Wise and Proper Use of National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) Data
This article provides examples of how serious misconceptions can result when only "all student" scores from the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) are used for simplistic state-to-state comparisons. Suggestions for better treatment are presented. The article also compares K...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of school choice 2012-04, Vol.6 (2), p.259-289 |
|---|---|
| 1. Verfasser: | |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 289 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 2 |
| container_start_page | 259 |
| container_title | Journal of school choice |
| container_volume | 6 |
| creator | Innes, Richard G. |
| description | This article provides examples of how serious misconceptions can result when only "all student" scores from the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) are used for simplistic state-to-state comparisons. Suggestions for better treatment are presented. The article also compares Kentucky's eighth grade EXPLORE testing to NAEP results for the same cohorts, finding that NAEP math and reading proficiency rates are astonishingly close to the reported percentages of those same students scoring at or above the EXPLORE Benchmark scores, which indicate those students are on track for success in college. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1080/15582159.2012.673932 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>eric_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_crossref_primary_10_1080_15582159_2012_673932</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><ericid>EJ968770</ericid><sourcerecordid>EJ968770</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c243t-4f63c1be27ca9b09485829b2f636eb3d15d82343f1256522715cef726247ece83</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kMtOwzAQRS0EEqXwB114CYsUvx2vUFXCS1Xpgoql5Tg2CkqTyg5C_XscBbpkNTP36sxoLgAzjOYY5egWc54TzNWcIEzmQlJFyQmYDHJGsJCnx56rc3AR4ydCjDOhJmD9XkcHTVvBTej2LsBtGjsP16avu9Y0cBGji3Hn2n6Qi-rL_jkJ-AjJg9frRbG5gfemN5fgzJsmuqvfOgXbh-Jt-ZStXh-fl4tVZgmjfca8oBaXjkhrVIkUy9MDqiRJFq6kFeZVTiijHhMuOCESc-u8JIIw6azL6RSwca8NXYzBeb0P9c6Eg8ZID5nov0z0kIkeM0nYbMRcqO0RKV6UyKVEyb4b7br1XdiZ7y40le7NoemCD6a1ddT03wM_ztxvkQ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype></control><display><type>article</type><title>Wise and Proper Use of National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) Data</title><source>Education Source</source><creator>Innes, Richard G.</creator><creatorcontrib>Innes, Richard G.</creatorcontrib><description>This article provides examples of how serious misconceptions can result when only "all student" scores from the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) are used for simplistic state-to-state comparisons. Suggestions for better treatment are presented. The article also compares Kentucky's eighth grade EXPLORE testing to NAEP results for the same cohorts, finding that NAEP math and reading proficiency rates are astonishingly close to the reported percentages of those same students scoring at or above the EXPLORE Benchmark scores, which indicate those students are on track for success in college.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1558-2159</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1558-2167</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1080/15582159.2012.673932</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Taylor & Francis Group</publisher><subject>Academic Achievement ; Achievement Gains ; Achievement Rating ; Classification ; Comparative Analysis ; Comparative Testing ; Demography ; Equated Scores ; Error of Measurement ; Evaluation Problems ; Level Accuracy ; Mathematics Achievement ; Misconceptions ; NAEP ; NAEP Achievement ; National Assessment of Educational Progress ; National Competency Tests ; Racial Differences ; Reading Achievement ; Scoring ; state ranking ; Statistical Bias ; Student Motivation ; Test Interpretation ; Testing Accommodations</subject><ispartof>Journal of school choice, 2012-04, Vol.6 (2), p.259-289</ispartof><rights>Copyright Taylor & Francis Group, LLC 2012</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c243t-4f63c1be27ca9b09485829b2f636eb3d15d82343f1256522715cef726247ece83</citedby></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,27903,27904</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/detail?accno=EJ968770$$DView record in ERIC$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Innes, Richard G.</creatorcontrib><title>Wise and Proper Use of National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) Data</title><title>Journal of school choice</title><description>This article provides examples of how serious misconceptions can result when only "all student" scores from the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) are used for simplistic state-to-state comparisons. Suggestions for better treatment are presented. The article also compares Kentucky's eighth grade EXPLORE testing to NAEP results for the same cohorts, finding that NAEP math and reading proficiency rates are astonishingly close to the reported percentages of those same students scoring at or above the EXPLORE Benchmark scores, which indicate those students are on track for success in college.</description><subject>Academic Achievement</subject><subject>Achievement Gains</subject><subject>Achievement Rating</subject><subject>Classification</subject><subject>Comparative Analysis</subject><subject>Comparative Testing</subject><subject>Demography</subject><subject>Equated Scores</subject><subject>Error of Measurement</subject><subject>Evaluation Problems</subject><subject>Level Accuracy</subject><subject>Mathematics Achievement</subject><subject>Misconceptions</subject><subject>NAEP</subject><subject>NAEP Achievement</subject><subject>National Assessment of Educational Progress</subject><subject>National Competency Tests</subject><subject>Racial Differences</subject><subject>Reading Achievement</subject><subject>Scoring</subject><subject>state ranking</subject><subject>Statistical Bias</subject><subject>Student Motivation</subject><subject>Test Interpretation</subject><subject>Testing Accommodations</subject><issn>1558-2159</issn><issn>1558-2167</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2012</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp9kMtOwzAQRS0EEqXwB114CYsUvx2vUFXCS1Xpgoql5Tg2CkqTyg5C_XscBbpkNTP36sxoLgAzjOYY5egWc54TzNWcIEzmQlJFyQmYDHJGsJCnx56rc3AR4ydCjDOhJmD9XkcHTVvBTej2LsBtGjsP16avu9Y0cBGji3Hn2n6Qi-rL_jkJ-AjJg9frRbG5gfemN5fgzJsmuqvfOgXbh-Jt-ZStXh-fl4tVZgmjfca8oBaXjkhrVIkUy9MDqiRJFq6kFeZVTiijHhMuOCESc-u8JIIw6azL6RSwca8NXYzBeb0P9c6Eg8ZID5nov0z0kIkeM0nYbMRcqO0RKV6UyKVEyb4b7br1XdiZ7y40le7NoemCD6a1ddT03wM_ztxvkQ</recordid><startdate>20120401</startdate><enddate>20120401</enddate><creator>Innes, Richard G.</creator><general>Taylor & Francis Group</general><general>Routledge</general><scope>7SW</scope><scope>BJH</scope><scope>BNH</scope><scope>BNI</scope><scope>BNJ</scope><scope>BNO</scope><scope>ERI</scope><scope>PET</scope><scope>REK</scope><scope>WWN</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20120401</creationdate><title>Wise and Proper Use of National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) Data</title><author>Innes, Richard G.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c243t-4f63c1be27ca9b09485829b2f636eb3d15d82343f1256522715cef726247ece83</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2012</creationdate><topic>Academic Achievement</topic><topic>Achievement Gains</topic><topic>Achievement Rating</topic><topic>Classification</topic><topic>Comparative Analysis</topic><topic>Comparative Testing</topic><topic>Demography</topic><topic>Equated Scores</topic><topic>Error of Measurement</topic><topic>Evaluation Problems</topic><topic>Level Accuracy</topic><topic>Mathematics Achievement</topic><topic>Misconceptions</topic><topic>NAEP</topic><topic>NAEP Achievement</topic><topic>National Assessment of Educational Progress</topic><topic>National Competency Tests</topic><topic>Racial Differences</topic><topic>Reading Achievement</topic><topic>Scoring</topic><topic>state ranking</topic><topic>Statistical Bias</topic><topic>Student Motivation</topic><topic>Test Interpretation</topic><topic>Testing Accommodations</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Innes, Richard G.</creatorcontrib><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC (Ovid)</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC (Legacy Platform)</collection><collection>ERIC( SilverPlatter )</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC PlusText (Legacy Platform)</collection><collection>Education Resources Information Center (ERIC)</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><jtitle>Journal of school choice</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Innes, Richard G.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><ericid>EJ968770</ericid><atitle>Wise and Proper Use of National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) Data</atitle><jtitle>Journal of school choice</jtitle><date>2012-04-01</date><risdate>2012</risdate><volume>6</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>259</spage><epage>289</epage><pages>259-289</pages><issn>1558-2159</issn><eissn>1558-2167</eissn><abstract>This article provides examples of how serious misconceptions can result when only "all student" scores from the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) are used for simplistic state-to-state comparisons. Suggestions for better treatment are presented. The article also compares Kentucky's eighth grade EXPLORE testing to NAEP results for the same cohorts, finding that NAEP math and reading proficiency rates are astonishingly close to the reported percentages of those same students scoring at or above the EXPLORE Benchmark scores, which indicate those students are on track for success in college.</abstract><pub>Taylor & Francis Group</pub><doi>10.1080/15582159.2012.673932</doi><tpages>31</tpages></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 1558-2159 |
| ispartof | Journal of school choice, 2012-04, Vol.6 (2), p.259-289 |
| issn | 1558-2159 1558-2167 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_crossref_primary_10_1080_15582159_2012_673932 |
| source | Education Source |
| subjects | Academic Achievement Achievement Gains Achievement Rating Classification Comparative Analysis Comparative Testing Demography Equated Scores Error of Measurement Evaluation Problems Level Accuracy Mathematics Achievement Misconceptions NAEP NAEP Achievement National Assessment of Educational Progress National Competency Tests Racial Differences Reading Achievement Scoring state ranking Statistical Bias Student Motivation Test Interpretation Testing Accommodations |
| title | Wise and Proper Use of National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) Data |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-22T11%3A39%3A20IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-eric_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Wise%20and%20Proper%20Use%20of%20National%20Assessment%20of%20Educational%20Progress%20(NAEP)%20Data&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20school%20choice&rft.au=Innes,%20Richard%20G.&rft.date=2012-04-01&rft.volume=6&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=259&rft.epage=289&rft.pages=259-289&rft.issn=1558-2159&rft.eissn=1558-2167&rft_id=info:doi/10.1080/15582159.2012.673932&rft_dat=%3Ceric_cross%3EEJ968770%3C/eric_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_ericid=EJ968770&rfr_iscdi=true |