Students in Alabama have been progressing in reading and math in the elementary and middle grades since the No Child Left Behind was implemented in 2002, according to a study by the nonpartisan Center on Education Policy in Washington, D.C.

Likewise, students nationwide have scored better on state tests of reading and mathematics since 2002, and achievement gaps between various groups of students have narrowed more often than they have widened, according to the CEP report.

In Alabama, the percentage of students who scored proficient in reading grew at a moderate-to-large rate in the elementary and middle grades, according to Sallie Owen, communications director for the A+ Education Foundation.

Owen and other education experts in the state credit, in part, the Alabama Reading Initiative for reaching more students in upper grades. Both Limestone County School and Athens City Schools use the program.

“At present, the initiative, which gets credit for students’ historic improvements in reading, reaches every K-3 school in the state and some secondary schools,” Owen said.

“The ARI’s Project for Adolescent Literacy provides intensive support for middle and upper grade teachers. It has been successfully piloted, and it is expected to reach at least 30 schools during the upcoming school year.”

In addition to improvements in reading, the percentage of Alabama students who scored proficient in math grew at a moderate-to-large rate across all grade levels, Owen said.

Gaps in achievement in math and reading narrowed for low-income and African American students in Alabama, though the gaps did not narrow for high school reading for both groups of students, she said.

The CEP report, titled “Has Student Achievement Increased Since 2002? State Test Score Trends Through 2006-07,” analyzed state test data from the 50 states along with trends through 2007 on the National Assessment of Educational Progress. The NAEP is the only federally administered assessment of reading and math achievement, according to the report. Here are some of the conclusions from the report:



Overall achievement

From 2004 to 2007, the percentages of students scoring at the proficient level increased at a moderate-to-large rate in both reading and math at the elementary and middle school grades analyzed. Data were not available to compute trends in effect sizes.

At the high school level, the percentage proficient rose at a moderate-to-large rate in math but decreased slightly in reading.



Achievement gaps

From 2004 to 2007, gaps in percentages proficient between African American and white students narrowed in both reading and math at the elementary and middle grade levels analyzed. At the high school level, African American achievement gaps narrowed in math but widened in reading.



Similarly, gaps in percentages proficient between low-income and other students narrowed in both reading and math at nearly all grade levels analyzed. The exception was in high school reading, where the gap widened.

Gaps in percentages proficient between Latino and white students narrowed in both reading and math at the high school level.

Gaps in percentages proficient between Native American and white students narrowed in math but widened in reading at the high school level.

In general, the overall trends on state tests and NAEP moved in the same direction, though gains on NAEP tended to be smaller (NAEP tests are not aligned with any specific state’s academic standards). The most agreement was in fourth-grade mathematics. Of the 33 states with sufficient state test and NAEP data, 31 showed gains on both assessments.

Other explanations for gains

In an effort to explain why there were more gains than declines in performances, the CEP report noted “students may be learning more as a result of improvements in curriculum and instruction and extra interventions for urban students and for lower-performing students and subgroups.” The CEP listed these examples:

• Many school districts are devoting more instructional time to reading and math—often

by reducing time for other subjects.

• Students and teachers may have become more familiar with the format and content of

state tests as a result of test preparation activities.

• Narrow types of test preparation may have led to “score inflation” on state tests, meaning that scores have gone up on state tests without students having learned the broader knowledge of the subject being tested.

• Subtle manipulations in test design not otherwise addressed in this study could have

made some state tests easier over time. Examples include small changes in the choice of

test items, training for scorers of open-ended test items, and procedures for equating scores across different test versions.

For a copy of the study, go to: http://snipurl.com/ceptrends