ED 230596

TIJTLEINSTITUTION

SPONS AGENCYPUB DATE .

GRANTNOTEAVAILABLE FROM

PUB TYPE

EDRS PRICEDESCRIPTORS

IDENTIFIERS

ABSTRACT

DOCUMENT RESUME

TM 830 385

National Assessment of Educational Progress.Education Commission of the States, Denver, Colo.National Assessment of Educational Progress.National Inst. of Education (ED), Washington, DC.[83]NIE-G-80-000328p.National Assessment of Educational Progress, 1860Lincoln Street, Denver, CO 80295Reports Descriptive (141)

.MF01/PCO2 Plus Postage.*Academic Achievement; Cost Estimates; Data Analysis;Data Collection; *Educational Assessment;*Educational Trends; *Federal Programs; *ProgramDescriptions; Research Methodology*National Assessment of Educational Progress

This brochure describes the mission of NationalAssessment, the highlights of recent findings, and the proceduresused in gathering the data. it also outlines how the project isadministered and governed and projects a framework for thedevelopment of upcoming assessments. The booklet includes a number ofcharts and graphs depicting achievement trends, dissemination of,material-s, and costs. Primary type of information provided by report:Program Description (Program Goals) (Progress Reports). (Author)

***********************************************************************Reprod4ctiOns supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made

* from the original document.***********************************************************************

(

4) National Assessment oEducational Progress

(\I

LU

"O.

2

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATIONNATIONAL INSTITUTE OF EOUCATION

EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATIONCENTER IERICI

)g This document has been reproduced asrmeived from the person Of organitatiOnoriginating itMoor changes have been made to improvereproduction quality

Points of view or opinions stated in this doCuTent Olt not ner essanly represent official NIEposition or policy

"PERMISSION TO REPRODUCE THISMATERIAL HAS BEEN GRANTED BY

Prztt

TO THE EDUCATIONAL RESOURCESINFORMATION CENTER (ERIC)."

Contents PrefaceMission of the National

AssessmentHighlights of Assessment

FindingsAchievements and Events

Products and Dissemination .1PublicationsData CollecHon and

Analysis -14Assessment Development .

4

511

13

15

4111100b-

40,A.

National Assessment Staff andAdministration 17

Assessment Policy Committee . 19

Policy Committee Consultants. 21Representatives of Principals'

Organizations 21

Analysis Advisory Committee .. 22Exercise Development

Advisory Committee 23

Administered by theEducation Commission of the States1860 Lincoln Street. Suite 700Denver. Colorado 80295(303) 830-36(X)

0,0

3

-Nor

Pushed by the rapid emergenceand expansion of the communica-tions technologies. America ischanging from an industrial-based to an informationbasednation from ,a centralized to adecentralized society and from anational to a global economy.Our finandal and industrial insti-tutions are being forced by theexpl9ding elec tronk technologyand (hanging relationships withother nations to reexamine theirmethods of operating. Businessas usual is no longer the orderof the day. These same forces.«mibined with de( lining re-sources and student enrollments,are profoundly affecting oureduc ation system as it strugglesto restructure to meet the needsof a c hanging society. New andmore cost-effec tive delivery sys-tems ways of learning. trainingprograms and assessment a ridevaulation techniques must befound to better prepare today sstudents to meet the sdentifkand te( hnic.al challenges of thefuture.

These events suggest how impor-tant it is to gather national dataabout educational achievementand to monitor changes in thatachievement over the years. Since1969. the National Assessment ofEducational Progress (NAEP) hasbeen responsible for that moni-toring. The information NAEP hasgathered offers all who are in-terested In education an unprec-edented opportunity to examineachievement In 10 learning areas.to detect changes in level ofachievement over the years andto apply the implications of those

changes to local and nationaleducational policy.

The National Assessment hasproven usefml to many differentaudiences. Its data are integral toreports of the National Instituteof Education on the status ofeducation: 37 states have drawnupon the assessment materials ormethodology in establishing theirown.assessment programs:assessment data have been usedto document educational in-equities and secure funds fortheir remediation: professionaleducators have interpreted the re-sults and discussed their implica-tions for curricul-um, textbooksand classroom practice: andcountless districts schools and

'I individuals have used NationalAssessment objectives as a start-ing point for the creation of per-sonal or local teaching objectivesand assessment instruments.

To continue as a -useful nationalreport card- on the progress ofAmerican education. Nati6nalAssessment, too, must respond tothe changing needs of educationand the nation. During its forma-tive years. NAEP devoted most ofits resources gathering baselineinformation on the education ac-complishments of the nation syouth and developing and standard-

4

Preface

I.

1

izing assessment procedures.Much attention was paid to ex-tending the breadth and qualityof the data collection, analysisand reporting. After 13 years ofestablishing political, technicaland methodological credibility.NAEP has evolved steadily froman idea into one of the mostsophisticated and comprehensiveeducational measurement pro-grams in the world. Under the ad-ministration of the EducationCommission of the States (ECS) ithas:

Pioneered objectives-referenced,large scale assessmenttechnology

Developed a comprehensivedata base describing the skills,knowledge and attitudes ofAmerican students in a widerange of learning areas

Pioneered the measurement andanalysis of changes in (Iduca-tion performance

Signifk antly influenced thedevelopment of state and localassessment programs thathave in turn, expanded thedata base for monitoring out-«,mes of education programs

ross the country

Pioneered methods of measur-ing complex skills in reading,writing, mathematics, art,itizenship, science and other

areas

2

Contributed unique informationabout critical social issues suchas the performance of dis-advantaged youngsters, racial/ethnic groups and languageminorities.

Clarified education trends bydescribing detailed changes inhigher- and lower-ordered (orbasic' ) skills

Linked performance data tofuture issues, such as theemergent high technologyeconomy

National Assessment.is nowmature. Its massive data base on'student achievement is a nationaltreasure. As the description ofstudent achievement has becomeclearer. it has now become possi-ble to focus on the utility of thedata, to expand the program's tech-nical services to states and others.to collaborate in various kinds ofresearch efforts and to serve as aconsultant and resource fur theeducation community.

Indeed, 1982 has been a year-oflooking ahead for staff andothers involved with the program.Two reveiws of NationaliAssess-ment (frleaNuring the Quality ofEducation, Wirtz and Lapointe.1981 7 On the Uses of the Nation-al Assessment of Educational

Progress Sebring and Boruch,1982) arid the reevaluation ofNAP!) through the «impetitiveaward pro( ess have providedstaff the National Institute of

ation and the education«immunity a relatively rare op-portunity to step bac k assess thestate Of educ ation in the n(itionand c onsider the future directionsof National Assessment in im-proving edw ation for all of ourstudents

fhow determining the road amature NALP Will take should(onsider the past the presentand the future We believe thatthe «intinued su« ess of the Nabona! Assessment will ultimatelybe measurrd not only by the vol-ume of data «ille( ted and the

4/

number of reports published, butalso by the quality of services itprovides to those individuals'whoare responsible for improvingeducation opportunities andquality.

Robert Andringa1.:Ae( Willy Dire( torEctm alion Commission ol the

States

Beverly AndersonDire( torNational Assessment 01

1.:(101ational Prowess

Philip Swainhairper son

Assessment Polk ti Committee

s.;

ifrvcriti n rlr, sr,n rlIrm tor nI thrNal lorml is se ss rnrrit cn f rlurl'ouiresa .onr1 Robrrt im/rIngaenrr inline dirrr for fcIiji( orromv.loo thr ',Mfrs ramiririf firultnqs

3

Mission of the National Assessmentthe ^lational Assessment of Edu-t atkincil Protfress is the firsteffort to iniprme education bypr(widing «mtinual «imprehen,sn,r 'and dcpendable national.1( hici,enwrit data Sib( tion 405()I thr (ieneral tido( ation Provi-sinns Act 12)) l'5( 1221 e) de

ribes thr National Assessnwntmission in this way,

11 Nat airial Assessmentshall «)11(1 t and report al leaston( 4 4\HIf InA- years data assussing thc IA-dormant e of studunts at %,af loos age of ((ladeItA OS III co( (it PH' .11e,IS ofwading 1.1111111 and mathentaIf( s rcoott prf10(11( alk data on( hamics In knoiAledtie and shills

s114.11 stildrilts mil a periodIMF 444141114 I .41444 1,11 41,4,44.44.44

4114141.44 Id 44(1101 cdu( annual areas

ItIl nerd 101 nationat inlomiatIon arises andpro%,;(14. O.( too( A) ,ISSIStdr1(

,11U)11,11 .1(1111( It'S and141, h)1 ,11 411111.111(M .1(1411( ulfl

llSc (ii NatIU111,11 Assessmentohlui tn,us unmatth prdainincito till- basis shilis ()I 1,4'adiliciinatiicinatic s and «miniunic anon and on making «miparisons of so( 11 ass( ssments withMu national u1()1114. and f haroicdata (14Ael)ped 1i fli National.lolsessinunt

In pursuing this mission, NationalAssessment:

Cone( ts and reports data onshort- and long-term trends andpatterns in the education at-tainments of young Amen( ans

( onduc ts special and otherstudies to support curriculumplanning and policydevelopment

Publishes assessment objectives exerc ises methodologicalstudies polic y papers and otherhelpful materials for a varietyof audien«bs

Provides tec hnic al assistance tostate and local educationagenc les

Produces public -use data tapesfor se«mdary researc h andanalysis

Intera( ts regularly with statearid lo( al educ ation agenc ies.( ongress, federal agenc ies,business and industry, nationalassoc lotions and other groupsto pia«. NAVY information in anappropriate «intext for ac (ion

Highlights of Assessment FindingsMany assessment findings pub-lished by the National Assess-ment in 1982 shed new light onperformance patterns of grade.Junior high and senior highschool students and on perform-mice diffrrences between variousgroups of students.

Previously publkhed NAEP reportsshowed that during the 1970s.the overall picture for readingperformance was different thanthat observed for science andmathematk s. Cienerally thereading performance of Arnerk.anyouth improved for young stu-dents while teenagers tended tohold their ground.

Mathematical performance of 13-and 17-yearold students declinedduring the 1970s. while 9-year-olds performed at nearly thesame level from one assessmentperiod to the next. Science per-forrnanc e however stayed at

,about the same level for 9- and13-yearolds and dropped torI 7 year-olds.

Heading. .S(leme and Malhemalk sTrends. A Closer Look examinedassessment data from a some-what different perspective: stu-dent performance was arrayed Inquartiles of achievement and ana-lyzed by age as wed as by modalgrade'. (The mo(Ial grade for9-yearolds is 4th grade: for13-year-olds. 8th: and for 17-yearolds. Ilth.) A sharper imageemerged of Where performancehangeS had occurred during the

1970s and of which studentgroups realized periormancegains and losses,

Overall, students in the lowestperformance quartiles (lowachievers) realized greatergains than did those in thehighest performance quartiles(high achievers). Among bothhigh and low achievers, blackstudents were more likely thanwhite students to show gains.although overall performanceof blacks remained below thatof whites.

In reading, both low and highachievers at aw 9 improvedsignificantly, low achievers by 5percentage points and,high

hievers by 1.4 percentagepoints. Among 13-year-olds,less able students improvedtheir performance by 1.4percentage points, whileacademically adept Junior highstudents showed no change.Neither high nor low achieversat the senior high level showedany significant changes in theirreading skills.

Mathematics and science per-formance of students in thebottom quartile did notchange, with the encouragingexception of 13-year-olds, whoimproved by 1,5 percentagepoints in science. However, themathematics and science skillsof high achievers at all threeages declined, dropping by 2,5to 4.3 percentage points,

Both white and'black 17-year-olds in the 11 th grade and inthe highest quartile sufferedsubstantial losses in mathe-matics and science.

85

Changes inReading. Mathi-matics and SciencePerformance ofLow and HighAchievers Duringthe 1970s'

6

Declines Improvements

-4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 59-Year-Olds

"7"j1ileeeceeelLnr...o

..d

13-Year-Olds

;::::::::;:::;*::::::

17,-Year-Olds

q;77777.1

11.11111.1

.1111111.1.e

4 -3 -2 1 0 1 2 3 4 5

Change in Mean Percent Correct

Low Achievers

III High Achievers

Reading

Mathematics

Science

Reading

MatheMatics

Science

Reading

Mathematics

Science

'Reading assessrnents were conducted In 1973 and 19807mathematks as.sessments In 1973and 1978 science assessments In 1973 and 1977.

Heading Comprehension ofAmerk an Youth: Do they tinder'stand What fhey Head? completeda series ,Llesc ribing the results ofthe 1979-80 reading and litera-ture assessment. Devoted to results abour students abilities tocomprehend written works and toapply study skills in reading. thisreport also inc luded findingsabout students perceptions ofreading and their habits and ex-perien«.s with reading. Here aresome of those findings.

At all ages students who readalmost every clay performedhigher on the reading «nn

,preheasion exerc ises thanthose who reported less Irequern spare time reading.However the percentages ofstudents'who reported almostdaily reading de( reased withage -54% at age 9 35% at -age11 and 33% at age 17.

At all ages females performedabove and males performedbelow the national levels ofperformance females alsotended to read more frequentlythan males in their spare time.However performance tendedto be more similar for malesand females who read the sameamount in their spare timethan for males and femalesgenerally.

White students performed abovethe nation and black andHispanic students performedbelow the nation at each age.However at eac h age blackstudents who attend sr hools in

advantaged-urban communitiesperformed closer to nationallevels of performance thanblack students who attendschook in rural or in disad-vantaged-urban communities.

At age 9. more time spentwatc hing television tended tobe positively associated withachievement. except for theheaviest watchers (five hours ormore). At age 13. performanceincreased with amount oftelevision viewing up to thepoint of one to two hours, thendecreased. At age 17, perform-ance decreased with amount oftelevision watched.

At ages 13 and 17. increasedtime spent on homework tend-ed to be associated with higherperformance on the reading«miprehension exerc ises.

I o7

Reading Com-prehension ofStudents Relatedto TelevisionViewing

A

Changes inReading Perform-ance for HispanicStudents and theNation Between1975 and 1980

8

NationalLevel

5

4

3

1

0

1

-3

4

-5

6

7

8

ZA.1

armie

Wstt Accl no Watched Watched WitchedTV or unckr 1 2 his S 4 hrs over 11

1 hr lay hrs

1/1 9.Ycar-OldsCl 13 Year-Olds

17-vear.Olds

Age 9 Age 13 Age 17

1111 Hispanic Students

nation

ii

Performance of Hispanic- StudentsIn Two National Assessments ofHeading shows that althoughstlispank students rerufing per-formance remains below the national leel they have made somesignificant gains in reading from1974 to 1980. Moreover the performance gains among Hispanic.youngsters at age 9-and amongseveral groups of Hispanicstudents at ages 13 and 17 (( eed those of students nationallyin certain ari.as of readingperformance tor instance.

The per formam e (71T172-ar oldHispanic S improved 5.3% r ompared with a 2.6O improvemerit for all 9 year olds.

improvement at age 9 wasgreatest 15 9".'0) on exerc isesassessing literal «miprehension

Nine year old Hispanics attendMg So hools in r ities of2(X)(XX) or Mort' improved 8.4perc entage points

Thirteen year old Hispanic s per-formance stayed about thesame between 1974 and 1979big o ity I 3-year old Hispanic sinh proved their performance onliteral c omprehension exerc isesby 9 9 points

Seventeen year Old Hispanksperformance also stayed aboutthe %Ph(' between assessments,Again big c ity students showedan improvement this time inexerc ises assessing inferential«rmprehension

, At all three ages. Hispanics inthe modal rade performed bet-ter than those below modalgrade and improved their performan«. at a faster rate.

Students from Homes In With hEnglish Is Not the DominantLanguage: Who Are They and HowWell Do They Head? contributes tothe national need for informationabout a significant number ofstudents: the bilingual and multi-lingual. a sometimes forgottengroup of youngsters.

Students from homes in whk ha language other than EnglishIs often spoken (01. students)generally performed belowstudents for whom English isthe dominant lanqugestudents) on the 1979-80 na-tional reading assessment.

Language dominance has different effec ts for people in dif-ferent sr hools arid soc fo-e( (Moth i( Strata. In general. 01.students attending advantaged,urban arid private sr hoots .those coming from homes willmany reading resources and(except at age 9) those whohave a parent with post-high

hool education performednear at or above nationallevels. 01, students attendingdisadvantaged-urban sc hoolsthose coming from homes Wit hfew reading resources andthose whose parents have notcompleted high sr hool per-formed c onsiderably belowtheir more advantaged peers.

1 z

Language tlominance has dif-ferent effects for people of dif-ferent ethnic/cultural back-grOunds. White OL 17-year-oldsperformed about a percentagepoint below the nation and 5percentage points below whitestudents foY whom English isthe dOminant language.Hispanic OL 17-year-olds per-formed 9 percentage pointsbelow the nation, just asHispanic EL students did.

Over two-thitds of the 17-year-old other-language-dominantstudents live in theyestern orNortheastern region of thecountry. Nine- and .13-year-oft'sfrom other-language homes are

' more elt-enly dispersed aroundthe country although they are

4

still more hepvily coriCentratedin the West.

While many other-language-dominant students areHispanics, they are by nomeans the only OL students inthe schools, and Spanish is byno means the only languagespoken by OL students.

1310

Achievements and EventsNatiorial Assessment's many audi-ences include the general public,state policy makers and programimplementors. business and in-dustry leaders, curriculumgroups, researchers, testing andassessment personnel and practi-tioners. 'Fa help these audiencesimprove education, NationalAssessment produces many prod-uc ts to rnalw its findings.methods ,ind materials readilyav,tilable: the periodic rfAEPr`lewsletter, spec ial reports andpapers tailored for specificgroups major reports on each

sse ssme n t dap tapes sa mrnaryleaflets learning area objectives .sets of exerc ises released to thepublk and technic al assistance.these arc disserninated through:thy rducation Commission of theStates Distributkm Center theSuperintendent of Document's, thetH.S. (iovernnwnt Printing Office.the Educational Resources Infor-mation Center ir.RIC) and itslearinghouse system the Library

of Congress news media andCongressional briefings. listingsin dire( tone, . articles in edtua-tion journals workshops and staffpresentations. In 1982

1111110....

36,04X1 publications weredisseminated in response to re-quests for inform'ation

Over 1,000 staff responses weremade to education institutionsand organizations, members ofCongress and Congressionalcommittees, news media,business firms, communityorganizations, private citizensand students.

3 NAEP Newsletters weredisseminated toover 360)0 in-dividuals and institutions

6 statesConnecticut, Maine,.Michigan, Minnesota, Penn-sylvania and Wyomingwereprovided direct technicalassistance

7 'new puNic-use data tapeswere produced. bringing thetotal to 32

202 public-use data tapes weredisseminated to researchers,principally at colleges anduniversities

31 presentations were given bystaff to national, state and local -education organizations

Pioducts andDissemination

14

Number of Infor-mation Requestsfor NAEPMaterials, 1982

1%

12

2000

1750

1500

1250

1000

750

500

250

Local Colleges/ individuals Commercial Education StateSchools Universities Organizations Local

Government

foreign

Note: This tally does not Include the heavy volume of telephone inquiries, reports providedto schools participating In the assessment or reports provided for news releases.

During 1982 the followingpublications were produc'ed:

Reading Cc-;mprehension ofAmerk an Youth: Do TheyUnderstand What They Read?

Performance of HispanicStudents in Two National As-,sessments of Reading

Students rrom Homes inWhkh English Is Not the Domi-nant Language: Who Are Theyand How Well Do They Read?.

Ac hievement and the ThreeK s: A Synopsis of National As-sessment rindings in Reading.Writing and Mathematics

A Closer l,00k at School CutoffDatc and Achievement

Reading. Scienc e andMathematks Achievement: ACloser Look

Te( hnk al Report: Changes inVudent Performance by

hievement Class and ModalOracle

Standards and NationalAssessment: Synthesis of SevenEducators Response's to Ques-tions About the NationalAssessinent s Role Relkive toRaising Education Standards

National Assessment Findingsand Educational PolicyQuestions

How Have You Used NationalAssessment Materials?...Responses From Six Educators

Writing Objectives, 1983-84Assessment

Leaflets summarizing variousresults, reports and microfkhetcvaugment public-use datatapes for science, mathematics,reading and other areas

16

Publications

13

Data Collectionand Analysis

14

Surveys of students perform,ance in mathematics and citi-zenship/social studies werecompleted in May of 1982.Representing the third assess-ment of these learning areas,the surveys will reveal changesin performance during hie1970s.

The mathematics survey pTovidescoverage of knowledge, skill,understanding and applications insuch content areas as: numbersand numeration: variables andrelationships: shape, size andposition (geometry): measure-ment, probability and statistics:le( hnology: and attitudes towardmathematk.s. The citizenship/social studies survey providesmeasures of student achievement

levels based on five broad goals:acquiring information; usinginformation; interacting withothers; understanding wayshuman beings adapt to, organizeand change their environments;and understending the historyand development of the UnitedStates. The first report on resultsof the 4hird mathematics assess-ment will be released in April1983, Release of citizenship/social studies findings is plannedfor November 1983.

In 1983-84 National Assessmentwill initiate interdisciplinaryassessments that measure corn-munk ation skills thinking skillsand de%elopment of bask knowl-edge ross interrelated SU hjectareas. A( tki ies related to the1.983-84 asst. sment for usingon reading 1n(I riting and their"Polk ation ross the c urri-( ulum are well underway.. rh9R5 Mr assessment will «ner

mathernatk s ierk e and ter h-,,imlogy lour reasons underliethe mike to integrated assessments

ornmunicatkms skills(reading 4,riting speakinglisteningi are integral tolearning and using knowl-edcw in arn subjec t area.

2 Mastery in every subject arearequires learning the prob-lem sok ing and thinkingskills.

3. There is high public and pro-fessional interest in topicsthat span subject areas, e.g.,literacy (reading, writing).technological skills (mathe-mati(s. science and computerliteracy) and higher-orderthinking and reasoning skills.

4. The assessments will enhancesubject area findings, multi-ply potential analyses and ad-dress policy issues that trans-cend particular subject areas.

What will such assessments looklike? The following chart pre-sents an overview of the 1983-84assessment simplifying what is,in lac t, a massive and complexundertaking.

AN.

181

AssessmentDevelopment

15

Framework forDevelopment ofthe 1983-84Assessment(Reading andWriting Acrossthe Curriculum)

16

WritingManage thewriting pro-cess andconventions

Readingand

WritingOrganize, apply andsynthesize informationand concepts fromliterature, socialstudies and science

ReadingComprehendwritten, num-erical and graphicinformation

Achievement-related variablesStudent/home characteristicsStudent interests and habitsStudent academic background/plansCurriculum and materialsTeacher preparation and pedagogyPrincipal leadership styleSchool structure and climate

iLl

National Assessment Staff and Administration

The National Assesment ofEducational Progress is ad-ministered by the EducationCommission of the States (ECS).ECS is a compact of 48 statesand three territories and pro-vides.servi«. to state pol1ticalarid educ ation leaders to im-prove the quality of education ata l l levels

As of December 31 1982 theNAEP staff totaled 51 inc luding45 full-tirne and 6 part-timestaff. Of the fulFtime staff 14

were male and 31 were female.Sixteen per«.nt of the staff wererninorities. Most professionalstaff members have experieru ein education measurement andresearc h program evaluationurric ulurn and instruc Don

statistic s teac hing and oradministration.

The NM" staff is responsible foroverall project management, assess-ment develoRment, data collgrtionanalysis, information processing,and utilization and dissemination ofresults and methods. The staff isassisted by Research Triangle Insti-tute personnel, responsible forsampling and field administrationand Westinghouse InformationSystems personnel responsible lorprinting and st oring of the assess-ment instruments.

Staff receive technic al assistancefrom various learning area ad-visory groups. In addition. twomajor committees advise staffon analysis a rid developmentproc,edures: the Analysis Ad-visory Committee and the Exer-

ise Development AdvisoryCommittee.

35%Analytla andData Procesalnq

2u

Distribution ofNational Assess-ment Resourcesby ExpenditureCategory, 1982

17

Statement ofRevenues,UnliquidatedObligations,Commitments andUnobligatedFunds for FiscalYear /982(January 1December 31,1982)

18

Revenues

FY-81 unliquidated obligations $494,404APC carryforward 21,341NOICC carryforward 53,636Secondary research carryforward 17,607NAEP grant (revision "5) 425,000NAEP grant (revision "6) 3,455,000MS cost sharing 40,405Publications revenue 48,520NAEP grant (revision 08) 284,794

Total $4,840,707Expenditures

Personnel compensation $1,603,713Transportation 180,192Meetings 6,089Rent and utilities 208,777Printing and duplication 107,365Communications 63,640Subcontracts 1,332,985Supplies and expenses 130,210Indirect cost 578,800Capital expense 141,706

Total $4,353,477

lin liquidated obligations and commitments $238,045Unobliciated funds" 249,185Orand Total '$4,840,707Subjec t to c hange when fv1982 transac lions and audit adjustments are completed.

Inc ludes the following fund!, carried forward for rY1983 activities:

A sse ss men t Poll( ommittee 913.913Resear( h triangle Institute 21.4(()Public use data tapes 194.885Misc ellaneous

18.987

2i

Assessment Policy Committee

The Assessment Policy Committee is charged by law with theoverall responsibility for thedesign and conduct of NationalAssessment. In addition to itspolicymaking responsibilities,the committee reviews and ap-proves the Assessment s internalbudget allocattlons and its an-nual budget reqUests to the Na-tional Institute of Education

The «knmittee consists of 19members 17 of whom are ap-pointed by the education Com-mission of the States with theadvice and «msent of education.business politic al and layorganizations. The dire( tor ofNIL is a voting ex offidomember of the «mimittee. Amember of the National Count IIOn Educ ational Research (NCER).Nit. s governing body serves asa nonvoting ex offk io memberof Welk ommittee. Four non-voting «msultants highlyrespec ted in the education andstatistic 11 «mi munit les are ap-pointed by the «knmittee to ad-vise and assist in deliberationsof educ ation and statistical mat-ters. On elementary and secon-dary St hool matters.sthe APC isassisted by representatives fromthe National Assodation ofElementary School Prindpalsand the National Association ofSeccmdary School Principals.

full committee Meets threetimes a year. The meetings areopen to the public, and the dateand agenda for each meeting areannounced in Federal Regkterand in various education publi-,

cations. Minutes of the meetingsare available from the NAEPoffices. The committee is cur-rently composed of the followingindividuals:

Philip Swain, ChairpersonPast DirectorEducational Relations,

Training and DevelopmentThe Boeing CompanySeattle, Washington

June Gabler. Vice ChairpersonSuperinttndentWoodhaven School DistrictRomulus. Mkhigan

V. Jon BentzDirectorFNYchological Research

and ServicesSears, Roebuck CorporationChic:ago, Illinois

Marettla BlackburnTeacherConstable SchoolKendall Park. New Jersey

Clarence MountState SenatorBaltimore. Maryland

(Albert BursleyPresidentCleary CollegeYpsilanti, Michigan

Wilmer CodySuperintendentBirmingham City SchoolsBirmingham, Alabama

22 19

AssessmentPolicyCornmittee(Continued)

20

Mary FutrellSecretary-TreasurerNational Education AssociationWashington, D.C.

James HabigerExecutive DirectorMinnesota Catholic ConferenceSt. Paul. Minnesota

John HersheyPresidentPennsylvania Board of

EducationHarrisburg, Pennsylvania

Barbara KleinDirectorNational School Boards

AssociationForest °rove. Oregon

Oera Id KochState SenatorLincoln. Nebraska

Trudi OdbertTem herHenry NI. Ounn High SilhoolPalo Alto. California

Albert QuieOovernorSt. Paul Minnesota

Joe, RomeroPast PresidentNew Mexico Board of EducationEspanola New Mexico

Term expired September I 1982

Charlotte RyanPast PresidentMassachusetts Parent-Teacher-

Student AssociationNorth Orange, Massachusetts

Lynn SimonsSuperintendent of InstructionCheyenne, Wyoming

Robert SweetActing DirectorNational Institute of EducationWashington, D.C.

Walter TiceVice PresidentAmerican Federation of TeachersYonkers. New York

2

Note N( tR member to be ppointed bythe Nir Direr tor

.

Policy Committee Consultants

(mug(' BrainDean( ()liege Of 1 durationWashington State CniversityPullman Washington

Janet Dkon ElasholfProfessor of Biomathematic srrthersity of ( alifornia1 ow Angeles ( alil)rnia

1.o k MerwinPrcdeNsor Of Educational

Psyc hologyUrthersity of MinnesotaSt Paul Minnesota

Ralph 1 yierSenkn ( onsultaiitSr fen( Iteseau h Assm kitesC. hk go Illinois

RepreenCattves of Principals' Organizations

15111 HambrickNational Assoc lation of

Elementary hool Principals( asher Wyoming

lames KeefeNatkmal Assoc latkor of

Sec ondary hool Prim ihalsRkton Virginia

2.121

Analysis Advisory Committee

Janet Dixon Clashoffhairperson

Professor 01 Blornathematic sUniversity of (

os Angeles C

l.k)yd BondResew( h Assoc lateUniversity of PittsburghPittsburgh Pennsylvania

David MI BingerProfessor of statistic sUniversity ol aliforniaBerkeley aliknnia

Lyle JonesProfessor 01 PsychologyUniversity ol North CarolinaChapel Dill. North Carolina

John TukeyAssodate utive Director!MI Laboratories, Inc.Murray WIT New ,Jersey

Exercise Development Advisory Committee.111( k Merwin C hairpersonProfessor Of Ed tit atIoriatrc:,'

Pity( hologyUniversity of I'lltiriesotaSt Paul Minnesota

.thonrae thiganDirer torf dor ational resting ( enterVniversity of Wls«nisin(flyer] [Say Wis«msin

Itr .14 rwtet it %Iiplu ii I I hi!

ImmlIIII hint I'M:

ason Millman]Professor of Educational

Methodology(omen tinlversityIthac i r1ww York

23

AssessmentTimetable

24

AssessmentYear

SchoolYear

1.earning Area6pecial

Assessments01 1969-70 Science Citizenship Writing02 1970-71 Reading Literature03. 1971-72 o Musk Social Studies04 1972-73 Scierki Mathematics ,

-

\,..05 1973-74

Career andWriting Occupational

Development06 1974-75 Reading Art Basic Skills

07 1975-76 ''sCitiz enship/Social Studies Basic

Mathematics

08 1976-77Adult Assessment

Science (Health, Energy,Reading and Science)

Basic LifeSkills

1977-78 Mathematics ConsumerSkills

10 1978-79 Writing Art Music11 1979-80 Reading/Literature

13 1981-82Citizenship/Mathematics

Social Studie,s15 1983-84 Writing/Reading

The National Assessment ofEducational Progress Is fundedby the National Institute ofEducation,- under a grant to theEducation Commission of theSt,stes. It is the policy of theEducation Commission of theStates to take affirmative attionto prevent discrimination in itspolicies, programs and -employ-

. ment practices.

The work upon which thispublication is based was per-formed pursuant to Grant No.NIE-G-80-0003 of the National In-stitute of Education. It 'does not,however, necessarily reflect theviews of that agency.'

rt.

-N1=1 National Assessment

EFI of Educational Progress

ZS

The National Instituteof Education

,,-.