receiving Title I services. Title I information collected by NAEP refers to current participation in Title I programs. Thus, students who participated in such services in the past but who do not currently receive services are not identified as Title I participants. Differences in achievement levels between students who receive Title I services and those who do not should not be used as an evaluation of Title I programs. Typically, Title I services are intended for low-achieving students. To properly evaluate Title I programs, the performance of students participating in them must be monitored and assessed over time. Eligibility for Free or Reduced-Price Lunch Program The free or reduced-price lunch component of the National School Lunch Program offered through the U.S. Department of Agriculture is designed to ensure that children near or below the poverty level receive nourishing meals.5 This program is available to students attending public schools, nonprofit private schools, and residential child care institutions. Eligibility for free or reduced-price meals is determined through the USDA’s Income Eligibility Guidelines. NAEP includes eligibility for the free or reduced-price lunch program as an indicator of poverty. As Table 8 shows, the nation’s poorest fourth-, eighth-, and twelfth-grade students (i.e., those who were eligible for the free or reduced-price lunch program) attained lower achievement levels than students who were not eligible. Specifically, in grades 4 and 8, lower percentages of students who were eligible to receive free or reduced-price lunch attained the Basic, Proficient, or Advanced levels of performance. At grade 12, this same pattern prevailed for the Basic and Proficient levels.6 Summary The preceding sections provide a detailed picture of achievement levels attained by students in various subgroups, defined by region, gender, race and ethnicity, level of parental education, type of school, Title I participation, and eligibility for the free or reduced-price lunch program. Although results differed slightly by grade and achievement level, the following major findings emerged:  Nationally, 29 percent of students in grades 4 and 8 were at or above the Proficient level.
|
