Speakout Columns

Lessons from NAEP

Jan 19, 2006 3:53 PM

Reprinted with permission from The New York Sun, from its Dec. 5 issue.

By Diane Ravitch

Last week the U.S. Department of Education released the results of the latest assessment of reading and mathematics in 4th and 8th grades in big-city public schools. Under the federal No Child Left Behind law, all states are required to take part in the federal test, called the National Assessment of Educational Progress. Since 2002, urban school districts have been invited to give the NAEP to samples of their students on a voluntary basis. Five cities did so in 2002; 10 in 2003; and 11 in 2005. The results are illuminating, both for New York City (where the test was administered all three times it was offered) and the nation.

Students in urban public schools generally have lower scores than the national average for their grade. This is not surprising, since urban districts tend to have more poverty, more children whose English is limited, and more families with lower educational attainment than those in non-urban districts. However, two urban districts in the 2005 federal test — Charlotte and Austin — actually scored higher than the national average in mathematics at both grades; Charlotte also outpaced the national average in 4th-grade reading. Charlotte and Austin matched the national average in 8th-grade reading scores. Both these cities have a higher percentage of white students in their public schools (who tend to come from more advantaged circumstances) than the other districts that were tested (40 percent in Charlotte, 30 percent in Austin, compared to 15 percent in New York City, 12 percent in Houston and Boston, 22 percent in San Diego, 11 percent in Atlanta, 19 percent in Cleveland, 9 percent in Chicago and Los Angeles, and 4 percent in Washington, D.C.).

In 2003, to the surprise of most New Yorkers, the New York City public schools scored far better on the NAEP tests than most other urban districts. These tests were administered before the implementation of the current school reforms. In 2003, New York City ranked second, behind Charlotte, in math and reading in 4th and 8th grades, and in a virtual tie with Houston, San Diego, and Boston. Once again, in 2005, New York City placed behind Charlotte (and Austin too, which was not tested in 2003), and again was either tied with or closely followed by the public schools in San Diego, Houston, and Boston.

On the 2005 test of 4th-grade reading, NAEP officials reported no significant change in overall performance for New York City between 2003 and 2005. However, the city did make some significant gains in this grade, where tens of millions of dollars have been spent for coaches, intensive remediation, and test preparation activities. The gains occurred at the low end of the scale, with a significant increase in the proportion of students reading at the “basic” level instead of “below basic.” The proportion of New York City students who attained the NAEP standard for “proficient” was flat at 22 percent in 2003 and 2005.

On the 4th-grade reading test, the New York City public schools reduced the achievement gap between white and black students by 10 percentage points, which was impressive indeed. However, five of those 10 points represented a decline in the performance of white students in the 4th grade, which was puzzling. Indeed, the proportion of white students who attained the proficient standard fell to 36 percent from 45 percent in the past two years, while the proportion of black students reaching proficiency increased to 16 percent from 13 percent, Hispanic students declined to 15 percent from 16 percent, and Asian students rose to 47 percent from 39 percent.

On the 2005 8th-grade reading test, New York City again was second among the tested cities, trailing only Charlotte. However, New York City’s scores did not increase between 2003 and 2005, and the proportion of students who reached the proficient standard fell from 22 percent to 20 percent. Among black students, the proportion who were proficient fell from 13 percent to 10 percent; among white students, from 42 percent to 38 percent; among Hispanics, from 17 percent to 14 percent. The achievement gap between white and black students increased from 25 percent to 28 percent.

On the 2005 4th-grade mathematics test, the New York City public schools made an unusually strong showing. As in 2003, New York City students placed behind Charlotte (also Austin, a first-time participant in the tests) and tied with Houston, San Diego, and Boston. New York City registered a sizable five-point increase in the proportion of students who reached proficient, to 26 percent from 21 percent. This is impressive for a two-year period, and it is even better than the four-point national increase at the proficient level, to 35 percent from 31 percent.

Other urban districts also saw statistically significant gains in the proportion of students attaining proficiency on the 4th-grade mathematics test, including Boston, where there was a 10-point gain to 22 percent from 12 percent; San Diego, to 29 percent from 20 percent; Houston, to 26 percent from 18 percent; Los Angeles, to 18 percent from 13 percent; and the District of Columbia, to 10 percent from 7 percent.

On the test of 8th-grade mathematics, New York City was again, as in 2003, a top-scoring district, behind Charlotte and Austin and tied with San Diego, Boston, and Houston. However, between 2003 and 2005, there was no significant change in performance, with a few important exceptions. The achievement gap between black and white students decreased, but nearly half of the seven-point decrease in the gap was accounted for by a decline in white scores at the proficient level and an improvement in black performance from “below basic” to “basic.”

Where New York City unquestionably leads the nation is in the performance of poor children, as measured by their eligibility for free or reduced-price lunch. In 2003, New York City outscored other cities and the nation in the performance of low-income students in mathematics in 4th and 8th grades as well as in reading in both grades. In 2005, low-income students in New York City trailed those in Austin and Charlotte in 4th-grade mathematics and were tied with Houston and Boston. In 8th-grade mathematics, New York City was tied with Boston in 2005. In