USVI Public Records

Document text

DOCUMENT RESUME ED 428 381 CS 013 510 AUTHOR Ballator, Nada; Jerry, Laura TITLE NAEP 1998 Reading State Report for Virgin Islands. INSTITUTION National Assessment of Educational Progress, Princéton, NJ.; Educational Testing Service, Princeton, NJ. SPONS AGENCY National Center for Education Statistics (ED), Washington, DC. REPORT NO NCES-1999-460-VI PUB DATE 1999-03-00 NOTE 63p.; "In collaboration with Alfred Rogers." For the entire report covering the nation and the states, see CS 013 460. For the 44 separate reports for 40 states, Virgin Islands, the District of Columbia, Department of Defense Dependents Schools, and Department of Defense Domestic Dependent Elementary and Secondary Schools, see CS 013 466-509. AVAILABLE FROM ED Pubs, P.O. Box, Jessup, MD 20794-1398; Tel: 877-433-7827 (Toll Free); online ordering: Web site: http://www.ed.gov/edpubs.html. Full report online: Web site: http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/pubs/stt1998/1999460.sh tml (pdf format) PUB TYPE Numerical/Quantitative Data (110) -- Reports - Research (143) EDRS PRICE MFO1/PCO3 Plus Postage. DESCRIPTORS Comparative Analysis; Elementary Education; *Grade 4; *Grade 8; *National Competency Tests; Private Schools; Public Schools; *Reading Achievement; Reading Research; *Standardized Tests; *Student Evaluation; Tables (Data) ; Test Results IDENTIFIERS National Assessment of Educational Progress; State Reading Assessments; *Virgin Islands ABSTRACT The 1998 NAEP (National Assessment of Educational Progress) state level reading assessment measured fourth- and eighth-grade students' reading proficiency in situations that involved reading for three purposes: reading for literary experience, reading to gain information, and reading to perform a task (grade 8 only). This report describes the reading proficiency of Virgin Islands fourth- and eighth-grade public and nonpublic school students and compares their overall performance to students in the nation (using data from the NAEP national assessments). The distribution of reading results and reading achievement level results are provided for subpopulations of students (gender, race/ethnicity, students' reports of parents' highest educational level, free/reduced-price lunch program eligibility, and type of location). The average reading proficiency of fourth-grade public school students in Virgin Islands on the NAEP reading scale was 178 compared to 215 nationwide; 207 compared to 233 for fourth-grade nonpublic school students; 264 compared to 281 for eighth-grade nonpublic school students; and 233 compared to 261 nationwide for eighth-grade public school students. (RS) CS 013 570 D reste NATIONAL CENTER FOR EDUCATION STATISTICS Re EP 1998 REPORT FOR VIRGIN ISLANDS US. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Ottice of Educational Research and improvement sea 1 img EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATION CENTER (ERIC O This docume 2 received trom the € tal ®@ Points of view or opinions stated in this document do not necessarily represe F} y ® AVAI | ABLE official OERI position or policy a a - U.S. Department of Education Office of Educational Research and Improvement NCES 1999-460 VI What is The Nation’s Report Card? THE NATION’S REPORT CARD, the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), ts the only nationally representative and continuing assessment of what America’s students know and can do in various subject areas. Since 1969 assessments have been conducted periodically in reading, mathematics, science, wnting, history, geography, and othe: tields. By making objective information on student performance available to policymakers at the national, state, and local evels, NAEP is an integral part of our nation’s evaluation of the condition and progress of education. Only information 1 to academic achievement ts collected under this program. NAEP guarantees the privacy of individual students and ndated project of National Center for Education Statistics, the U.S. Departmer mmussioner Education Statistics ts responsible, by law, for carrying out the NAEP project through to qualified ranizations. NAEP reports directly to the Commissioner, who ts also responsibk nuing revies including validation studies and solicitation of public com 1t, on NAEP’s conduct shed the National Assessment Governing Board (NAGB ormulate policy guidelin * Board 1s responsible for selecting, the subject areas to be assessed from among, those included in the National m Goals; tor setting appropriate s udent performance levels; tor deve loping assessment objectives and test ' fications through a national consensus approach; tor designing the assessment methodology, tor developin © reporting and disseminating NAEP results; for developing standards and procedures for interstate, regional ymparisons; for determining tl t to improve the form and use of the National Assessment ¢ appropriateness of test items and ensuring they are free from bias; and for ¢ The National Assessment Governing Board Mark D. Musick, Chair Edward H. Haertel Honorable Roy Romer 1s lent Protessor, Schoo! of Education Member Designate | kd thon | i Stantord University Former Governor of Colorad At ta, Georgia Stantord, California Denver, C olorad Michael T. Nettles, Vice Chair Juanita Haugen John H. Stevens l ssor of Ed ton & Pa | Local School Board President Exccutne Director Pleasanton, Calitornia Texas Business and Educano Austin, Lexas Carole Kennedy Elementary School Principal Adam Urbanski Columbia, Missour President Rochester hers Assoctat Rochest vow York Honorable Nancy Kopp Marvland House of Delegates Bethesda, Marvland Deborah Voltz Assistant Protesso Department of Special kd Melanie A. Campbell Honorable William J. Moloney — Commussioner of Education : Fourth Grade Tea ! Universit tT coureswalle 7 ot C ole do 1 PCA Kar i mane Hora Laousvill r rks Denver. Colorado Marilyn A. Whirry Iweltth Giade bnehlsh Le Manhattan B h, Cahors ' ithe Honorable Wilmer S. Cody ( ) Mitsugi Nakashima birst Vice Chairperson onc Hawan State Board of Educati Honolulu, Hawan Dennie Palmer Wolf Edward Donle w h Associate reap ea sd Debra Paulson School « Ris Drciics x : iy lighth Grade Mathematics Tea 1 a eee \ ms ; ; aay bl} Paso, Texas C. Kent McGuire (Ex-Officio) Honorable John M. Engler Honorable Norma Paulus \s wy of bdu vat bormer Supenmntendent of Cy) roor « chiar Lansing. Michiva Pubhe Tnstruction O)ttic {} Oregon State Department of Ed Thomas H. Fisher Salem, Oregon Lit tow Student \ WW * Honorable Jo Ann Pottorff Kansas House of Representati Wichita, Kansas Roy Truby Michael J. Guerra | i i eee Diane Ravitch . Senror Research Scholar yieig York Univer York, Ne NATIONAL CENTER FOR EDUCATION STATISTICS Re: 1998 | ® REPORT FOR VIRGIN ISLANDS Nada Ballator Laura Jerry n collaboration with Alfred Rogers March 1999 U.S. Department of Education Office of Educational Research and Improvement NCES 1999-460 VI U.S. Department of Education Ik rd W. Ralc Office of Educational Research and Improvement C. Kent McGuire a, Ata National Center for Education Statistics Pascal D rgione, |t { Assessment Division Pegev G. Cart ( March 1999 nent. National Center tor Wy NCES 1999-460 VI i\ | Y99 1 other U.S. Department PDD 1-s 301-470-1244 rvia the Internet: rtp rww.ed.gov/ puos/capuo Copies also are available in alternate formats upon request seo WAN ul il] On the World \\ 1 Wi ly htt vork upon which this publication is based was performed tor the National Center for Education Statistics, Office of Educational Research and Improvement, by Educational Testing Service Table of Contents Section | Overview of the NAEP Reading Assessment What Is NAEP? What Is Reported Here’ How Are Results Reported Reading Scale Score Results tor Public School Students Achievement Level Results tor Public School Students Comparisons Between the Virgin Islands and Other Participating Jurisdictions What Was Assessed” What Should Students Be Able to Dé Who Was Assessed”? How Are Pertormance Differences Repor Section 2 Overall Reading Performance and Performance by Demographic Characteristics Students’ Overall Scale Scores Overall Results in Terms of Achievement Levels Gender Race/Ethnicity Students’ Reports of Parents’ Highest Education Level Free/Reduced-Price Lunch Program Eligibility Ty pe of School Appendix A Where to Find More Information Appendix B Figures from Section I Acknowledgments S READING STATE REPORT The Virein Islands Overview of the NAEP Reading SECTION 1 Assessment What Is NAEP? [he National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) is the only nationally representative and continuing assessment of what students in the United States know and can do in various academic subjects. NAEP is authorized by Congress and directed b the National Center tor Education Statistics (NCES). The National Assessment Governing Board (NAGB), an independent body. provides policy guidance for NAEP The NAEP assessments are administered to representative samples of students at the national level as well as at the state level for those states that want to participate. To ensure comparability ina particular subject across all jurisdictions, NCES has established guidelines tor school and student participation rates. These guidelines. as well as other technical aspects of the assessment. are detailed in the NAEP 1998 Readi Report Cai The 1998 NAEP program included state-level assessments in reading at grades 4 and & and in writing at grade 8, and national-level assessments in civics, reading, and writing at grades 4. 8. ¢ 2. This report and its companion, the NAEP 1998 Reading Report Card, provide a first look at the results of the NAEP 1998 reading assessment The Reading Report Card otters additional state-level data. Each participating jurisdiction receives its own customized State Report identical in format to this one Summary data tables providing information for all jurisdictions for which results are reported in 1998 are available at http://nees.ed.gov/naep/. the NAEP Web site What Is Reported Here? The NAEP reading assessment has been administered at the state level three times: in public schools at grade 4 in 1992, in public and nonpublic schools at grade 4 in 1994, and in public and nonpublic schools at grades 4 and & in 1998. The Virgin Islands participated in the 1998 NAEP reading assessment at grades 4 and 8. Both public and nonpublic schools participated. The Virgin Islands also partipated in the 1992 reading assessment. The Virgin Islands” public and nonpublic school results for 1998 and public school results tor 1992 are presented here. along with national results for comparison This report has two sections. This Overview provides basic information on NAEP and the overall results for public schools in graphic form. It describes the assessment, the sample of students assessed. the metrics for reporting student performance, and how the differences in performance are reported. The second section, Overall Reading Performance and Performance by Demographic Characteristics. reports findings for the entire public school population at grades 4 and & as well as for the population broken out by major demographic categories and school type. This information is presented in data tables NCES Pul NAEP 1998 READING STATE REPORT The Virein Islands lition. this report has two appendices. Appendix A, Where to Find More avatlable on the Web and provides information on sources of related data. Appendix B. Figures from Section 1. displays full-page replicas ef Figures 1-5 The demographic data provided in this report are only a small portion of the data iwailable trom the several hundred questions asked of students, teachers, and school principals in order to provide context tor NAEP results. Overall results for all student and school variables tor public school students in each participating jurisdiction are J available in summary data tables at the NAEP Web sit How Are Results Reported? In this report. as in other NAEP reports, only those results based on preestablished minimum sample sizes are reported. For details. see the forthcoming NAEP 1998 Technical Report. The results are reported in terms of two metrics. descriptions of which follow and details of which can be found in the Reading Report Card ] Average NAEP reading scale scores are reported for all students or for subgroups of students Percentages of students in each achievement level: that is. the students’ scale scores place them into three categories: at or above the Basic level. at or above the Proficient level. and at the Advanced level. Also reported are the percentages ot students whose scores are below the Basic level Phe bulleted statements in the text as well as the symbols in the tables are based on the results of statistical tests of the data. The reader is cautioned to rely on the results of these statistical tests rather than on the apparent magnitude of any difference in scale scores or percentages in making inferences trom the data The NAEP Reading Scale Students” responses to the NAEP 1998 reading assessment were analyzed to determine the percentages of students responding correctly to each multiple-choice question or in each of several score categories for constructed-response questions (requiring a short o1 long written answer). Three scales were developed. one for each of the three purposes for reading: reading for literary experience; reading to gain information, and reading to perform a task (grades 8 and 12 only). The purposes for reading are described fully in the companion Reading Report Card and in the Reading Framework for the National \ssessment of Educational Progress, both available on the Web (see Appendix A) Student performance by each of the purposes for reading appears in the percentile data tables at the NAEP Web site. The scales summarize results across all three grades. The scale for each of the purposes for reading ranges from 0 to 500 and ts linked to tts corresponding scale trom 1992 and 1994.) An overall composite scale was developed by weighting each of the three subscales based on its relative importance in the NAEP reading tramework. This composite scale ts the metric used to present the average scale scores and selected percentiles in this and other reports NAEP 1998 READING STATE REPORT The Virein Islands The Reading Achievement Levels In addition to the NAEP reading scale. results are also reported achievement levels authorized by the NAEP legislation Assessment Governing Board. The achievement levels are pertormat on the collective judgments about what students should be expected Viewing students’ performance trom this perspective provides some adequacy of students’ knowledge and skills and the extent to which they achieved expected levels of pertormance. The Board reviewed and adopted the recommended achievement levels derived from the judgments of a broadly representative panel that led t included teachers, education specialists, and members of the general For each tested. the Board has adopted three achievement and Advan For reporting purposes. the achievement level cut scores f a)! between four ranges on the NAEP reading scale below Basic, Bus if ran | ( Phe policy definitions of the achtevement levels ar \ clow le te the descriptions of expected reading performances at each achievement level at grades 4 and & can be found under the heading What Should Students Be | byes 1) nt ik ‘a : ly t nolan the ) f the MLTEER VA A Sal \ ( l ! 14 is 4 \ Able to Do? later in this section. The cut scores that divide tl Definitions of the achievement levels Proficient Advanced The NAEP legislation requires that the achievement levels be used on a developmental basis until the Commissioner of Education Statistics determines, as the result of a congressionally mandated evaluation by one or more nationally recognized evaluation organizations, that the achievement levels are “reasonable, valid. and informative to the public Upon review of the available information, the Commisstonet of Education Statistics agrees with the National Academy's recommendation that caution needs to be exercised in the use of the current achies ’ \ since in the opinion of the Academy “.. appropriate validity evideng lw cul scores ts lacking: and the process has produced unreasonable results eretore, the Commiusstoner concludes that these achievement levels should continue to be considered developmental and should continue to be interpreted and used with caution. The Reading Report Cara contains further information on the developmental status of the achievement levels. The Commissioner and the Governing Board belt that the achreveme levels are usetul for reporting trends in the educationa NAEP 1998S READING STATE REPOR | The Virgin Islands Reading Scale Score Results for Public School Students Figure | on the following page shows graphically the Virgin Islands’ performance in terms of average scale scores as compared to that of the nation. Note that only a small portion of the NAEP reading scale. which actually ranges from 0 to 500, is represented on the vertical axis Public School Students, Grade 4 In 1998, the average reading scale score of students in the Virgin Islands was 178 This was lower than that of students across the nation (215) In the Virgin Islands, the average scale score of students was higher in 1998 (178) than in 1992 (171). However, the average scale score of fourth graders across the nation was not significantly different in 1998 (215) from that in 1992 (215) Public School Students, Grade 8 In the Virgin Islands, the average reading scale score was 233 1 YX, lower than that of students across the nation (261 The bulleted statements above give only a few of the assessment’s findings. Complete notations of significant differences in overall performance tor 1992 as compared to 1998 can be found in Table 1A in Section 2. Note that the changes indicated between two particular years show differences in performance between two distinct points im time are not meant to indicate a veneral trend through the intervening years Additional information can be tound in the NALP /99S Readine Report Card and on the NAEP Web site NAEP 1998 READING STATE REPORT The V.rein Islands How to read Figure 1 nt ans FIGURE 1 CARD =a \verage reading scale scores for public school students at grades 4 and 8 1998 i) g for f g State Assessment Virgin islands eee Nation RE GION f ANY RE Ff ANY RE * ANY RE NOT PART OF ANY PAR NOT PAR NOT PART O NOT 1994 1998 1998 Grade 4 Grade 4 Grade 8 REPORT The Virein Islands Achievement Level Results for Public School Students Figure 2 on the following page shows graphically the Virgin Islands” performance in terms of achievement levels (see page 3 for a deseriptr ompared to that of the nation Public School Students, Grade 4 In 1998, the percentage of Virgin Islands students who performed at or above the Proficient level was 8 percent. This percentage was smaller than the percentage YQ) of the nation’s students who performed at the same level (29 percent) Phe percentage of students performing at or above the Proficient level in the Virgin Islands was higher in 1998 (8 percent) than in 1992 (3° percent) Public School Students, Grade In 1998. the percentage of students who performed at or above the Proficient level in the Virgin Islands was 10 percent. This percentage was smaller than that of students across the nation (31) percent) Phe bulleted statements above vive only a tew of the assessment’s findings. Complete notations of significant changes in overall performance tor 1992 as compared with 1998 an be tound in Table 1B in Section 2 How to read Figure 2 REPOR] The Virgin Islands THE NATION'S FIGURE 2 REPORT | CARD = Reading achievement level results for public school students at grades 4 1996 L— and 8 State Assessment Relea Basic 1998 Grade 4 Sa NOT PART OF ANY REGION eee 32 1994 Grade 4 DID NOT PARTICIPATE NOT PART OF ANY REGION SIRE 31 ET Virgin Islands NOT PART OF ANY REGION le RS 33 Natior 1998 Grade 8 A 30 Virgin Islands NOT PART OF ANY REGION ARLES a1 ‘ Nation Percent Basic and Below Basic Percent t roficient and Advanced Phe text and tables in this report reter to the percentage of students who score “at or above Proficient and “at or above Basic.” These percentages are cumulative. For instance, in Table 1B in Section 2. “at or above Proficient” appears as a single percentage. In order to compare the percentage in Figures 2. 4. and 5 with that in Fable 1B. the percentage appearing in the Proficient band in the tigures must be added to the percentage in the Advanced band to obtain the percentage of students whose scores categorize them as “at or above Proficient.” Similarly, the sum of the percentages appearing in the Basic, Proficient, and Advanced bands yields the percentage of students “at or above Bast Figures 2, 4, and 5 allow one to compare performance by the total percentage of a given student population whose scores put the students in the broad category “at o1 above Proficient (that is, simply comparing bar lengths to the right of the zero axis) Other interesting comparisons might consider the components of the bar lengths. For instance, One student population with 40 percent of its members performing at or above Proficient could have 35 percent at Proficient and 5 percent at Advanced. Another student population, also with 40 percent of its members performing at or above Proficient, might have 25 percent at Proficient and 15 percent at Advanced. Ina similar manner, on the left side of the zero axis, much can be gained by comparing the percentage of students performing at the Basic level with the percentage below the Basi level BEST COPY AVAILABLE NAEP 1998 READING STATE REPORI The Virgin Islands Comparisons Between the Virgin Islands and Other Participating Jurisdictions In 1998, 45 states and other jurisdictions participated in the reading assessment. O1 those, 43 at grade 4 and 40 at grade 8 met statistical reporting requirements fot publishing their public school students’ performance on the NAEP reading assessment The maps in Figure 3 show the participating states and indicate their membership in four U.S. geographic regions. Note that the Virgin Islands and the domestic and overseas Department of Defense Education Activity schools (DoODEA/DDESS and DoDEA/DoDDS) do not belong to any of these regions. Reading results for all participating states and other jurisdictions are available at the NAEP Web site Average scale scores: How to read Figure 3 3 presents maps comparing the Virgin Islands’ overall 1998 grade 4 and » 8 reading s cale scores with those of all other participating states and “ The jifferent shadings are determined by whether or not the Virgir slands’ average scale score is significantly different (in a statistical sense’ fro at f each of the other participants in the 1998 NAEP state reading assessment. States participate in 1998. or that did not meet reporting guidelines, are als« Jin the maps Achievement levels: How to read Figures 4 and 5 jyures 4 and 5 permit comparisons of all participants in the NAEP state ssessment, in terms of percentages of public school students performing at or ove the Proficient level as well as those performing at the Basic level and below As with Figure 3, the participating jurisdictions are arranged into categories reflecting student performance compared to that in the Virgin Islands. The jurisdictions are yrouped by whether the percentage of their students with scores at or above the Proficient level (including Advanced) was higher than, not significantly different fron r lower than the percentage in the Virgin Islands. Note that the arrangement of the states and other jurisdictions within each category is alphabetical, statistical isons among the jurisdictions in each of the three group ye not includ These figures are available in color at the NAEP Web site. In the companion Reading Report Card, there are additional data tables as well as multiple comparison charts permitting comparison of each participating jurisdiction with all others \DING STATE REPORT The Virein Islands THE NATION'S FIGURE 3 REPORT | CARD ; : = a The Virgin Islands’ 1998 average reading scale score compared to those for —4+ —t} 1998 other participating jurisdictions for public school students at grades 4 and 8 State Assessment BEST COPY AVAILABLE LEADING The Virgin Islands THE NATION'S FIGURE 4 REPORT CARD Achievement levels for reading: Comparing the percentage of public school antl students at or above the Proficient level in the Virgin Islands with those in State Assessment = Ofer participating jurisdictions at grade 4 in 1998 Basic Proficient aaa Higher than target state Alabama Alabama Arizona Arizona Arkansas Arkansas California California Colorado Colorado Connecticut Connecticut Delaware DoDEA/DDESS DoDEA/DoDDS Florida Delaware DoDEA/DDESS DoDEA/DoDDS Florida Georgia Georgia Hawaii Hawaii lowa lowa Kansas Kansas Kentucky Kentucky Loutsiana Louisiana Maine Maine Maryland Maryland Massachusetts Massachusetts Michigan Michigan Minnesota Minnesota Mississippi Mississippi Missouri Missour! Montana Montana Nevada Nevada New Hampshire New Hampshire New Mexico New Mexico New York New York North Carolina North Carolina Oklahoma Oklahoma Oregon Oregon Rhode Island Rhode Island South Carolina South Carolina Tennessee Tennessee Texas Texas Utah Utah Virginia Virginia Washington Washington eeeekeesee Fe West Virginia West Virginia = Wisconsin Wisconsin i a Wyoming Wyoming Not different from target state District of Columbia 7 a District of Columbia VIRGIN ISLANDS 64 VIRGIN ISLANDS ac 0 6 5 4 Percent Basic and Below Basic Percent Proficient and Advanced SOURCH BEST COPY AVAILABLE NAEP 1998 READING STATE REPORI The Virein Islands THE NATION'S FIGURE 5 CARD Achievement levels for reading: Comparing the percentage of public school _ = students at or above the Proficient level in the Virgin Islands with those in State Assessment = OL her participating jurisdictions at grade 8 in 1998 Basic | Proficent a Higher than target state Alabama Alabama Arizona Arizona Arkansas Arkansas California Calitorma Colorado Colorado Connecticut Connecticut Delaware Delaware DoDEA/DDESS DoDEA/DDESS 0DEA/DoDDS DoDEA/DoDDS Florida Florida Georgia Georgia Hawaii Hawaii Kansas Kansas Kentucky Kentucky Louisiana Loursiana Maine Maine Maryland Maryland Massachusetts Massachusetts Minnesota Minnesota Mississippi Mississipp Missouri Missour! Montana Montana Nevada Nevada New Mexico New Mex: New York New York North Carolina North Carolina Oklahoma Oklahoma Oregon Oregon Rhode Island Rhode Island South Carolina South Carolina Tennessee Tennessee Texas Texas Utah Utah Virginia Virginia Washington Washington West Virginia West Virginia Wisconsin Wisconsin Wyoming Wyoming Not different from target state District of Columbia "1 j District of Columbia VIRGIN ISLANDS a | VIRGIN ISLANDS a Percent Basic and Below Basic Percent Proficient and Advanced BEST COPY WAITLABLE NAEP 1998 READING STATE REPORI The Virgin Islands What Was Assessed? Phe subject area content for each NAEP assessment is developed through a congressionally mandated national consensus process directed by the National \ssessment Governing Board (NAGB). The objectives for each NAEP assessment are described in a framework document that delineates the important content and process areas to be measured, as well as the types of exercises to be included in the assessment. The Reading Framework tor the 1992 and 1994 NAEP reading assessments also guided the 1998 reading assessment. This framework was developed under the auspices of the Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO). Reflecting current theories of reading. the Reading Framework describes reading as a complex interaction among the reader, the text. and the context of the reading situation. According to this interactive view of reading, readers use different strategies and processes depending on the type of text being read and the purposes tor reading it Phe framework specifies that students be assessed in reading tor three different purposes: reading for literary experience, reading to gain information, and reading to perform a task. The last purpose ts not assessed at grade 4. In order to measure students’ abilities to read tor different purposes, the assessment is composed of three different types of texts, each associated with one purpose tor reading While responding to text, readers take different approaches in order to understand what is being read. The comprehension process typically involves changing stances, of orientations toward the text. The framework describes four reading stances: initial understanding, developing an interpretation, personal response, and critical stance. Phese stances are not intended to represent a sequential routine of reading abilities nor are they considered hierarchical: rather, they describe reading processes that all readers use at any level of development. The assessment contains reading materials that were drawn trom sources commonly available to students in and out of school. These authentic materials were considered to be representative of the types of reading experiences typically encountered by students. Each student in the state assessment was asked to complete two 25-minute blocks, each consisting of a reading passage and associated comprehension questions at the appropriate grade level. A combination of multiple-choice and constructed-response questions was used to assess students’ understanding of the passages. The passages and associated items followed a distribution specified by the framework Distribution of items by purpose for reading as specified by the Reading Framework Purpose Grade 4 Grade 8 iterary expenence jain informatior NAEP 1998 READING STATE REPORT The Virgin Islands What Should Students Be Able to Do? Phe following grade-specific achievement level descriptions focus on the interaction of the reader, the text, and the context. The achievement level descriptions reflect what readers performing at each achievement level should be able to do. The achievement levels are cumulative from Basic to Proficient to Advanced. Each level builds on the previous level such that knowledge at the Proficient level presumes mastery of the Bast level. and knowledge at the Advanced level presumes mastery of both the Basic and Proficient levels THE NATION'S FIGURE 6A REPORT | carp | “2? ‘ 1998 +} State Assessment Levels of Reading Achievement at Grade 4 verall meanin appropriate for fourth graders, they connections between the text and thei making simple inferences Fourth-grade students performin ) nt level should be able t demonstrate an overall understanding of the text, providing inferential as well a literal information. When reading text appropriate to fourth grade. they should be able to extend the ideas in the text by making inferences, drawing con clusions, an making connections t r own experiences. The + ( Nnection between the text and what the student infers Fourth-grade students perform at the Advanced | ADVANCED generalize ab pu t eT ng selection LEVEL how authors compose and use literary devices. Wher (268) fourth grade ey ) t ible to judge text critical BEST COPY AVAILABLE NAEP 1998 READING STATE REPORI The Virein Islands THE NATION'S FIGURE 6B my re or =o Levels of Reading Achievement at Grade 8 ee | 1998 State Assessment PROFICIENT LEVEL (281) ADVANCED LEVEL (323) S READING The Virein Islands Who Was Assessed? Selection of Schools and Students For the NAEP state assessment. participating schools within a given jurisdiction, and students in those schools, were selected using probability sampling methods. These methods are described in the NAEP 1998S Readine Report Card The Virgin Islands’ Participation Phe overall participation rate for schools and students must meet guidelines established by NCES and NAGB tn order for assessment results to be reported publicly. The NAEP slate assessment in reading was administered in public schools at grade 4 in 1992. in public and nonpublic schools at grade 4 in 1994, and in public and nonpublic schools at grades 4 and & in 1998. The Virgin Islands participated in the NAEP reading assessments in 1992 and 1998 at grade 4 and met the minimum guidelines tor publication of its public school results in both years. The Virgin Islands also satistied the criteria tor reporting nonpublic school results at grade 4 in 1998. At grade 8 in 1998 the Virgin Islands met the eriterta for reporting both public and nonpublic school results Details on participation rates and guidelines tor all participating jurisdictions can be found in Appendix A of the Reading Report Card Possible Sources of Bias in Reported Results Within a certain state sample that meets the guidelines for publication of results, there sull may exist possible sources of bras of the results due to nonparticipation of selected schools or due to nonparticipation of certain student groups. These possible sources of bias are indicated by notations and are specified and described in Appendix A of the Reading Report Card. The Virgin Islands’ public schools did not receive any notations to indicate the possibility ot bias Participation by Students with Disabilities or Who Are Learning English NAEP endeavors to assess all students selected in the randomized sampling process including students with disabilities (SD) as well as students who are beginning to learn English and are classified by their schools as limited English proficient (LEP). Although the guidelines used to classify students into these two categories vary trom state to state, NAEP eriteria for inclusion standardize the selection of students. The recent Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) should bring turther consistency to classification criteria. The percentages of students classified as SD or LEP in all participating states and jurisdictions are available at the NAEP Web site in the all-yurisdiction summary data tables (SDTs). Participation guidelines specity levels of SD/LEP student nonparticipation that put the sample at risk for nonresponse bias: however, no jurisdiction tailed to meet these guidelines for the 1998 reading assessment NAEP offers certain accommodations for SD or LEP students who need them (for example, large print test booklets or extended time), as described in the NAEP 1998 Reading Report Card and in a special report to follow. However, school personnel make the ultimate decision as to whether or not a particular student should take the assessment and whether accommodations are needed. The following table shows the percentage of students in the Virgin Islands who were classified as SD or LEP in 1998 and also the percentage of those students who were excluded trom NAEP at the discretion of school personnel NAEP 1998 READING STATE REPORT The Virgin Islands Students in the Virgin Islands who are classified as limited English proficient (LEP) or having disabilities, 1998 Percentage of students who are: School Type Public Nonpublic Grade 4 How Are Performance Differences Reported? Because the percentages of students and the average reading scale scores presented in this report are based on samples—rather than on the entire population of fourth or eighth graders in a jurisdicuon—the numbers reported are necessarily estimates. As such, they are subject to sampling error, a measure of uncertainty reflected in the standard error, ot the estimate. When the percentages or average scale scores of certain groups are compared, it is essential to take the standard error into account rather than to rely solely on observed similarities or differences. The comparisons discussed in this report are based on statistical tests that consider both the magnitude of the differences between the averages or percentages and the standard errors of those statistics Phe statistical tests determine whether the evidence—based on the data trom the groups in the sample—ts strong enough to conclude that there ts an actual difference in the averages or percentages for those groups in the population. Tf the evidence ts strong (i.e., the difference ts statistically significant), the report describes the group averages or percentages as being different (e.g.. one group performed /igher than or lower than another group) regardless of whether the sample averages or percentages appear to be about the same or not. [f the evidence ts not sufficiently strong (.e.. the difference ts not statistically significant), the averages or percentages are described as being nor vignificantly different—again, regardless of whether the sample averages or sample percentages appear to be about the same or widely discrepant In this report, statemen.s that compare groups or years by using terms such as higher” or “no significant difference” (e.g.. “females scored higher than males” o1 “scores in 1998 were not significantly different from 1992”) are based on the results of staustical tests. Change over time that is statistically significant is indicated in the tables. The reader is cautioned to rely on the results of the statistical tests (as expressed in the bulleted text or as indicated in the tables) rather than on the apparent magnitude of any difference in seale scores or percentages in making inferences from the data Phe statistical tests are discussed in greater detail in the NAEP /998 Reading Report Card and the forthcoming NAEP 1998 Technical Report IN READING STATE REPORI The Virgin Islands Overall Reading Performance SECTION 2 and Performance by Demographic Characteristics Since its inception in L969, NAEP ’s mission has been to collect. analyze. and produc Valid and reliable information about the academic performance of students in the United States in various learning areas. In 1990, the mission oF NAEP was expanded to prov tk State-by-state results on academic achievement. To provide reports with cach stat data, the computer-generated reporting system was developed: this report was produced using that system From 1990 through 1996, NAEP provided state reports with a variety of variabh chosen for their general interest to most states. Because of new Internet capabilities and with the approval of the state NAEP representatives, the 1998 state reports are tullored to provide information of most immediate need to all states. Consequently ‘sults are reported here by total population and broken out by major demograph variables only. State NAEP results on the Internet provide resources for customized reports not possible in the past Reported in this section are the results for student performance overall as disaggregated by the main demographic variables usually reported by NAEP Gendet Race/ethnicity Highest level of parental education (grade & only) Eligibility for the tree or reduced-price school lungh program e Type of school (public compared to nonpublic. where available) ach of these variables is reported first by average scale score and selected percent and then by percentages of students at or above cach achievement level Phe reader is cautioned against making inferences about the performance of students in these groups, or about the effectiveness of the National School Lunch Program or types of school control, because there are generally many other factor mvolved that are not discussed here and possibly not addressed by NAEP NAEP L998 READING STATE REPORI The Virgin Islands: Students’ Overall Scale Scores Fable 1A shows the overall performance of the Virgin Islands’ public school students as Well as the overall performance for the nation. The first column of results ve scale score on the NAEP 0-500 reading scale Phe columns to the right show the score at each of the selected percentiles rangement permits a more detailed view of performance along the distribution of lowest to highest scores, with the score at cach percentile as a demarcation point y each percentile, that percentage of scores talls below the score at that percentile. For instance. 75 percent of the student scores fall below the score shown at the Sth percentile. If. for a particular jurisdiction. the score at the 75th percentile ts equal to the national average. 25 percent of its students performed better than the national average. A jurisdiction might also compare the score at tis 25th percentile for the current year to that of a previous year to see what change has occurred for students who scored in the lower quartile In terms of the average NAEP reading scale score tor the Virgin Islands” publi school students. Table LA shows the tollowing Public School Students, Grade 4 In 1998, the average reading scale score tor students in the Virgin Islands was 178 This was lower than that of fourth graders in public schools across the nation (215) In the Virgin Islands, the average scale score of students was higher in 1998 (178) than in 1992 (171). However. the average scale score of fourth graders across the nation Was not significantly different in 1998 (215) trom that in 1992 (215) Public School Students, Grade 8 In 1998, the average scale score of students in the Virgin Islands was . that of erghth graders in public schools nationwide (261) THE NATION'S REPORT [rege ¢ 1998 = CARD State Assessment Grade 4 Grade 8 NAEP 1998 READING The Virgin Islands TABLE 1A Average reading scale scores and selected percentiles for public school students: 1992 and 1998 Average : Seale score distribution ans scale 10th 25th 50th 75th 90th score percentile percentile percentile percentile percentile BEST COPY AVAILABLE STATE REPORT The Virgin Islands Overall Results in Terms of Achievement Levels lable 1B presents the percentages of students who performed below Basic, at or above Basic, at or above Proficient, and at Advanced levels. Because the percentages in the levels are cumulative trom Basic to Proficient to Advanced, they sum to more than 100 percent. Only the percentage of students at or above Basic (which includes Proficient and Advanced) plus the percentage of students below Basic will always sum to 100) percent Table 1B indicates the following in terms of achievement levels attained by the Virgin Islands” public school students Public School Students, Grade 4 In 1998, the percentage of Virgin Islands students who performed at or above the Proficient level was 8 percent. This was smaller than the percentage of the nation’s public school students who performed at the same level (29° percent) Phe percentage of students performing at or above the Prosicient level in the Virgin Islands was higher in 1998 (8 percent) than in 1992 (3° percent) Phe percentage of students in the Virgin Islands who pertormed at or above the Basic level in 1998 (26 percent) was smaller than that for the nation’s public school students (61 percent) Public School Students, Grade 8 The percentage of students in the Virgin Islands who performed at or above the Proficient level in 1998 was 10 percent. This percentage was smaller than that of public school students across the nation (31 percent) In 1998, the percentage of students who performed at or above the Basic level in the Virgin Islands was 40 percent. This percentage was smaller than that of public school students natltonwide (72 percent) NAEP 1998 READING STATE REPORT The Virgin Islands THE NATION'S TABLE 1B REPORT caro | SEP . =< Percentages of public school students attaining achievement levels: 1992 and 1998 1998 State Assessment At or Above Proficient Advanced Grade 4 198 Grade 8 1998 The standard erro table appear in parentheses vw 1LYOS valu lower) than the value for 19* Sample size reliable estimate SOURCE: Nationa Readi Assessn BEST COPY AVAILABLt \DING STATE REPORT The Virgin Islands Gender Phis report focuses on trend differences, for example, whether females” performance has improved since 1992. The indicators of significant differences that appear in the tables come from a comparison of performance by males or females over time. Another issue covered in many studies and by comparisons below (but not in the tables) ts that of differences in performance between males and females. Several studies show that females outperform males in development of literacy at the elementary and middle school grades: reports documenting or surveying gender differences in reading include NAEP. 1996 Trends in Academic Progress’ and The Condition of Education Table 2A shows scale scores for public school fourth and eighth graders by gendet in the Virgin Islands and the nation Scale Score Results by Gender In terms of average reading scale scores for the Virgin Islands’ public school students Table 2A shows the following. Public School Students, Grade 4 In the Virgin Islands. male students’ average scale score was 169 in 1998 was lower than that of females (186) In 1998, male students in the Virgin Islands had an average scale score in reading (169) that was lower than that of fourth-grade males across the nation (212) Similarly, females in the Virgin Islands had an average score (186) that was lowe! than that of females nationwide (218) Phe average reading scale score of the Virgin Islands’ fourth-grade males did not differ significantly in 1998 (169) trom that in 1992 (164). However, the average scale score of female students was higher in 1998 (186) than in 1992 (179) Public School Students, Grade 8 In 1998 in the Virgin Islands, male students” average scale score was 229. This did 5 not differ significantly trom that of females (236) Phe average reading scale score of males in the Virgin Islands (229) was lower than that of males across the nation (255) in 1998. Similarly, Virgin Islands females > average scale score (236) was lower than that of females nationwide (268) P. (199 NAEP enter for Educat Department DC: Office of ucational R ur ind Improves NAEP 1998 READING STATE REPOR I The Virgin Islands THE NATION'S TABLE 2A REPORT CARD as Average reading scale scores and selected percentiles for public 1998 school students by gender: 1992 and 1998 State Assessment . Percentage Average Scale score distribution ; of total scale 10th 25th 50th 75th 90th population score percentile percentile percentile percentile percentile od Males Grade 4 19 Grade 8 Aj ot Va Females Grade 4 198 Grade 8 { 198 Virai nd 5% 1 v) } 4 4 213 (4 236 ( 4.2 261 (3.3 283 ( 5.7) j 308 ( 1.5 the statistics in the table appear in parentheses inthy higher (lower) than the value for 1992 at permit a relrable estimate Standard errot SOURCI Hon ter for kducatior ist tonal ment of Educational Progress (NAEP). 1992 and 1998 IX ! BEST COPY AVAILABLE NAEP 1998 READING STATE REPORI The Virgin Islands Achievement Level Results by Gender As shown in Table 2B, the following ts true of achievement levels attained by the Virgin Islands” public school students Public School Students, Grade 4 In 1998, 6 percent of males and LO percent of females performed at or above the Proficient level in the Virgin Islands. These percentages were not significantly different. Phe percentage of males in the Virgin Islands who were at or above the Proficient level in 1998 (6 percent) was smaller than that of males in the nation (27 percent). Che percentage of females in the Virgin Islands at or above this level in 1998 (10 percent) was smaller than that of the nation’s females (31 percent) The percentages of both males and females performing at or above the Proficient level were higher in 1998 than in 1992 Public School Students, Grade 8 In 1998. 8 percent of males and 11 percent of females in the Virgin Islands performed at or above the Proficient level. These percentages were not significantly different. In 1998, the percentage of males at or above the Proficient level in the Virgin Islands (S percent) was smaller than that of males in the nation (24 percent). Phe percentage of females in the Virgin Islands performing at or above the Proficient level in 1998 (11 percent) was smaller than that of females nauonwide (37 percent) NAEP 1998 READING STATE REPORT The Virgin Islands THE NATION'S TABLE 2B REPORT CARD = Percentages of public school students attaining achievement levels 1998 by gender: 1992 and 1998 State Assessment : hfe, at At or Above Proficient Advanced Males Grade 4 1998 Virgin Islands Nation Virgin Islar Nation Grade 8 1998 Virgin Islands Nation Females Grade 4 1998 Virgin Islands Nation Virgin Islands Nation Grade 8 1998 Virgin Island Natior The achievement levels correspond to the tolk ' ponts NAEP reading scale at grade 4 (and 8): Basic, 208-2 243-280): Proficient, 238-267 (281-322 in lvanced, - (323) and above. The standard errors of the statistics 1 the table appear in parentheses. If the notation ) appears, it signifies that the 1998 value was significantly higher (lower) than the value tor 1992 at about the 95 percent confidence level Sample size is insufficient to permit rehable estimate Standard error estimat mot be accurately determined SOURCE: National Center tor Education Statist tional Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP). 1992 and 1998 Reading Assessments seST COPY AVAILABLE NAEP 1998 READING STATE REPORT The Virgin Islands Race/Ethnicity \s part of the background questionnaire administered with the assessment, students were asked to identify the racial/ethnic subgroup that best described them. The five mutually exclusive categories were White, Black, Hispanic. Asian/Pacific Islander, and American Indian. This information was the primary contributor to the classifications appearing below. For details of the derivation of this variable, see the NAEP 1/998 Reading Report Card Fable 3A shows scale scores for public school students by racial and ethnic background in the Virgin Islands and the nation. Only the race/ethnicity categories with sufficient membership to meet reporting requirements in the Virgin Islands are reported Scale Score Results by Race/Ethnicity In terms of average reading scale scores for the Virgin Islands’ public school students, Fable 3A indicates the following. Public School Students, Grade 4 In 1998, Black students in the Virgin Islands had an average scale score that was higher than that of Hispanic students. The average scale score of Black and Hispanic students in the Virgin Islands did not differ significantly in 1998 from in 1992. Public School Students, Grade 8 In 1998, Black students in the Virgin Islands had an average scale score that was not significantly different from that of Hispanic students NAEP 1998 READING STATE REPORT The Virgin Islands THE NATION'S TABLE 3A REPORT CARD ye =< Average reading scale scores and selected percentiles for public 1998 f =e school students by race/ethnicity: 1992 and 1998 State Assessment ; ; Percentage Average Scale score distribution of total scale 10th 25th 50th 75th 90th population score percentile percentile percentile percentile percentile Black Grade 4 Grade 8 Hispanic Grade 4 199R Grade 8 1998 ntheses. Ht the notation for 1992 at about the 9S Standard error estimates SOURCE: National Center tor Education Statist \ tot Fd tional Pre NAEP), 1992 anc Read Assessments est COPY AVAILABLE a3 NAEP 1998 READING STATE REPORT The Virgin Islands Achievement Level Results by Race/Ethnicity Table 3B shows the following to be true of achievement levels attained by the Virgin Islands’ public school students Public School Students, Grade 4 In the Virgin Islands in 1998, the percentage of Black students performing at or above the Proficient level was not significantly different from that of Hispanic students Phe percentage of Black students in the Virgin Islands performing at or above the Proficient level was greater in 1998 than in 1992 Public School Students, Grade 8 In the Virgin Islands, the percentage of Black students performing at or above the Proficient level in 1998 was not significantly different from that of Hispanic students YS READING STATE REPORT THE NATION'S REPORT fraep CARD on = State Assessment Black Grade 4 Grade 8 Hispank Grade 4 Grade 8 The Virgin Islands TABLE 3B Percentages of public school students attaining achievement levels by race/ethnicity: 1992 and 1998 < At or Above Proficient Advanced The Virgin Islands Students’ Reports of Parents’ Highest Education Level As part of the background questionnaire administered with the assessment. students were asked to identity the highest level of education completed by each parent. The groupings were determined by the highest educational level reported for either parent Level of parental education has always exhibited the same general pattern in NAEP reports: the higher the level of parental education, the higher the level of student performance. This finding ts borne out by other studies: for instance. see a paper by Grissmer, Kirby. Berends. and Williamson (1994) that includes findings from the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth (NLSY) and the National Education Longitudinal Study (NELS). Table 4A shows scale scores for public school students by parents” highest education level in the Virgin Islands and the nation. Because the format for the question was changed for grade 4. only grade 8 results are reported. The format change ts described in the NAEP 1998 Reading Report Card Scale Score Results by Parents’ Education In terms of average reading scale scores for the Virgin Islands* eighth-grade public school students in 1998, Table 4A indicates the following. (Note that the following discussion pertains only to those students who reported knowing the highest level of education achieved by one or both parents.) Public School Students, Grade 8 Students in the Virgin Islands who affirmed that neither parent graduated trom high school had an average reading scale score that was not significantly different trom those of students reporting that at least one parent graduated trom high school. at least one parent had some education after high school, or at least one parent graduated trom colleu Phe average seale score for students reporting that at least one parent graduated ‘rom high school, at least one parent had some education after high school, or at least one parent graduated trom college in the Virgin Islands was lower than that of similai students nationwide. The average scale score for students reporting that neithet parent graduated from high school in the Virgin Islands was not significantly different from that of similar students natlonwide NAEP 1998 READING STATE REPORI THE NATION'S REPORT [rapp CARD State Assessment Did not finish high school Grade 8 Graduated from high school Grade 8 Nat Some education after high school Grade 8 Graduated from college Grade 8 ! dont know Grade 8 The Virgin Islands TABLE 4A \verage reading scale scores and selected percentiles for publi school students by parents’ highest level of education: 1998 Scale score distribution 10th 25th 50th 75th 90th percentile percentile percentile percentile percentile Percentage Average of total scale population score EST COPY AVAILABLE TE POR TI The Virgin Islands Achievement Level Results by Parents’ Education In terms of achievement levels attained by the Virgin Islands’ eighth-grade public schoo! students in 1998, Table 4B shows the following. (As with the previous discussion regarding average scale scores, the following pertains only to those students who reported knowing the highest level of education achieved by at least one parent Public School Students, Grade 8 Phe percentage of students in the Virgin Islands reporting that neither parent graduated trom high school who performed at or above the Proficient level significantly different trom the corresponding percentages for students reportin at least one parent graduated from high school, at least one parent had som. education after high school, or that at least one parent graduated trom coll For students reporting that at least one parent graduated trom high school, at least one parent had some education after high school, or at least one parent graduated from college. the percentage who performed at or above the Proficient level was smaller in the Virgin Islands than across the nation. For students reporting that neither parent graduated from high school, the percentage who performed at above the Proficient level was not significantly different in the Virgin Islas that of similar students across the nation The Virgin Islands THE NATION'S TABLE 4B REPORT naep CARD Percentages of public school students attaining achievement levels 1998 ———F_— by parents’ highest level of education: 1998 State Assessment At or Above Proficient Advanced Did not finish high school Grade 8 Graduated from high school Grade 8 Some education after HS Grade 8 Graduated from college Grade 8 | don't know Grade 8 ‘EST COPY AVAILABLE * READING STATE REPORT The Virein Islands Free/Reduced-Price Lunch Program Eligibility NAEP tracks eligibility for the federal program providing tree or reduced-price schoo! lunches. The free/reduced-price lunch component of the National School Lunch Program (NSLP) offered through the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), ts designed to ensure that children near or below the poverty line receive nourishing meals This program ts available to public schools, nonprotit private schools, and residential child care institutions. Eligibility is determined through the USDA’s Income Eligibility Guidelines, and results for this category of students are included as an indicator of poverty. More information is available at the USDA Web site, in particular, in a question-and-answer style document called “Nutrition Program Facts” at http://www.usda.gov/tes/enp/school*2.htm. NAEP first collected information on participation in this program in 1996 NAEP collects data on student eligibility for the NSLP in five categories: eligible for reduced-price lunches, eligible tor tree lunches, not eligible tor the NSLP, information was not available. or schools did not provide the information. Because some of these groups were small, these categories were combined into eligible, not eligible and information not available. as reported here for groups meeting minimum sample size requirements Scale Score Results by Eligibility for the Free/Reduced-Price Lunch Program In terms of average reading scale scores for the Virgin Islands” public school student in 1998. Table SA shows the following Public School Students, Grade 4 Students in the Virgin Islands eligible for tree/reduced-price lunch had an reading scule score of | 79 Students in the Virgin Islands eligible for tree/reduced-price lunch had an avera scale score (179) that was lower than that of similar fourth-grade students in th nation (198) Public School Students, Grade 8 In the Virgin Islands, the average reading scale score ot tree/reduced-price lunch was 233 Students in the Virgin Islands eligible tor tree/reduced-price lunch had ] i a. SCUIE SCOTS f 34) that Nal \ } a] eyed | iitt REPOF THE NATION'S REPORT | CARD naep = 1998 ne | State Assessment Eligible Grade 4 Grade 8 Information not available Grade 4 Grade 8 The Virgin Islands TABLE 5A \verage reading scale scores and selected percentiles by free/reduced-price lunch eligibility: 1998 Perc entage Average Scale score distribution of total scale 10th 25th 50th 75th population score percentile percentile percentile percentile EST COPY AVAILABLE 90th percentile The Virein Islands Achievement Level Results by Eligibility for the Free/Reduced-Price Lunch Program IL by public school students 1 Public School Students, Grade 4 percent of students who wer h program performed at or abo, 4 mn the Virgin Islands who were eligi ‘tor the free reduced-price lunch ram. the percentage at or above the Proficient level CS percent) was smader than he corresponding percentage for therr national counterparts (134) percent) Public School Students, Grade 8 lO percent of students who were ell reduced-price lunch program performed at or above the rik students w were cligible tor the tree/reduced-price lunch program. the percentage at or above the t the Virgin Islands (10) percent) tM significantly different ponding percentage for wid ' PEW Tit REPORI lhe Virein Islands THE NATION'S TABLE 5B REPORT caro | “#8P . = Percentages of public school students attaining achievement levels — 1998 by free/reduced-price lunch eligibility: 1998 State Assessment z At or Above At or Above Proficient Advanced Eligible Grade 4 Grade 8 Information not available Grade 4 Grade 8 3EST COPY AVAILABLE I} REPOR] The Virgin Islands Type of School The 1994 NAEP assessment marked the first time that nonpublic school student assessed at the state level. The Virgin Islands met the participation guidelines tor reporting nonpublic school results for the reading assessment in 199S at grades 4 and 8. Results are reported tor nonpublic schools and also for public and nonpublic school! combined ) In 1998, approximately 23) percent of fourth graders in the Virgin Islands attended nonpublic schools. bor the nation, PT] percent of students at grade 4 attended nonpublic schools in 1998. At grade 8, approximately 21) percent of students in the Virgin Islands and Tt} percent of students nationwide attended nonpublic schools in 1998 Phe reader should not make inferences about any apparent differences tn performance between students attending public schools and those attending nonpublic schools. Such differences may be related to socroeconomic and sociological factors such as the level of parental involvement ina child's education Additional information on nonpublic schools, including disaggregation by type of nonpublic school, is in the NAEP 1998 Reading Report Card Fable 6A presents scale score results for students in public schools. in nonpublic schools, and tor students in public and nonpublic schools combined Scale Score Results by Type of School In terms of average reading scale scores for the Virgin Islands” students. Table 6A provides the following information Public and Nonpublic School Students, Grade 4 In 1998. the average scale score for students in nonpublic schools in the Virgin Islands was 207. This was higher than that for students in public schools (178) Phe average scale score for the Virgin Islands’ nonpublic school students (207) wa lower than that for students in the nation’s nonpublic schools (233) in 1998 Public and Nonpublic School Students, Grade 8 Phe average scale score tor students in nonpublic schools in the Virgin Islands wa 12? 54) 64. This was higher than that for students in public schools Phe average scale score for the Virgin Islands’ nonpublic school students (264) wa lower than that for students in the nation’s nonpublic schools (281) NAEP L998 READING STATE REPORT The Virein Islands THE NATION'S TABLE 6A REPORT | CARD reap = \rerage reading scale scores and selected perce ntiles for students 0008 Seenneent hy type of school: 1998 State Assessment Percentage Average Scale score distribution of total scale 10th 25th 50th 75th 90th population score percentile percentile percentile percentile percentile Public Grade 4 Grade 8 Nonpublic Grade 4 Grade 8 Combined Grade 4 Grade 8 EST COPY AVAILABLE YE ATE REPOR The Virgin Islands Achievement Level Results by Type of School In terms of achievement levels attained by the Virgin Islands’ students. Table 6B shows the following Public and Nonpublic School Students, Grade 4 Virgin Islands, the percentage of nonpublic school students who wer the Profict level in L998 was 26 percent. This was greater than the orresponding percentage tor students in public schools (8 percent) 1998. the percentage of nonpublic school students at or above the Proficient level the Virgin Islands (26 percent) was smaller than the corresponding percentage tudents in the nation’s nonpublic schools (46 percent) Public and Nonpublic School Students, Grade 8 [he percentage of nonpublic school students in the Virgin Islands who were at ot above the Profictent level was 34 percent. This was greater than the corresponding percentage for students in public schools (10) percent) ly / Phe percentage of nonpublic school students at or above the Proficient level in the Virgin Islands (34 percent) was smaller than the corresponding percentage for j students in the nation’s nonpublic schools (54 percent ADING STATE REPORI The Virgin Islands THE NATION'S TABLE 6B REPORT CARD =e Percentage of students attaining achievement levels by type of 1998 school: 1998 State Assessment Public Grade 4 Nat Grade 8 Nonpublic Grade 4 199K Grade 8 P vat Combined Grade 4 1998 Grade 8 Aja? Ja | chools and/or Department ot DoDEA/DDESS he | ' { renher th i or the Nonpublic sample The rt 1 tor the ‘ 1 { \ 4 vain t yrade 4 (and Sb) Basic, 208-237 tandard errors of the statisties in not allow accurate determination Standard error ect (PY AVAILABLE NAEP 1998 READING STATE REPORT Appendix A Where to Find More Information Below are only a tew suggestions tor tinding additional NAEP results and related information. In spring 1999, a hyperlinked version of this section will be available from the Web page that introduces the 1998 state reports, http://nees.ed.gov/naep/. Many ot the reports and data files on the Web will require the use of the (free) Adobe Acrobat for tips on installing the Reader, click on the He/p button Details of the NAEP Reading Assessment For details of the assessment, refer to the companion report, the NAEP /998 Reading Report Card. Both that report and the NAEP 1998 Reading State Reports are available on the NCES Web site, http://nces.ed.gov/naep/. For details of the framework on which the reading assessment was developed. see http://www.nagb.org/. Click on the Publications button on the lett. and then click on Reading Framework for the National Assessment of Educational Progress: 1992-1998 Late in 1999, technical information about the assessment will be available in the VAEP 1998 Technical Report. Unul that technical report ts available. many questions may be answered by searching in the Technical Report of the NAEP 1996 Stat Assessment Program in Mathematics, to be tound at http://nces.ed.gov/naep/naep1996.html. The mathematics assessment was also on a cross-grade scale, so mathematics scaling procedures would be more similar to reading than would the scaling procedures in the science assessment (which was on a within-grade scale) Participation by All Jurisdictions in 1998 Information on each jurisdiction's participation rates for schools and students ts in Appendix A of the companion report, the NAEP 1998S Reading Report Card, to be tound at http://nees.ed.gov/naep/. Participation rates from previous years are included in the Technical Report tor the given year Additional Results from the Reading Assessment For more findings trom the 1998 reading assessments, refer to the 1998 results at http://nees.ed.gov/naep/. On the release date, the summary data tables (SDTs) at this site will include student and school variables tor all jurisdictions, the nation, and the four NAEP geographic regions. In the spring of 1999, complete SDTs will be available for all jurisdictions, with all background questions cross-tabulated with the major demographic reporting variables (for instance, hours of television watched by level otf parental education or limited English proficiency by race/ethnicity). Summary tables will also be available for the jurisdictions’ schools and teachers. Results by the purposes for reading will also appear in summary data tables in spring 1999 NAEP 1998 READING STATE REPORT The Virein Islands [he variables reported in the State Reports may found in the summary data tables at http://nees.cd naep/. The variables reported here. with th els im the tables are Gender. Ih DSEX in the data tables. Report differences im reading include NAEP 1996 Trends u htp://nees.cd.gov/naep/naepl996.html and The Cona Indicator 20 at hitp://nees.ed.gov/pubs/ce/c9620a0 | Race/Ethnicity. This is DRACE tn the tables derivation appears in Appendix A of the Re http://nces.ed.gov/naep Students’ Reports of Parents’ Highest Education Level) PARED ts a derived variable also described in Appendix A of the Reading Report Card. The ettect of parental education ts discussed in a paper by Grissmer. Kirby. Berends, and Williamson (1994) at http://www orand.org/publications/MR/MRS35/MRS535. html Free/Reduced-Price Lunch Program Eligibility. The variable reported here ts SLUNCH I], which ts a version of SLUNCH with several of 1 ategories of SLUNCH (e.g... reduced and tree) combined. A d available at http www usda.vov/tes/en Type of Location. TOL 3 ts the |: nthe summary data s. The TOI uses data trom Common Core of Data (s« ecd/index.html) Private School Survey (see http://nces.ed.gov/surveys/pss.htn nd Quality Education Data (see http WwW geddat, ype of School, SCHTYPE ts tl school sample includes Private and Cat ident | sure: Trcic \ftairs) and DoDEA (Departing nt CICTING ducatiot ( tuden ire u Combined sample only At http://nees.ed.gov/naep these variables. including how the information about the summury data The Virgin Islands Publications from NAEP Reading Assessments NAEP also offers various special reports on reading that may be of particular interest to teachers. These may be ordered trom the source at the end of this section, and some of them can be accessed and printed from the Web. Re Gddine / rallhle work fov thre Vational Lvve ssment of kduc ational Proere ) 1992-1998. trom the National Assessment Governing Board (available at http://www .nagb.org/) VAEP 1998 Reading Report Card for the Nation and the States, the companion to this State Report (available at http nees.ed. gor naep/, the NAEP Web site) VAEP 1998 Reading Sample Questions and Student Responses: Results from Public School Students in the States and Nationwide, a forthcoming brochure with state-level results for the released items : ' ; « The NAEP 1998 Reading Report Card National Highlights, a brochure with student samples, covering the national and state NAEP 1998 Reading Assessment (available at the NAEP Web site) »t0 Children Read Aloud, Data from NAEP ’s Integrated Reading Performance Record (IRPR) at Grade 4, results trom the 1992 IRPR, a special study conducted with a subgroup of fourth graders who participated in the 1992 NAEP Reading Assessment (available in print only) Children About their Literacy Experiences, Data from NAEP ’s Integrated Reading Performance Record (IRPR) at Grade 4, results trom the 1992 a special study conducted with a subgroup of fourth graders who participated in the 1992 NAEP Reading Assessment (available in print only) Students Selecting Stories: The Effects of Choice in Reading Assessment, results from the NAEP Reader Special Survey of the 1994 National Assessment of Educational Progress (available at the NAEP Web site) ordering information on these reports, write U.S. Department of Education ED Pubs P.O. Box 1398 lessup, MD 20794-1398 or call toll free 1-877-4 ED PUBS = (1-877-433-7827) NAEP reading reports in addition to those listed above are available ; hitp://nees.ed.gov/naep The Virgin Islands Sample NAEP Questions for Classroom Use Sample reading questions and student responses from the 1994 readin; now available at http://nces.ed.gov/naep/: look for the sample questions. There ar instructions at this site for copying individual ttems trom the files on the Web into word processor. All of the 1998 released items are available now in the Reading Report Cara The released items trom the 1998 Reading Assessment will appear on the Web tn the spring of 1999. Also available will be state-level results for the released items at grades 4 and 8, in a brochure suitable for distribution to schools. NAEP /99S Sample Quest and Student Responses ym? \ STATE REPORT The Virein Islands Appendix B Figures from Section 1 ose \verage reading scale scores for public school students at grades 4 and 8 1998 State Assessment Virgin islands ee Nation z z z * . : » » - a a a 5 : z 7 . + 2 2 a NOT PART NOT Pant 1992 1994 1998 Grade 4 Grade 4 Grade 4 THE NATION S neep = Reading achievement level results for public school students at grades 4 and 8 —— State Assessment sted percentages of students in each NAEP reading actwevement category f t where the Proficient category begins, so that they may be compared at Prot RSE Bee | Proton SS 1998 Grade 4 —_ A 6 Bl Virgin Islands NOT PART OF ANY REGION | 32 eos. Nation 1994 Grade 4 DID NOT PARTICIPATE NOT PART OF ANY REGION le RE EE a | Nation TTT sy Virgin Islands NOT PART OF ANY REGION eS io Nation 1998 Grade 8 LR 0 hed Virgin Islands NOT PART OF ANY REGION ie oe re | Nation 10 20 w» Percent Basic and Below Basic Percent Proficient and Advanced OPY AVAILABLE THE NATION § REPORT fac CARD neep The Virgin Islands’ 1998 average reading scale score compared to those for other partic ipating jurisdictions for public school at students at grade 4 1998 Ls} State Assessment al RI PA NO, { 7 Target state ea State has higher average scale score than target state State is not significantly different from target state in average s« es te Apes State has lower average scale score than target state hy State did not meet minimum participation rate guidelines State did not participate in the NAEP 1998 Reading State Assessment tional Or lu on es. National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP). 1998S Reading Assessment THE NATION S REPORT CARD 1998 State Assessment The Virgin Islands’ 1998 average reading scale score compared to those for other participating jurisdictions for public school students at vrade & Target state State State State State State has higher average scale score than target state is not significantly different from target state in average scale score has lower average scale score than target state did not meet minimum participation rate guidelines did not participate in the NAEP 1998 Reading State Assessment National ¢ ‘nter for Education Statistics, National \ sessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 1998 Reading BEST COPY AVAILABLE DoDDS Assessment Sh eee Achi l ls f 1 ( / / bli hool i REPORT chievement levels for reading: Comparing the percentage of pubttc schoot students CARD naep / / / = at or above the Proficient level in the Virgin Islands with those in other participating jurisdictions at grade 4 in 1998 1998 State Assessment The bars belo tain estimated percentages of ts in each NAEP reading achievement cate that they may be compared at f t student igned at the 5 t where the Proficient category begin Basic —| Proficient Alabama Arizona Arkansas California Colorado Connecticut Delaware DoDEA/DDESS DoDEA/DoDDS Florida Georgia Hawaii lowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maine Maryland Massachusetts Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nevada New Hampshire New Mexico New York North Carolina Oklahoma Oregon Rhode Isiand South Carolina Tennessee Texas Utah Virginia Washington West Virginia Wisconsin Wyoming District of Columbia VIRGIN ISLANDS 70 60 50 40 Percent Basic and Below Basic COP} e®eeeeteeee tee tg epee tet 228 Higher than target state Not different from target state i788 '¢6 3 ' ‘ Percent Proficient and Advanced AVAILABLE Alabama Arizona Arkansas California Colorado Connecticut Delaware DoDEA/DDESS DoDEA/DoDDS Florida Georgia Hawaii lowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maine Maryland Massachusetts Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nevada New Hampshire New Mexico New York North Carolina Oklahoma Oregon Rhode Isiand South Carolina Tennessee Texas Utah Virginia Washingtor West Virginia Wisconsir Wyoming Distr VIRGIN ISLANDS THE NATION'S , REPORT Achievement levels for reading: Comparing the percentage of public school students ~~ at or above the Proficient level in the Virgin Islands with those in other participating jurisdictions at grade 8 in 1998 1998 State Assessment ite)! =z: Higher than target state Alabama Arizona Arkansas Califorma Colorado Connecticut Delaware DoDEA/DDESS DoDEA/DoDDS Florida Georgia Hawaii Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maine Maryland Massachusetts Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nevada New Mexico New York North Carolina Oklahoma Oregon Rhode Isiand South Carolina Tennessee Texas Utah Virginia Washington West Virginia ed : , Alabama Arizona Arkansa California Colorado Connecticut Delaware DoDEA/DDESS DoDEA/DoDDS Florida Georgia Hawai Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maine Maryland Massachusetts Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nevada New Mexico New York North Carolina Oklahoma Oregon Rhode Isiand South Carolina Tennessee Texas Utah Virginia Washington West Virginia Wisconsin 2 Wisconsin TTT 2 Wyoming Not different from target state Wyoming District of Columbia ; CR NOGE ae: 11 4 District of Columbia VIRGIN ISLANOS Se a | VIRGIN ISLANDS 4 4 ‘ Percent Basic and Below Basi Percent Proficient and Advanced BEST | WAILABLE The Virgin Islands Phe NAEP Reading Assessment has benetited from the many individuals who contributed their considerable Knowledge. experience, and creativity to the NAEP 199% Reading Assessment. Beginning with the committee members who constructed thi framework, then the committees who wrote and edited the assessment items with much Input from curriculum specialists, and, after the 1992 assessment, the committee meetings necessary to establish achievement level cut scores, the NAEP Reading \ssessment has benetited from the contribution of hundreds of interested educators policy makers, and other citizens. The delivery of the assessment in 1992, 1994, and 1998 involved hundreds of state and local education officials—and especially teachers and school administrators who made it possible for 225,000 fourth and eighth graders to read passages and answer questions for 50 minutes to produce results culminating in the 1998 report card of reading performance Phe NAEP program at Educational Testing Service ts directed by Stephen Lazer and John Mazzeo. Patricia Donahue directed the scoring operations for the Reading Assessment. The NAEP state sampling and data collection activities were conducted at Westat under the direction of Nancy Caldwell. Keith Rust, Dianne Walsh, Lisa Alton, and Leslie Wallace. with contributions from many more. Printing, distribution, scoring, and processing activities were conducted by National Computer Systems (NCS) under the direction of Brad Thayer, Patrick Bourgeacg. Charles Brungardt, Tom Huenecke. Cynthia Malott, Connie Smith, and Mathilde Kennel, with the collegial participation of others At ETS, the complex statistical and psychometric activities necessary to report results were directed by Nancy Allen, John Barone, James Carlson, John Donoghue, and David Freund. Steve Isham, Jiahe Qian, and Lois Worthington were directly responsible for coordinating the analysis work. Edward Kulick. Venus Leung. Bruce Kaplan, linming Zhang, and others contributed to special aspects of the project. Even computer-generated reports require a lot of human input in planning, writing, programming, and integrating graphics. After that. they require further assistance getting onto the Web. This computer-generated report demanded even more human input than its predecessors, for it underwent a transmogrification from a book with over 200 pages to a booklet with just over 50 pages. This transformation was due to requests trom the NAEP jurisdictions for results that were easier to disseminate and the response of NCES and NAGB to these needs Frances Stancavage of American Institutes for Research twice elicited critical input from the NAEP Network, whose members were willing to give their time and attention to producing a more useful report. In shaping the report, Al Rogers and Laura Jerry broke through the barriers imposed by the mainframe to integrate graphics. The NAEP jurisdictions continued to shape the report with several additional reviews: in th process, they helped fine-tune the new graphic \DING The Virgin Islands Throughout this process, many important editorial contributions were received from two reviewers outside the Department of Education or Educational Testing Service Peter Mosenthal at Syracuse University and Timothy Shanahan at the University ot Iinois at Chicago. From the Department of Education, the following contributed much, and read this report at several different stages: Marilyn McMillen, Chief Statistician at NCES; Janis Brown, Peggy G. Carr, Arnold Goldstein, Andrew Kolstad. Holly Spurlock, Sheida White, and Shi-Chang Wu of the Education Assessment Division; Mary Lyn Bourque, Mary Crovo, and Sharif Shakrani of the National Assessment Governing Board; Shelley Burns, Beth Young, and Kerry Gruber of various OERI departments: and Christina Kary, Qiwu Liu, Erin Massie, Anne Meek, Alan Vanneman, Mark White, and Tracey Zima of the Education Statistics Services Institute. From Educational Testing Service, much assistance was received from Nancy Allen, Jim Carlson, Hua Chang. John Donoghue, Debra Kline, Jo-Lin Liang, John Mazzeo, and Jiahe Qian Karlene Farquharson provided editorial assistance, as did Karen Damiano, who made important contributions to all phases of the report. Karen Damiano also ensured that the report was properly printed and reached its intended audience at each review She did this frequently with planning assistance trom Barbette Tardugno. Carol Errickson, Kelly Gibson and Rod Rudder designed the covers of the NAEP 1/998 Reading Report Card and its companion reports The brochure that accompanies the State Report has benefited trom reviews by NCES, especially by Sheida White. The input and assistance of many who were involved in the State Report were important, especially those trom Karen Damiano, John Mazzeo, and Rod Rudder And, finally, Phil Leung and Pat O'Reilly directed the operation of putting the forty-five reading reports on the Web NAEP 1998 READING STATE REPORI United States Postage and Fees Paid Department of Education Department of Education Washington, DC 20208-5653 ORES SB. Sv? Official Business Standard Mail (A) Penalty for Private Use, $300