By National Research Council, Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education, Board on Testing and Assessment, Committee on NAEP Reporting Practices, Judith A. Koenig, Pasquale J. DeVito
At the request of the dep. of schooling, the nationwide study Council shaped the Committee on NAEP Reporting Practices to deal with questions on the desirability, feasibility, and strength impression of enforcing those reporting practices. The committee built learn questions designed to handle concerns surrounding district-level and market-basket reporting.
Read Online or Download NAEP Reporting Practices: Investigating District-Level and Market-Basket Reporting PDF
Similar nonfiction_2 books
Download e-book for iPad: 44 Scotland Street 02 Espresso Tales by Alexander McCall Smith
Alexander McCall Smith’s many lovers may be proud of this most modern installment within the bestselling forty four Scotland road sequence. again are all our favourite denizens of a Georgian townhouse in Edinburgh. Bertie the immensely proficient six yr outdated is now enrolled in kindergarten, and masses to his dismay, has been clad in crimson overalls for his first day of sophistication.
New PDF release: ASVAB Core Review, 3ed
This absolutely revised and up to date variation presents army applicants with the sting they should go 4 of 8 subtests-commonly referred to as the ASVAB center. ASVAB middle evaluate, third variation, offers all of the invaluable instruments to overcome the main the most important a part of the ASVAB, together with: * 3 whole ASVAB center perform assessments, with complete solutions and reasons * designated coaching for note wisdom, * Paragraph Comprehension, arithmetic wisdom, and mathematics Reasoning subtests * A unfastened, immediately scored perform attempt on-line as well as the try instruction fabrics, the ASVAB middle assessment, third version, is filled with insider info to lead new recruits in the course of the complete enlistment method.
- Ishmael on the Border: Rabbinic Portrayals of the First Arab (S U N Y Series in Judaica)
- Positive Organizational Scholarship: Foundations of a New Discipline
- Estimating Day Work Rates 2nd Edition
- How to Change Your Name in California, 11th edition
- Modelling the F-4 Phantom II (Osprey Modelling 3)
Additional resources for NAEP Reporting Practices: Investigating District-Level and Market-Basket Reporting
Sample text
NAEP summarizes achievement results by these various characteristics. Types of Reports NAEP produces a variety of reports, each targeted to a specific audience. S. Department of Education, 1999). Table 2-1 below lists the various types of NAEP reports along with the targeted audience and general purpose for each type of report. Uses of NAEP Reports The Committee on the Evaluation of National and State Assessments of Educational Progress conducted an analysis of the uses of the 1996 NAEP mathematics and science results.
REPORTING DISTRCT-LEVEL NAEP RESULTS 39 They defined naturally occurring districts as those that comprise at least 20 percent of the state’s sample and that meet the minimum sampling requirements for analysis and reporting at the district level (25 schools and 500 assessed students per grade and subject). These districts can be thought of as “self-representing in state NAEP samples” (Rust, 1999). The districts that met these guidelines in 1998 were Albuquerque, New Mexico; Anchorage, Alaska; Chicago, Illinois; Christiana County, Delaware; Clark County, Nevada; and New York City, New York.
Some workshop participants have found the background data to be exceedingly useful and would look forward to receiving reports that would associate district-level performance with background and environmental data. Lack of Program Details Workshop participants were bothered by the lack of specifications about district-level reporting. Even though the committee asked NAEP’s sponsors to describe the plans and features of district-level reporting, many of the details have not yet been determined. In responding to questions put to them about district-level reporting, many participating state and district officials formulated their own assumptions and reacted to the program they thought might be enacted.
