Thesis advisor: Laura M. O'Dwyer / Youth civic participation is at alarmingly low levels. In 2014, nearly 80% of eligible 18-29 year-olds did not vote in the midterm election (CIRCLE, 2014). Other forms of civic engagement are also at starkly low levels: less than one in ten 18-29 year-olds report contacting a public official, boycotting a product, or frequently expressing political opinions on the internet (U.S. Census Bureau, 2014). Historically, schools have been tasked with preparing students with the knowledge and skills to be active democratic citizens. However, few studies have examined the role of teachers in fostering students' civic knowledge and skills. This study used data from the 2010 National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) 8th grade civics assessment to analyze the relationships between teacher participation in professional learning, use of interactive instructional practices, and student achievement in civics. Participation in professional learning significantly predicted both interactive instruction and student achievement: a one standard deviation increase in professional learning was associated with a predicted .32 standard deviation increase in interactive instructional practices, and a predicted .045 standard deviation increase in student achievement. There was no significant difference between more traditional and communities of practice based forms of professional development in their relationships with interactive instructional practices and student civic achievement. Interactive instructional practices were also significantly associated with increases in student achievement on NAEP civics, but the effect size was small: a one standard deviation increase in interactive instruction was related to a predicted .03 standard deviation increase in student achievement. Moreover, the relationship between interactive instruction and student achievement was curvilinear; high levels of interactive instruction were associated with decreases in student achievement. The study did not find any evidence that teacher participation in professional learning increased the effectiveness of interactive instructional practices. / Thesis (PhD) — Boston College, 2015. / Submitted to: Boston College. Lynch School of Education. / Discipline: Educational Research, Measurement and Evaluation.

The purpose of this study was to investigate the information regarding the comparative relationship between the proficient mathematics scores of eighth-grade students on the 2009 state mathematics assessments and the 2009 National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) mathematics assessment by state, census-defined regions and AYP subgroups. Analysis was completed and six research questions were used to guide the study. A multiple regression was used to assess the relationship between the percentage of eighth-grade students who were proficient in mathematics as assessed by the 2009 NAEP and those who were proficient in mathematics as assessed by their 2009 state assessment. A significant quadratic (non-linear) relationship between the state and NAEP levels of proficiency was determined. Several two-factor split plot (one within-subjects factor and one between-subjects factor) analysis of variance (ANOVA) were conducted to determine if region moderated the difference between the percentage proficient on the state and NAEP assessments for eighth grade students overall and in the following AYP subgroups : (a) low socioeconomic students, (b) white students, (c) black students and (d) Hispanic students. The within-subjects factor was type of test (NAEP or state), and the between-subjects factor was region (Midwest, Northeast, West, and South). Overall, the percentage proficient on state mathematical assessments was always higher than the percentage proficient on the NAEP mathematics assessments. The degree of discrepancy is discussed, as well as possible reasons for this divergence of scores.

The goal of this research was to analyze the academic impact of the implementation of the Value Added Assessment Model. The researcher analyzed the Value Added Assessment Models in the three Value Added Assessment Model states that had implemented the Value Added Assessment Model for more than five years. Additionally, the research was done by analyzing the academic impact as measured by the eighth grade reading NAEP and the eighth grade mathematics NAEP. The researcher paired the three states that had implemented Value Added Assessment Model for more than five years, with three demographically matched states that had not implemented Value Added Assessment Model. The states were matched as follows: Ohio (Value Added Assessment Model implementing state) with Michigan (non Value Added Assessment Model state), Pennsylvania (Value Added Assessment Model implementing state) with Virginia (non Value Added Assessment Model state) and Tennessee (Value Added Assessment Model implementing state) with Georgia (non Value Added Assessment Model state). The mean composite scale score in NAEP from the following categories of students were compared and analyzed: 1) All students 2) White students 3) Black students 4) National School Lunch Program Eligible Students 5) National School Lunch Program Ineligible Students 6) Exceptional Education students. The results of the study indicated that the impact of Value Added Assessment Model on academic impact as measured by the eighth grade reading NAEP and the eighth grade mathematics NAEP was negligible.

The purpose of this study was to provide an exploratory analysis of African American females achievement on the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) within the years 1996 through 2012 across academic contents and grade levels. To conduct this analysis, four questions were posed: 1) What is the academic achievement trend of African American females on the mathematics, reading, U.S. history, science, and visual and performing arts NAEP within the years 1996 through 2012? 2) How does African American female achievement proficiency differ across grade levels on the NAEP in mathematics, reading, science, and U.S. history in 2009? 3) How does the academic achievement of African American females compare to the academic achievement of African American males in core content areas (mathematics and reading) on the NAEP? and 4)How does African American females academic achievement compare to the academic achievement of their female counterparts on core content areas (mathematics, science, U.S. history, reading, visual arts and music) on the NAEP within the years 1996 through 2012? The results of this study are: 1. African American females’ achievement trends mirrored the combined trends of all other populations; however, their scores were well below the other subgroups (Asian, White and Hispanic female students.) 2. African American females outperformed African American males in mathematics and reading. 3. More than 35% African American female students fail to meet the basic level of proficiency in all grades tested in every content area. Moreover, less than 3% of the African American female students scored at the advanced level in any subject or grade level. 4. The current practices are maintaining rather than closing the gaps between African American female performance and other students. African American female student score disparities in all other areas ranged from 1 point to 40 points. The data suggest that preteen and teenage years are important for African American female proficiency. It is recommended that African American female students, their parents, educational professionals, and researchers address the seriousness of the low performance of African American female achievement and institute policies, programs and practices to address their academic needs

Educational quality is a way to influence the future of the American economy (Hanushek, 1986). Large-scale assessments are designed to determine quality in education by measuring student achievement. A connection exists between the standards, teachers, and assessments that form a system of accountability within education. State and national accountability policies place value in certain educational fields, thereby preferring some while excluding others. As a result, accountability systems influence the field of social studies in several unanticipated ways. Consequential validity suggests that assessments should include value implications and relevance (Messick, 1989). While assessment research examines the disciplines of mathematics, science, and language arts in a more holistic manner, the few social studies assessments are often divided among the field’s various disciplines. The purpose of social studies, and its development of standards, is firmly linked to the current state of disunity within the social studies field. These issues are reflected in teacher preparation policies as well as state assessment policies. Social studies advocates have proven that, in other subjects, teachers and instructional methods are influenced by assessment. Fortunately, the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) provides an opportunity to determine whether the exclusion of social studies within the state/national accountability system is impacting student achievement in social studies. The current systems make social studies uniquely positioned for studying the effects of large-scale assessment upon the field. Uses and interpretations of assessment data by researchers have been limited in social studies because the subject is not incorporated into most accountability policies. State policy governs educational standards, teacher licensure, and the extent of assessments upon students. For this study, the social studies NAEP assessment is divided into three separate tests (U.S. History, Geography, and Civics). By looking at data from the fourth-, eighth-, and twelfth-grade 2010 social studies NAEP tests, this study will investigate some of the unintended consequences of educational assessment culture. I will examine social studies through different lenses and apply the concept of consequential validity to social studies in order to understand the value of social studies within education.

Thesis advisor: Henry Braun / The State NAEP program only reports the mean achievement estimate of a subgroup within a given state if it samples at least 62 students who identify with the subgroup. Since some subgroups of students constitute small proportions of certain states’ general student populations, these low-incidence groups of students are seldom sufficiently sampled to meet this rule-of-62 requirement. As a result, education researchers and policymakers are frequently left without a full understanding of how states are supporting the learning and achievement of different subgroups of students.Using grade 8 mathematics results in 2015, this dissertation addresses the problem by comparing the performance of three different techniques in predicting mean subgroup achievement on NAEP. The methodology involves simulating scenarios in which subgroup samples greater or equal to 62 are treated as not available for calculating mean achievement estimates. These techniques comprise an adaptation of Multivariate Imputation by Chained Equations (MICE), a common form of Small Area Estimation known as the Fay-Herriot model (FH), and a Cross-Survey analysis approach that emphasizes flexibility in model specification, referred to as Flexible Cross-Survey Analysis (FLEX CS) in this study. Data used for the prediction study include public-use state-level estimates of mean subgroup achievement on NAEP, restricted-use student-level achievement data on NAEP, public-use state-level administrative data from Education Week, the Common Core of Data, the U.S. Census Bureau, and public-use district-level achievement data in NAEP-referenced units from the Stanford Education Data Archive. To evaluate the accuracy of the techniques, a weighted measure of Mean Absolute Error and a coverage indicator quantify differences between predicted and target values. To evaluate whether a technique could be recommended for use in practice, accuracy measures for each technique are compared to benchmark values established as markers of successful prediction based on results from a simulation analysis with example NAEP data. Results indicate that both the FH and FLEX CS techniques may be suitable for use in practice and that the FH technique is particularly appealing. However, before definitive recommendations are made, the analyses from this dissertation should be conducted employing math achievement data from other years, as well as data from NAEP Reading. / Thesis (PhD) — Boston College, 2021. / Submitted to: Boston College. Lynch School of Education. / Discipline: Educational Research, Measurement and Evaluation.

<p> </p> <p>This dissertation researched the scope of mathematics achievement disparities in the United States and how these disparities can be minimized through a self-efficacy lens. To answer pertinent research questions with data from the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) 2019 mathematics assessment in Grades 4, 8, and 12, gap analyses, two-level cross-sectional multilevel modeling, and two-level structural equation modeling were conducted. The discoveries demonstrated that the excellence gaps in U.S. in mathematics achievement by race/ethnicity, gender, NSLP, ELL, and IEP persisted and widened from Grade 4 to Grade 8 yet decreased at Grade 12. Self-efficacy was a noteworthy predictor of students’ mathematics achievement, displaying large effect sizes across grades. The disparities in mathematics achievement by student subgroups lessened when students' self-efficacy was equal. Moreover, self-efficacy mediated the relationships between mastery-approach goals, performance-approach goals, interest, persistence in learning and achievement. Additional results demonstrated that the status of being racially/ethnically underrepresented students partially moderated the connections between motivational variables and mathematics achievement. School locale and the percentage of underrepresented students significantly impacted students’ achievement. This dissertation underscores the importance of self-efficacy in closing mathematics achievement gaps and improving students’ mathematics achievement. </p>

This action research study investigates classroom visual art assessments and their potential to improve teacher instruction and student learning. In order to examine this topic more thoroughly, a National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP)-related classroom assessment was designed and administered to the researcher’s Drawing and AP Art History classes. Students were also asked to fill out a questionnaire that asked about their past art experiences and motivation to participate in art activities such as creating artwork outside of the school setting or attending an art museum. Students observed, described, and analyzed contemporary artwork, and they created and wrote about their own original works of art. The use of contemporary art exemplars led to some of the most interesting findings; namely, that students felt free to create their artwork in a contemporary style that was less about technical elements and more about the meaning they wished to convey. In general, the AP Art History students’ written contemporary art criticism scores were significantly higher than the scores of both of the studio drawing classes. Artwork scores of AP Art History, Drawing I, and Drawing II students showed no significant difference. Interestingly, all three groups indicated they were highly motivated to look at works of art, create art in school, and make artwork outside of the school setting. Also noteworthy was the relatively high number of students who indicated that the contemporary artwork they analyzed influenced the mother and child artwork they created. It could be surmised by this study that a NAEP-related iv assessment is a beneficial method for improving teacher instruction and student learning in visual arts education

The US National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) measures cognitive competences in reading and mathematics of US students (last 2012 survey N = 50,000). The long-term development based on results from 1971 to 2012 allows a prediction of future cognitive trends. For predicting US averages also demographic trends have to be considered. The largest groups’ (White) average of 1978/80 was set at M = 100 and SD = 15 and was used as a benchmark. Based on two past NAEP development periods for 17-year-old students, 1978/80 to 2012 (more optimistic) and 1992 to 2012 (more pessimistic), and demographic projections from the US Census Bureau, cognitive trends until 2060 for the entire age cohort and ethnic groups were estimated. Estimated population averages for 2060 are 103 (optimistic) or 102 (pessimistic). The average rise per decade is dec = 0.76 or 0.45 IQ points. White-Black and White-Hispanic gaps are declining by half, Asian-White gaps treble. The catch-up of minorities (their faster ability growth) contributes around 2 IQ to the general rise of 3 IQ; however, their larger demographic increase reduces the general rise at about the similar amount (-1.4 IQ). Because minorities with faster ability growth also rise in their population proportion the interactive term is positive (around 1 IQ). Consequences for economic and societal development are discussed.

Progress in International Reading Literacy Study (PIRLS) was used to measure Indonesian fourth grade elementary school students’ reading comprehension in 2006 and 2011. Indonesian students scored among the lowest of the participating countries with a score of 405 in 2006 and 428 in 2011, with the PIRLS average scale score being 500. These results raised questions about the alignment of the Indonesian curriculum with PIRLS. Alignment research between the PIRLS 2021 frameworks and the Curr13 language standards and textbooks (the current Indonesian curriculum) was conducted to provide Kemendikbud (Indonesian Ministry of Education and Culture) with a prediction of students’ performance in future PIRLS. The alignment research was mixed methods research with an exploratory sequential design (a three-phase design). The first phase was qualitative data collection and analysis. Alignment instruments were developed using the components of Webb, NAEP ESSI, and HumRRO alignment models. The second phase identified features to be tested, where I revised the alignment instruments, guidelines, and codebook based on the first phase and created a new table. The revised instruments were then used to align Curr13 and PIRLS. The third phase was quantitative calculation using Webb's quantitative criteria (categorical concurrence, depth-of-knowledge consistency [DOK], range-of-knowledge correspondence, and balance of representation) and descriptive statistics. After the three phases, the interpretation used both the qualitative and quantitative data. The results found inconsistencies between Curr13 and PIRLS frameworks. There was no categorical concurrence between PIRLS frameworks and Curr13 unit assessments. Curr13 language standards and unit assessments did not include one PIRLS framework, evaluating and critiquing content and textual elements. This resulted in the absence of DOK for this framework. One PIRLS framework mostly covered by Curr13 language standards and unit assessments was interpreting and integrating ideas and information. DOK and balance of representation were achieved in this framework. Two PIRLS frameworks on comprehension processes (focusing on and retrieving explicitly stated information and making straightforward inferences) aligned to Curr13 and had a balance of representation but weak DOK. Meanwhile, Curr13 unit resources mostly aligned to one of two reading purposes in the PIRLS framework, acquiring and using information, but was weakly aligned with the other one, literary experience. The implication of research findings was to support Kemendikbud in predicting students’ performance in future PIRLS participation by examining the inconsistencies between Curr13 and PIRLS. Recommendations were provided for the elementary school teachers, students, parents, publishers, policymakers, local governments, and other elementary school stakeholders to be familiar with and understand PIRLS. The role of AKSI should also be maximized. In addition, the concept and practice of curriculum alignment should be introduced and enacted into the educational system in Indonesia.