Grade 12

Reading and Mathematics 2009

National and Pilot State Results

 NATIONAL ASSESSMENT OF EDUCATIONAL PROGRESS

I n s t i t u t e o f E d u c a t i o n S c i e n c e s

U.S. Department of Education

NCES 2011–455
 Contents

1 Executive Summary

4 Introduction

7 National Reading Results

24 National Mathematics Results

39 State Results

70 Technical Notes

72 Appendix Tables

What is The Nation’s Report CardTM?

The Nation’s Report CardTM informs the public about the academic achievement of elementary and secondary students in the United States. Report 

cards communicate the findings of the National Assessment of Educational 

Progress (NAEP), a continuing and nationally representative measure of 

achievement in various subjects over time.

Since 1969, NAEP assessments have been conducted periodically in reading, 

mathematics, science, writing, U.S. history, civics, geography, and other 

subjects. NAEP collects and reports information on student performance at 

the national and state levels, making the assessment an integral part of our 

nation’s evaluation of the condition and progress of education. Only academic 

achievement data and related background information are collected. The 

privacy of individual students and their families is protected.

NAEP is a congressionally authorized project of the National Center for 

Education Statistics (NCES) within the Institute of Education Sciences of the 

U.S. Department of Education. The Commissioner of Education Statistics is 

responsible for carrying out the NAEP project. The National Assessment 

Governing Board oversees and sets policy for NAEP.

Photo Credits:

© OJO Images/Jupiterimages #77188799; © Collage Photography/Veer #CLP0106832; © Chris Schmidt/Stockphoto #3562287; © Image Source/Jupiterimages #71275001; © Supernova/Digital Vision/Jupiterimages

#89833597; © Dougal Waters/Photodisc/Jupiter Images #sb10066996i-001; © Image Source/Jupiterimages #71275001; © iStockphoto #1768971; © Ekaterina Monakhova/iStockphoto #12228237; © Soren Pilman/

iStockphoto #2214693; © Corbis Photography/Veer #CBP1003581; © Chris Scredon/iStockphoto #6512313; © David Barcroft/iStockphoto #11865644; © Tetra Images/Alamy #BJH8D9; © Blend Images Photography/

Veer #BLP0097690; © Willie B. Thomas/iStockphoto #2309015; © Willie B. Thomas/iStockphoto #4802469; © Image Source Photography/Veer #ISP2139675; © Image Source/Getty Images #74409098; © Blend

Images Photography/Veer #BLP0094386; © Martin Child/Photodisc/Getty Images #200446050; © Jean-Paul Nacivet/Photographer’s Choice/Getty Images #83662218; © RubberBall Photography/Veer #RBP9032575;

© Damir Karan/iStockphoto #5052001; © Palto/iStockphoto #7973403; © Bill Noll/iStockphoto #5863143; © Somos/Veer/Getty Images #74953581; © Edie Layland/iStockphoto #10553226; © Fancy Photography/

Veer #FAN2005623; © DNY59/iStockphoto #9932044; © Blend Images Photography/Veer #BLP0097692; © image100 Photography/Veer #IMP9024013; © OJO Images Photography/Veer #OJP0001402; © Frederic

Cirou/PhotoAlto/Getty Images #103059732; © Jamie Grill/Getty Images #88853060; © yan Fox/iStockphoto #2511951; © Corbis/Jupiterimages #78819988; © Duane Osborn/Somos Images/Corbis #42-21856589;

© Julia Nichols/iStockphoto #7644847; © Stefan Klein/iStockphoto #507534; © Ekaterina Monakhova/iStockphoto #8859642; © Purestock/Jupiterimages #76945628; © Dean Mitchell/iStockphoto #14259577;

© Eric Audras/PhotoAlto/Getty Images #98680159; © Josef Philipp/iStockphoto #1599405; © Fancy Photography/Veer #FAN2014375; © Ariel Duhon/iStockphoto #10777314; © FotografiaBasica/iStockphoto

#6021354; © Somos Photography/Veer #SMP0015232; © Thomas Perkins/iStockphoto #3171762; © Lisa F. Young/iStockphoto #3956056; © Christopher Futcher/iStockphoto #13249101; © Chris Schmidt/iStockphoto

#6735703; © RubberBall Photography/Veer #RBP9029755; © Jamie Grill/Photographer’s Choice/Getty Images #85986618; © Digital Vision/Getty Images #dv740013; © Laurence Mouton/PhotoAlto/Getty Images

#pha206000025; © Comstock Images/Getty Images #78468469; © BRANDON JENNINGS/iStockphoto #1294097; © Björn Kindler/iStockphoto #3284501; © Björn Kindler/iStockphoto #3293464; © Björn Kindler/

iStockphoto #3224873; © Björn Kindler/iStockphoto #3312264; © Björn Kindler/iStockphoto #3325092; © Björn Kindler/iStockphoto #3338426; © Björn Kindler/iStockphoto #3389750; © Björn Kindler/iStockphoto

#3431914; © Björn Kindler/iStockphoto #3443822; © Björn Kindler/iStockphoto #3486460; © Björn Kindler/iStockphoto #3505774; © Robert Churchill/iStockphoto #11266393
Accommodations not permitted Accommodations permitted

Executive Summary 

Twelfth-graders’ performance in

reading and mathematics improves 

since 2005

Nationally representative samples of twelfth-graders from 1,670 public and private schools across the nation participated in the 2009 National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP). Approximately 52,000 students were 

assessed in reading, and 49,000 students were assessed in mathematics. National reading results from the 2009 

assessment are compared to results from five earlier assessment years going back to 1992. The 2009 mathematics 

results are compared to those from 2005 when a change in the mathematics framework for the assessment necessitated a new trend line for that subject at grade 12. 

State results in NAEP reading and mathematics are reported for twelfth-grade public school students in 11 states. 

These states volunteered to participate in the twelfth-grade state pilot program in 2009. 

Reading results were based on students’ 

responses to questions designed to measure reading comprehension across two 

types of texts: literary and informational. 

The average reading score in 2009 was 

higher than in 2005 but lower than in 

1992 (figure A). Thirty-eight percent of 

twelfth-graders performed at or above 

the Proficient level in reading in 2009, 

which was higher than the percentage in 

2005, but not significantly different from 

the percentages in other earlier assessment years. The percentage of students 

performing at or above Basic (74 percent) in 2009 was not significantly 

different from 2005 and was lower than 

in 1992. 

Mathematics results were based on students’ responses to questions 

designed to measure their knowledge and abilities across four content 

areas: number properties and operations; measurement and geometry; 

data analysis, statistics, and probability; and algebra. The average 

mathematics score in 2009 was higher than in 2005 (figure B), as 

were the percentages of students at or above Proficient (26 percent) 

and at or above Basic (64 percent). 

Figure A. Trend in twelfth-grade NAEP reading average scale scores

Figure B. Average scale scores 

in twelfth-grade NAEP 

mathematics: 2005 and 2009

* Significantly different (p < .05) from 2009.

* Significantly different (p < .05) from 2009.

GRADE 12 READING AND MATHEMATICS 2009 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1

300

290

280

287 286* 288 291*

290*

287

292*

’92 ’94 ’98 ’02 ’05 ’09 Year

0

270

500

Scale score

150* 153

’05 ’09 Year

0

120

110

140

130

150

170

160

300

Scale score
Some student groups make gains since 

2005, but gaps in achievement persist

Average mathematics scores were higher in 2009 than in 2005 for twelfth-grade public and private school students 

overall, for all racial/ethnic groups, and for male and female students. While the overall average reading score was also 

higher in 2009 than in 2005, reading scores did not change significantly for Black, Hispanic, and American Indian/

Alaska Native students, or for female students. Racial/ethnic and gender achievement gaps did not change significantly 

in either reading or mathematics. 

In comparison to 1992, reading scores were lower in 2009 overall and for both male and female students. There were 

no significant changes in the reading scores for any of the racial/ethnic groups with samples large enough to report 

results in both years, and no significant changes in the racial/ethnic or gender achievement gaps compared to 1992. 

Change in average 

reading scale score

Change in average 

mathematics scale score

Characteristic Since 1992 Since 2005 Since 2005

Overall q p p

Race/ethnicity 

White t p p

Black t t p

Hispanic t t p

Asian/Pacific Islander t p p

American Indian/Alaska Native ‡ t p

Gender

Male q p p

Female q t p

Gaps

White – Black t t t

White – Hispanic t t t

Male – Female t t t

p Indicates the score was higher in 2009. 

q Indicates the score was lower in 2009.

t Indicates no significant change in the score or the gap in 2009.

‡ Reporting standards not met. Sample size insufficient to 

 permit a reliable estimate.

2 THE NATION’S REPORT CARD 

NOTE: Accommodations were not permitted for the NAEP reading assessment in 1992.
Results for public school students in 

11 states available for the first time

The 2009 results from the twelfth-grade state pilot program in reading and mathematics provide a first look at the performance 

of public school students in the 11 states that volunteered to participate and how their performance compares to the national 

average for public school students. Five states had higher average scores than the nation in both reading and mathematics: 

Connecticut, Iowa, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, and South Dakota. 

CT

NJ

MA

NH

AR

SD ID

IA

FL

IL

WV

Compared to the nation, average reading 

and mathematics scale scores were

 higher in both subjects in

Connecticut, Iowa, Massachusetts, 

New Hampshire, and South Dakota;

higher in reading and not significantly different in mathematics 

in Idaho and Illinois; 

 higher in mathematics and not 

significantly different in reading 

in New Jersey; and

lower in both subjects in Arkansas, 

Florida, and West Virginia. 

State did not participate in the 

twelfth-grade state pilot 

program.

GRADE 12 READING AND MATHEMATICS 2009 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 3
Introduction

National results from the 2009 NAEP assessments in reading and mathematics show how

twelfth-graders’ performance in these subjects has progressed over time. State results are 

also available for the 11 states that volunteered to participate in the 2009 state pilot 

program at grade 12.

The National Assessment Governing Board oversees the 

development of NAEP frameworks, which describe the 

specific knowledge and skills that should be assessed in each 

subject. Frameworks are developed through an extensive 

process incorporating ideas and input from subject-area 

experts, school administrators, policymakers, teachers, 

parents, and others. NAEP frameworks also describe the 

types of questions that should be included in each 

assessment, and how they should be designed and scored. 

Overviews of the subject-area frameworks are provided in the 

reading and mathematics sections of this report. 

Reporting NAEP Results

The assessment results are based on nationally representative samples of twelfth-graders from 1,670 schools. 

Approximately 52,000 students were assessed in reading, 

and 49,000 were assessed in mathematics. Results for the 

nation are representative of the performance of students 

attending public and private schools across the nation even 

though results for private school students could not be 

reported separately. Results in reading and mathematics 

are also presented for public school students nationally 

4 THE NATION’S REPORT CARD 

and in the following 11 states that participated in the first 

voluntary state pilot program in 2009 for grade 12: 

Arkansas Massachusetts

Connecticut New Hampshire

Florida New Jersey

Idaho South Dakota

Illinois West Virginia

Iowa

Scale scores

NAEP reading results for grade 12 are reported as average 

scores on a 0–500 scale, and mathematics results are 

reported on a 0–300 scale. Because NAEP scales are 

developed independently for each subject, scores cannot

be compared across subjects. Average scale scores are 

referred to as “average scores” or “scores” in the discussion 

of the results in this report.

In addition to reporting an overall score for each subject, 

scale scores are reported at five selected percentiles to show 

trends in results for students performing at lower (10th and 

25th percentiles), middle (50th percentile), and higher 

(75th and 90th percentiles) levels. 
Achievement levels

Based on recommendations from educators and members of 

the general public, the Governing Board sets specific achievement levels for each subject area and grade. Achievement 

levels are performance standards showing what students 

should know and be able to do. NAEP results are reported as 

percentages of students performing at or above the Basic and 

Proficient levels and at the Advanced level. 

As provided by law, NCES, upon review of congressionally 

mandated evaluations of NAEP, has determined that achievement levels are to be used on a trial basis and should be 

interpreted with caution. Even though they are still considered trial, the NAEP achievement levels have been widely 

used by national and state officials. 

GRADE 12 READING AND MATHEMATICS 2009 INTRODUCTION 5

Interpreting the Results

Twelfth-grade national results from the 2009 reading 

assessment are compared to the results from 5 previous 

assessment years. Changes in students’ performance over 

time in reading are summarized in the text by comparing the 

results to 2005 and the first assessment year in 1992, except 

when pointing out consistent patterns across assessments.

National results for the twelfth-grade mathematics assessment are compared to those from 2005 only. At that time, a 

new framework was adopted for grade 12, and a new trend 

line was established. 

NAEP reports results using widely accepted statistical 

standards; findings are reported based on a statistical 

significance level set at .05 with appropriate adjustments 

for multiple comparisons (see the Technical Notes for more 

information). The symbol (*) is used in tables and figures to 

indicate that an earlier year’s score or percentage is significantly different from the 2009 results, or to indicate that the 

specific state results are significantly different from the 

corresponding results for public school students in the nation 

overall. Only those differences that are found to be statistically significant are discussed as higher or lower. The same 

criterion applies when comparing the performance of one 

student group to another. 

When scores significantly increase or decrease from one 

assessment year to the next, we are confident that student 

performance has changed. However, NAEP is not designed 

to identify the causes of these changes. Furthermore, the 

many factors that may influence average student achievement scores also change across time. 

Although comparisons are made in students’ performance 

based on demographic characteristics and educational 

experiences, the results cannot be used to establish a causeand-effect relationship between student characteristics and 

achievement. Many factors may influence student achievement, including educational policies and practices, available 

resources, and demographic characteristics of the student 

body.

NAEP Achievement Levels

Basic denotes partial mastery of prerequisite knowledge and 

skills that are fundamental for proficient work at each grade.

Proficient represents solid academic performance. Students 

reaching this level have demonstrated competency over 

challenging subject matter.

Advanced represents superior performance.
Accommodations and exclusions in NAEP

It is important to assess all selected students from the target 

population, including students with disabilities (SD) and 

English language learners (ELL). To accomplish this goal, 

many of the same testing accommodations (e.g., extra 

testing time or individual rather than group administration) 

that students use on other tests are provided for SD and ELL 

students participating in NAEP. 

Prior to 1998, no accommodations were provided in NAEP 

reading assessments. Because providing accommodations 

represented a change in testing conditions that could potentially affect the measurement of changes over time, split 

national and state samples of students were assessed in 

1998—one sample permitted accommodations, and the 

other did not. Although the reading results for both samples 

are presented in the tables and figures, any comparisons to 

1998 in the text are based on just the accommodated samples. Beginning in 2002, accommodations were permitted for 

all twelfth-grade reading administrations. Accommodations 

were available for both the 2005 and 2009 mathematics 

administrations. 

Even with the availability of accommodations, some students 

may still be excluded from NAEP. Variations in exclusion and 

accommodation rates, due to differences in state policies and 

practices for identifying and including SD and ELL students, 

should be considered when comparing students’ performance over time and across states. States also vary in their 

proportions of special-needs students (especially ELL students). While the effect of exclusion is not precisely known, 

comparisons of performance results could be affected if 

exclusion rates are markedly different among states or vary 

widely over time. See the appendix tables at the end of this 

report for the percentages of students accommodated and 

excluded in the nation and participating states in reading 

(tables A-1 through A-5) and mathematics (tables A-11

through A-15). More information about NAEP’s policy on the 

inclusion of special-needs students is available at http://nces

.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/about/inclusion.asp. 

Explore Additional Results

Not all of the data for results discussed in this report are 

presented in corresponding tables or figures. These and 

other results can be found in the NAEP Data Explorer at 

http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/naepdata/.

6 THE NATION’S REPORT CARD 
New Background Photo Here

National Reading

Results

GRADE 12 READING AND MATHEMATICS 2009 NATIONAL READING RESULTS 7

Reading score higher than in 

2005 but lower than in 1992

The average reading score for the nation’s twelfth-graders in 2009 was

2 points higher than in 2005 but 4 points lower than in 1992. White 

students, Asian/Pacific Islander students, and male students all made gains 

since 2005, but no racial/ethnic or gender groups showed gains since 1992. 

Students attending suburban schools in 2009 scored higher on average than 

those attending schools in other locations. Higher scores were also associated 

with frequently writing long answers to questions involving reading and 

higher educational aspirations.
The Reading Framework

The development of the Reading Framework for the 2009 National 

Assessment of Educational Progress was guided by scientifically 

based reading research that defines reading as a dynamic cognitive process that allows students to 

• understand written text;

• develop and interpret meaning; and 

• use meaning as appropriate to the type of text, purpose, and 

situation.

The 2009 reading framework specifies the use of both literary 

and informational texts. Literary texts include: fiction, literary 

nonfiction, and poetry. Informational texts fall into three broad 

categories: exposition; argumentation and persuasive text; and 

procedural text and documents. The inclusion of distinct text types 

recognizes that students read different texts for different purposes.

The Reading Framework for the 2009 National Assessment of 

Educational Progress replaces the framework first used for the 1992 

reading assessment and for subsequent twelfth-grade reading 

assessments through 2005. Compared to the previous framework, 

the 2009 reading framework for grade 12 includes more emphasis 

on cognitive processes, a wider variety of literary and informational 

texts, and a new systematic assessment of vocabulary knowledge.

The 2009 reading framework for grade 12 specified that a higher 

proportion of the text types should be informational (70 percent). 

Informational text includes stand-alone documents and procedural 

texts typical of the kind of documents adults encounter and must 

understand every day. This change from the earlier framework was 

made to enable NAEP to better assess the preparedness of 

twelfth-graders for postsecondary education and training.

Results from the 2009 reading trend study determined that the 

2009 reading assessment results could be compared to results 

from earlier assessment years. Special analyses included in-depth 

comparisons of the frameworks and the test questions, as well as a 

close examination of how the same students performed on the 

2009 assessment and on questions from the earlier assessment 

that were readministered in 2009. A summary of the special 

analyses conducted and an overview of the differences between 

the previous framework and the 2009 framework are available on 

the Web at http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/reading/

trend_study.asp.

The 2009 framework identifies three reading behaviors or 

cognitive targets: locate and recall, integrate and interpret, and 

critique and evaluate. The term cognitive target refers to the mental 

processes or kinds of thinking that underlie reading comprehension. Reading questions are developed to measure these cognitive 

targets for both literary and informational texts. 

In addition, the framework calls for a systematic assessment of 

meaning vocabulary. Meaning vocabulary questions measure 

readers’ knowledge of specific word meaning as used in the 

passage by the author and also measure passage comprehension.

Meaning vocabulary questions were included in the 2009 reading 

assessment. Some were administered as part of a set of questions 

related to the text with which they were presented, and these 

contributed to the reading results for grade 12. Another set of 

meaning vocabulary questions was presented in special vocabulary 

sections that did not contribute to reading results. 

8 THE NATION’S REPORT CARD 

Reading Cognitive Targets

Locate and Recall: When locating or recalling information 

from what they have read, students may identify explicitly 

stated main ideas or may focus on specific elements of a 

story.

Integrate and Interpret: When integrating and interpreting 

what they have read, students may make comparisons, 

explain character motivation, or examine relations of ideas 

across the text. 

Critique and Evaluate: When critiquing or evaluating what 

they have read, students view the text critically by examining 

it from numerous perspectives or may evaluate overall text 

quality or the effectiveness of particular aspects of the text. 

The complete reading framework for 2009 is available at 

http://www.nagb.org/publications/frameworks/reading09.pdf. 
Reading score up 2 points 

since 2005

The average reading score for the nation’s 

twelfth-graders was 2 points higher in 2009 

than in 2005 (figure 1). The score in 2009, 

however, was 4 points lower than the score 

for the first reading assessment in 1992. 

In comparison to 2005, scores in 2009 

were higher for students at the 10th and 

50th percentiles, and not significantly 

different from the scores for students at the 

25th, 75th, and 90th percentiles (figure 2). 

In comparison to 1992, scores were lower in 

2009 for students at the 10th, 25th, and 

50th percentiles, and not significantly 

different at the 75th and 90th percentiles.

Percentage of students 

performing at or above 

Proficient increases since 

2005 

Thirty-eight percent of students performed 

at or above the Proficient level in reading in 

2009 (figure 3). The percentage at or above 

Proficient was 3 percentage points higher 

in 2009 than in 2005; however, it was not 

significantly different from the earlier 

assessment years. The percentage of 

students performing at or above the Basic

level in 2009 was not significantly different 

from the percentage in 2005 but was lower 

than in 1992. There was no change in the 

percentage at Advanced since 2005, although 

it was 1 percentage point higher than in 1992. 

Figure 1. Trend in twelfth-grade NAEP reading average scale scores

300

290

280

287 286* 288 291*

290*

287

292*

’92 ’94 ’98 ’02 ’05 ’09 Year

0

270

500

Scale score

* Significantly different (p < .05) from 2009.

Accommodations not permitted Accommodations permitted

Figure 2. Trend in twelfth-grade NAEP reading percentile scores

90th

10th

25th

50th

75th

235*

242*

240*

239

249*

238

262

268*

267*

264

271*

288*

293*

293*

290 294*

313

317

317

313 315 315

237

263

289

312*

332* 333

264

291

337

336

333 332* 335

Percentile

’92 ’94 ’98 ’02 ’05 ’09 Year

0

240

230

260

250

270

290

280

300

310

320

340

330

500

Scale score

Figure 3. Trend in twelfth-grade NAEP reading achievement-level results

* Significantly different (p < .05) from 2009.

100

80

60

40

20

0

Percent

’09

74

’05

73

’02

74

5

’98

5 5

77* 76*

6 6

’94

75

’92

40 40

80*

4* 4

Year

36 40 36 35* 38

% at Advanced

% at or above Proficient

% at or above Basic

Accommodations

permitted

Accommodations

not permitted

* Significantly different (p < .05) from 2009.

Accommodations not permitted Accommodations permitted

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), various years, 1992–2009 Reading Assessments. 

GRADE 12 READING AND MATHEMATICS 2009 NATIONAL READING RESULTS 9
Figure 4. Trend in twelfth-grade NAEP reading average scale scores, by race/ethnicity

White and Asian/Pacific Islander students make gains since 2005

Although the overall average reading score 

increased since 2005, not all racial/ethnic 

groups made gains (figure 4). The average 

score for White students was 3 points 

higher in 2009 than in 2005, and the score 

for Asian/Pacific Islander students was 

11 points higher. Scores for Black, Hispanic, 

and American Indian/Alaska Native 

students did not change significantly from 

2005 to 2009. 

There was no statistically significant 

change in scores for any of the racial/ethnic 

groups in comparison to 1992, even though 

the overall average score for twelfthgraders was lower (see Technical Notes 

for information about interpreting 

statistical significance). 

White and Asian/Pacific Islander students 

scored higher on average than Black, 

Hispanic, and American Indian/Alaska 

Native students in 2009. Scores for 

Hispanic and American Indian/Alaska 

Native students did not differ significantly 

from each other, and both were higher than 

the score for Black students. 

’92 297

’98 297

297

’94 293*

’02 292*

’09

’05 293*

296

’94 274

’09

’05 279

283

’92 290

’98 288

287*

’94 278*

’02 286*

’09

’05 287*

298

’92 279

’98 276

275

’94 270

’02 273

’09

’05 272

274

Year

’92 273

’98 271

269

’94 265

’02 267

’09

’05 267

269

Accommodations not permitted Accommodations permitted

210 220 230 240 250 260 270 280 290 300 310 500

Scale score

0

Hispanic

Black

Asian/

Pacific Islander

White

American Indian/

Alaska Native

* Significantly different (p < .05) from 2009.

NOTE: Sample sizes were insufficient to permit reliable estimates for American Indian/Alaska Native students in 1992, 1998, and 2002. Black 

includes African American, Hispanic includes Latino, and Pacific Islander includes Native Hawaiian. Race categories exclude Hispanic origin.

10 THE NATION’S REPORT CARD 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), various years, 1992–2009 Reading Assessments. 
Racial/ethnic gaps persist 

Score gaps in reading persisted between 

White students and their Black and Hispanic 

peers (figure 5). Neither the 27-point score 

gap in 2009 between White and Black 

students, nor the 22-point gap between 

White and Hispanic students was significantly different from the score gaps in 

previous assessment years.

Figure 5. Trend in twelfth-grade NAEP reading average scale scores and score gaps, 

by selected racial/ethnic groups

Score gap

’92 ’94 ’98 ’02 ’05 ’09

267 267 269 269 271

265

273

292*

297

Year

293* 297 293* 297

24 29 26 27 25 26 27

296

Score gap

’92 ’94 ’98 ’02 ’05 ’09

276

270

279

Year

275

19

23 21 22 20 21 22

274 273 272

White

Black

White

Hispanic

0

260

250

280

270

290

310

300

500

Scale score

0

260

250

280

270

290

310

300

500

Scale score

292*

297 293* 297 293* 297 296

* Significantly different (p < .05) from 2009.

NOTE: Black includes African American, and Hispanic includes Latino. Race categories exclude Hispanic origin. Score gaps are calculated 

based on differences between unrounded average scores. 

Accommodations not permitted Accommodations permitted

GRADE 12 READING AND MATHEMATICS 2009 NATIONAL READING RESULTS 11

The proportion of twelfth-graders in the 

racial/ethnic groups NAEP reports on has 

changed over time (table 1). From 1992 to 

2009, the percentage of White students 

has decreased while the percentages of 

Hispanic, Asian/Pacific Islander, and 

American Indian/Alaska Native students 

have increased. Since 2005, the percentage of White students has decreased from 

67 percent to 61 percent, and the percentage of Hispanic students has increased from 

14 percent to 17 percent. The percentage of 

Black students has not changed significantly 

in comparison to either 2005 or 1992. 

Table 1. Percentage of students assessed in twelfth-grade NAEP reading, by

race/ethnicity: Various years, 1992–2009

Race/ethnicity 19921 19941 1998 2002 2005 2009

White 74* 75* 72* 71* 67* 61

Black 15 13* 14 12* 13 15

Hispanic 7* 7* 10* 10* 14* 17

Asian/Pacific Islander 3* 4* 4* 5 5 6

American Indian/Alaska Native #* 1 #* ‡ 1 1

# Rounds to zero.

‡ Reporting standards not met. Sample size insufficient to permit a reliable estimate.

* Significantly different (p < .05) from 2009. 1

 Accommodations were not permitted in this assessment year.

NOTE: Black includes African American, Hispanic includes Latino, and Pacific Islander includes Native Hawaiian. Race categories 

exclude Hispanic origin. Detail may not sum to totals because results are not shown for students whose race/ethnicity was 

unclassified.

Achievement-Level Results

Information is available on reading 

achievement-level results for racial/ethnic 

groups and other reporting categories

at http://nationsreportcard.gov/

reading_2009/gr12_national.asp.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), various years, 1992–2009 Reading Assessments. 
Reading score for male students up 3 points since 2005

While the average score for female Figure 6. Trend in twelfth-grade NAEP reading average scale scores and score gaps, by gender

students in 2009 was not significantly 

different from 2005, male students scored 

3 points higher in 2009 (figure 6). Average 

reading scores for both male and female 

twelfth-graders were lower in 2009 than in 

1992. 

Female students scored 12 points higher on 

average than male students in 2009, which 

was not significantly different from the 

score gaps in either 2005 or 1992. 10 14 16* 16* 16* 13 12

’92 ’94 ’98 ’02 ’05

279* 279* 283 282 280

287*

295 292

298*298*

294 297*

’09

Male

Female

282

294

Score gap

Year

0

260

250

280

270

290

310

300

500

Scale score

* Significantly different (p < .05) from 2009.

NOTE: Score gaps are calculated based on differences between unrounded average scores.

Students in suburban schools score higher 

Students’ performance on the reading 

assessment differed based on the location 

of the schools they attended. In 2009, 

students attending suburban schools 

scored higher on average than those 

attending schools in cities, towns, and rural 

locations (figure 7). Scores for students 

attending city, town, and rural schools did 

not differ significantly from each other. See 

the Technical Notes for more information 

about how these school location categories 

were defined. 

Although not shown here, the percentage of twelfth-graders attending suburban 

schools (37 percent) was higher than 

the percentages in cities (30 percent), 

towns (11 percent), and rural locations 

(22 percent). 

Figure 7. Average scale scores in twelfth-grade NAEP reading, by school location: 2009

286

287

292

286

Rural

Town

Suburb

City

200 210 220 230 240 250 260 270 280 290 300 500

Scale score

0

Accommodations not permitted Accommodations permitted

12 THE NATION’S REPORT CARD 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), various years, 1992–2009 Reading Assessments. 
Higher levels of parental education associated with higher scores

Twelfth-graders were asked to report the 

highest level of education completed by 

each parent. Five response options—did 

not finish high school, graduated from 

high school, some education after high 

school, graduated from college, and 

“I don’t know”—were offered. Results 

are reported for the highest level of 

education for either parent. 

In 2009, students who reported higher 

levels of parental education had higher 

average reading scores than those who 

reported lower levels (figure 8). For 

example, students whose parents 

graduated from college scored higher on 

average than those whose parents had 

some education after high school, who 

in turn scored higher than those whose 

parents’ highest level of education was 

high school. 

Although there were no significant 

changes in scores from 2005 to 2009 

based on the level of parental education, 

scores were lower in 2009 than in 1992 

for all four categories. 

Figure 8. Trend in twelfth-grade NAEP reading average scale scores, by student-reported highest 

level of parental education

Did not finish high school

Graduated from high school

268 268 268 266

275*

269

274 277 280* 279 283*

287 289 292* 291* 294* 297 298 301* 300 301* 299

268

278

289

296

276

287

’92 ’94 ’98 ’02 ’05 ’09 Year

0

260

250

280

270

290

310

300

500

Scale score

Some education after high school

Graduated from college

* Significantly different (p < .05) from 2009.

Accommodations not permitted Accommodations permitted

The percentage of students whose parents graduated from college has increased over time, while the percentages of students whose parents graduated from high school or completed some education after high school 

have decreased (table 2). While there was no significant change in the percentages of students who reported 

different levels of parental education since 2005, the percentage of students whose parents graduated from 

college increased from 41 percent in 1992 to 49 percent in 2009. The percentages of students whose parents 

graduated from high school or completed some education after high school were both smaller in 2009 than in 

1992, and the percentage of students whose parents did not finish high school was not significantly different 

from the percentage in 1992.

Table 2. Percentage of students assessed in twelfth-grade NAEP reading, by studentreported highest level of parental education: Various years, 1992–2009

Highest level of parental education 19921 19941 1998 2002 2005 2009

Did not finish high school 8 7 7 7 8 8

Graduated from high school 22* 21* 19* 18 18 17

Some education after high school 27* 26* 25* 24* 24 22

Graduated from college 41* 44* 46* 48 47 49

* Significantly different (p < .05) from 2009. 1

 Accommodations were not permitted in this assessment year.

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because results are not shown for students who did not know the highest education level for either of their 

parents.

GRADE 12 READING AND MATHEMATICS 2009 NATIONAL READING RESULTS 13

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), various years, 1992–2009 Reading Assessments. 
Students who write long answers to questions that involve reading 

score higher than those who do not

Students were asked how often they 

wrote long answers to questions on tests 

or assignments that involved reading. 

Students selected one of the following 

response options: never, once or twice a 

year, once or twice a month, and at least 

once a week.

In 2009, there was no significant difference in the scores for students who 

reported writing long answers to questions 

related to reading monthly or weekly, and 

both groups scored higher on average than 

students who wrote long answers less 

frequently (figure 9). Students who 

reported never writing long answers to 

questions involving reading had the 

lowest average score.

Figure 9. Average scale scores in twelfth-grade NAEP reading, by studentreported frequency of writing long answers to questions that involve 

reading: 2009

Never 261

Once or twice a year 281

Once or twice a month 292

At least once a week 294

200 210 220 230 240 250 260 270 280 290 300 500

Scale score

0

Students assessed in 2002 and 2005 were asked the same question 

about writing long answers to questions on tests or assignments 

involving reading. In 2009, about one-third (34 percent) of twelfthgraders reported writing long answers at least once a week, which 

was higher than the percentages in 2005 and 2002 (table 3). The 

percentage of those who reported writing long answers once or twice 

a month was lower in 2009 than in 2005 and 2002. The percentage 

of students who reported never writing long answers in 2009 was 

not significantly different from the percentage in 2005 but was 

1 percentage point lower than in 2002.

14 THE NATION’S REPORT CARD 

Table 3. Percentage of students assessed in twelfth-grade NAEP 

reading, by student-reported frequency of writing long 

answers to questions that involve reading: 2002, 2005, 

and 2009

Frequency of writing long answers to 

questions that involve reading 2002 2005 2009

Never 7* 6 6

Once or twice a year 22 21* 22

Once or twice a month 41* 42* 38

At least once a week 31* 32* 34

* Significantly different (p < .05) from 2009. 

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2002, 2005, and 2009 Reading Assessments. 
Scores vary with students’ educational aspirations

Twelfth-grade students were asked to choose from several 

options indicating how much education they expected to 

complete. Students who expected to complete higher levels 

of education had higher average reading scores (figure 10). 

In 2009, students who expected to complete graduate 

school had higher average scores than students who 

expected to complete less education. The average scores of 

students who reported they were unlikely to finish high 

school and those expecting to finish high school were not 

significantly different from each other, and both were lower 

than the average scores of students in the other categories.

Figure 10. Average scale scores in twelfth-grade NAEP reading, by studentreported highest level of education they plan to complete: 2009

266 Some education

after high school

Graduate from college 287

Go to graduate school 310

Not finish high school 239

245 Graduate from

high school

210 220 230 240 250 260 270 280 290 300 310 500

Scale score

0

Students assessed in 2005 were asked the same 

question about their educational aspirations. The 

percentage of twelfth-graders who expected to 

graduate from college increased from 58 percent 

in 2005 to 60 percent in 2009 (table 4). The 

percentage of twelfth-graders who expected to 

complete some education after high school was 

lower in 2009 than in 2005. There were no 

significant changes since 2005 in the percentages of students who reported that they would 

not finish high school, would graduate from high 

school, or would go to graduate school. 

GRADE 12 READING AND MATHEMATICS 2009 NATIONAL READING RESULTS 15

Table 4. Percentage of students assessed in twelfth-grade NAEP 

reading, by student-reported highest level of education they 

plan to complete: 2005 and 2009

Highest level of education students plan to complete 2005 2009

Not finish high school 1 1

Graduate from high school 5 4

Some education after high school 9* 7

Graduate from college 58* 60

Go to graduate school 25 26

* Significantly different (p < .05) from 2009. 

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because results are not shown for students who did not know the highest level of 

education they plan to complete.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2005 and 2009 Reading Assessments. 
Assessment Content at Grade 12

The distribution of items among the three cognitive targets reflects the 

relative emphasis of each target as specified in the twelfth-grade 

reading framework. 

35% Critique and Evaluate

These questions ask students to consider 

all or part of the text from a critical perspective and to make judgments about the 

way meaning is conveyed.

45% Integrate and Interpret

These questions move beyond a focus on 

discrete information and require readers to 

make connections across larger portions of 

text or to explain what they think about the 

text as a whole.

20% Locate and Recall

These questions focus on specific information contained in relatively small amounts of 

text and ask students to recognize what 

they have read. 

Because the assessment covered a range of texts and included more questions than any one student could 

answer, each student took just a portion of the assessment. The 223 questions that made up the entire 

twelfth-grade reading assessment were distributed across 22 sets of passages and items. Each set typically 

comprised 10 questions, a mix of multiple choice and constructed response. Each student read and responded to questions in two 25-minute sets. 

16 THE NATION’S REPORT CARD 
Reading Achievement-Level Descriptions for Grade 12

NAEP reading achievement-level descriptions present expectations of student performance in relation to a range of text types and text 

difficulty and in response to a variety of assessment questions intended to elicit different cognitive processes and reading behaviors. The 

specific processes and reading behaviors mentioned in the achievement-level descriptions are illustrative of those judged as central to 

students’ successful comprehension of texts. These processes and reading behaviors involve different and increasing cognitive demands 

from one performance level to the next, as they are applied within more challenging contexts and with more complex information. While 

similar reading behaviors are included at the different performance levels, it should be understood that these skills are being described in 

relation to texts and assessment questions of varying difficulty. 

The specific descriptions of what twelfth-graders should know and be able to do at the Basic, Proficient, and Advanced reading achievement levels are presented below. (Note: Shaded text is a short, general summary to describe performance at each achievement level.) 

NAEP achievement levels are cumulative; therefore, student performance at the Proficient level includes the competencies associated 

with the Basic level, and the Advanced level also includes the skills and knowledge associated with both the Basic and the Proficient levels. 

The cut score indicating the lower end of the score range for each level is noted in parentheses.

Basic (265)

Twelfth-grade students performing at 

the Basic level should be able to identify 

elements of meaning and form and 

relate them to the overall meaning of 

the text. They should be able to make 

inferences, develop interpretations, make 

connections between texts, and draw 

conclusions; and they should be able to 

provide some support for each. They 

should be able to interpret the meaning 

of a word as it is used in the text.

When reading literary texts such as 

fiction, literary nonfiction, and poetry, 

twelfth-grade students performing at the 

Basic level should be able to describe 

essential literary elements such as 

character, narration, setting, and theme; 

provide examples to illustrate how an 

author uses a story element for a specific 

effect; and provide interpretations of 

figurative language.

When reading informational texts such 

as exposition, argumentation, and 

documents, twelfth-grade students 

performing at the Basic level should be 

able to identify the organization of a text, 

make connections between ideas in two 

different texts, locate relevant information in a document, and provide some 

explanation for why the information is 

included.

Proficient (302)

Twelfth-grade students performing at the 

Proficient level should be able to locate 

and integrate information using sophisticated analyses of the meaning and form 

of the text. These students should be 

able to provide specific text support for 

inferences, interpretative statements, 

and comparisons within and across texts.

When reading literary texts such as 

fiction, literary nonfiction, and poetry, 

twelfth-grade students performing at the 

Proficient level should be able to explain a 

theme and integrate information from 

across a text to describe or explain character motivations, actions, thoughts, or 

feelings. They should be able to provide 

a description of settings, events, or character, and connect the description to the 

larger theme of a text. Students performing at this level should be able to make 

and compare generalizations about 

different characters’ perspectives 

within and across texts.

When reading informational texts 

including exposition, argumentation, 

and documents, twelfth-grade students 

performing at the Proficient level should 

be able to integrate and interpret texts to 

provide main ideas with general support 

from the text. They should be able to 

evaluate texts by forming judgments 

about an author’s perspective, about the 

relative strength of claims, and about the 

effectiveness of organizational elements 

or structures. Students performing at this 

level should be able to understand an 

author’s intent and evaluate the effectiveness of arguments within and across 

texts. They should also be able to comprehend detailed documents to locate 

relevant information needed for specified 

purposes.

Advanced (346)

Twelfth-grade students performing at the 

Advanced level should be able to analyze 

both the meaning and the form of the text 

and provide complete, explicit, and 

precise text support for their analyses 

with specific examples. They should be 

able to read across multiple texts for a 

variety of purposes, analyzing and evaluating them individually and as a set.

When reading literary texts such as 

fiction, poetry, and literary nonfiction, 

twelfth-grade students performing at the 

Advanced level should be able to analyze 

and evaluate how an author uses literary 

devices, such as sarcasm or irony, to 

enhance and convey meaning. They 

should be able to determine themes and 

explain thematic connections across 

texts.

When reading informational texts, 

twelfth-grade students performing at the 

Advanced level should be able to recognize, use, and evaluate argumentation and 

expository text structures and the organization of documents. They should be able 

to critique and evaluate arguments and 

counterarguments within and between 

texts, and substantiate analyses with full 

and precise evidence from the text. They 

should be able to identify and integrate 

essential information within and across 

documents.

GRADE 12 READING AND MATHEMATICS 2009 NATIONAL READING RESULTS 17
What Twelfth-Graders Know and Can Do in Reading

The item map below illustrates the range of reading comprehension skills demonstrated by twelfth-graders. The scale 

scores on the left represent the scores for students who were 

likely to get the items correct or complete. The cut score at the 

lower end of the range for each achievement level is shown in a 

box on the scale. The descriptions of selected assessment 

questions indicating what students need to do to answer the 

question correctly are listed on the right, along with the corresponding reading cognitive targets.

For example, students performing in the middle of the Basic

range (with a score of 286) were likely to be able to integrate 

details across a story to recognize the description of the plot.

Students performing in the middle of the Proficient range (with 

a score of 323) were likely to be able to recognize the meaning 

of a word within the context of the story.

18 THE NATION’S REPORT CARD 

GRADE 12 NAEP READING ITEM MAP Advanced Proficient Basic

265

346

302

Scale score Cognitive target Question description

500

//

416 Critique/evaluate Analyze a story to explain use of different genre elements 

408 Critique/evaluate Support a generalization about language use in a document (shown on page 23)

403 Critique/evaluate Explain the relation between a paragraph and the author’s main argument

384 Integrate/interpret Synthesize poetic details to derive and explain the theme of a poem 

374 Integrate/interpret Synthesize story events to provide and explain the theme of a story 

367 Integrate/interpret Interpret a paragraph within the context of a historical speech 

355 Critique/evaluate Evaluate arguments across texts to judge their effectiveness 

347 Critique/evaluate Evaluate information and support an opinion with specific text reference

345 Integrate/interpret Explain the change in a character’s perspective with specific text support

340 Critique/evaluate Explain the effectiveness of an organization feature of a document 

338 Integrate/interpret Analyze a story to provide a text-based description of a character

333 Critique/evaluate Evaluate arguments and justify reasoning with support from the text

331 Integrate/interpret Recognize a generalization supported by information in two texts

323 Integrate/interpret Recognize the meaning of a word within the context of a story 

320 Integrate/interpret Explain the interrelated importance of two documents 

316 Integrate/interpret Make a straightforward inference to explain why information is needed (shown on page 22)

305 Integrate/interpret Provide and explain information from an article 

295 Integrate/interpret Integrate details across a story to explain a character’s motivation 

294 Integrate/interpret Recognize the interpretation of an author’s point in a persuasive essay

286 Locate/recall Recognize information explicitly stated in a document (shown on page 21)

286 Integrate/interpret Integrate the details across a story to recognize the description of the plot 

276 Integrate/interpret Recognize an inference about a main idea

272 Integrate/interpret Recognize an inference about an author’s purpose in informational text

263 Integrate/interpret Recognize the meaning of a word in the context of a document (shown on page 21)

257 Locate/recall Recognize a character’s feelings at a specific moment in a story

251 Locate/recall Recognize the motivation of a character in a literary essay

244 Locate/recall Recognize the paraphrase of a supporting idea in informational text

230 Integrate/interpret Recognize what an essay mainly describes

//

0

NOTE: Regular type denotes a constructed-response question. Italic type denotes a multiple-choice question. The position of a question on the scale represents the scale score attained by students who had a 65 

percent probability of successfully answering a constructed-response question, or a 74 percent probability of correctly answering a four-option multiple-choice question. For constructed-response questions, the 

question description represents students’ performance at the highest scoring level. Scale score ranges for reading achievement levels are referenced on the map.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2009 Reading Assessment.
Grade 12 Sample Reading Passage

As part of the 2009 reading assessment, twelfth-graders were asked to answer a series 

of questions based on a housing rental agreement, which stipulates the responsibilities of 

landlord and tenant when renting an apartment. Selected sections of the agreement are 

shown below.

GRADE 12 READING AND MATHEMATICS 2009 NATIONAL READING RESULTS 19

View the complete document at http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/itmrlsx/landing.aspx. 
View the complete document at http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/itmrlsx/landing.aspx. 

20 THE NATION’S REPORT CARD 
Sample Questions:

Locate and Recall

This sample multiple-choice question from the 2009 

reading assessment at grade 12 measures students’ 

performance in recognizing explicit information from 

a highly detailed document. Seventy-one percent of 

twelfth-graders selected the correct response.

Percentage of twelfth-grade students in each response category: 

2009

A

B

C

D

Choice A Choice B Choice C Choice D Omitted

11 71 7 9 1 

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding.

The table below shows the percentage of twelfth-graders 

within each achievement level who answered this question 

correctly. For example, 73 percent of students performing at 

the Basic level selected the correct response.

Percentage correct for twelfth-grade students at each achievement 

level: 2009

Overall Below Basic At Basic At Proficient At Advanced

71 40 73 90 96

According to the rental agreement, which of 

the following is the landlord required to do?

 Maintain and repair air conditioning 

units

 Provide a stove and refrigerator

 Arrange for weekly trash disposal

Supply the tenant with multiple keys 

SAMPLE QUESTION:

Integrate and Interpret

This sample multiple-choice question measures students’ 

performance in integrating and interpreting the language of 

a legal document. Students used their understanding of the 

section to identify the meaning of the word. Eighty-four 

percent of twelfth-graders selected the correct response.

Percentage of twelfth-grade students in each response category: 

2009

A

B

C

D

Choice A Choice B Choice C Choice D Omitted

84 7 3 5 #

# Rounds to zero.

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding.

The table below shows the percentage of twelfth-graders 

within each achievement level who answered this question 

correctly. For example, 87 percent of students performing at 

the Basic level selected the correct response.

Percentage correct for twelfth-grade students at each achievement 

level: 2009

Overall Below Basic At Basic At Proficient At Advanced

84 61 87 97 100

In Section 12, the rental agreement states 

that the landlord can enter and show 

the house to “prospective residents.” The 

agreement is referring to people who

are interested in living in the house

wish to make future improvements

lived in the house before

help the landlord do inspections 

SAMPLE QUESTION:

GRADE 12 READING AND MATHEMATICS 2009 NATIONAL READING RESULTS 21

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2009 Reading Assessment.
Sample Question: Integrate and Interpret

This sample extended constructed-response question 

measures twelfth-graders’ performance in integrating and 

interpreting the language of a legal document for renting an 

apartment. Successful responses demonstrated understanding of the purpose and the implications of entering the 

tenant’s name at the beginning and at the end of the 

document.

Student responses to this question were rated using four 

scoring levels.

Extensive responses correctly identified the two places 

where the tenant’s name appears and explained what each 

indicates. 

Essential responses correctly identified one or two places 

where the tenant’s name appears and explained what one of 

them indicates.

Partial responses identified either one or both places where 

the tenant’s name appears with no explanation of why or 

what the tenant’s name indicates. 

Unsatisfactory responses provided incorrect information or 

irrelevant details.

The first sample response on the right received a score of 

“Extensive.” It correctly identifies the beginning and end as 

the two places where the name of the tenant needs to 

appear and correctly explains why the tenant’s name must 

appear in both places. Forty-three percent of twelfth-graders 

received an “Extensive” rating on their responses to this 

question.

The second sample response received a score of “Essential.” 

The response correctly identifies and explains that the 

tenant’s name must appear at the end to show that the 

document has been read and agreed to. The first part of the 

response about the payment of rent section is incorrect. 

Twenty-seven percent of twelfth-graders received an 

“Essential” rating on their responses to this question.

Percentage of twelfth-grade students in each response category: 

2009

Extensive Essential Partial Unsatisfactory Omitted

43 27 15 5 7

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because the percentage of responses rated as “Off-task” is not 

shown. Off-task responses are those that do not provide any information related to the assessment 

task.

The table below shows the percentage of twelfth-grade students within each achievement-level interval whose responses 

to this question were rated as “Extensive” or “Essential.” For 

example, among the students assessed who answered this 

question, 66 percent of twelfth-graders performing at the 

Proficient level provided a response rated as “Extensive.”

Percentage of answers rated as “Extensive” and “Essential” for 

twelfth-grade students at each achievement level: 2009

SAMPLE QUESTION:

The name of the tenant must be filled in on the 

rental agreement in two places. Identify the two 

places and explain why the name of the tenant 

needs to appear in each of them.

Extensive response:

Essential response:

22 THE NATION’S REPORT CARD 

Scoring 

level Overall

Below 

Basic

At

Basic

At 

Proficient

At 

Advanced

Extensive 43 11 39 66 87

Essential 27 20 35 27 13

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2009 Reading Assessment.
Sample Question: Critique and Evaluate

This sample short constructed-response question measures 

twelfth-graders’ performance in critiquing the way language 

is used in a rental agreement document. Successful responses 

demonstrated understanding of how certain phrases actually 

gave the landlord more rights or qualified the landlord’s 

responsibility.

Student responses to this question were rated using three 

scoring levels.

Full comprehension responses explained how the language of 

the section favors the landlord, and students provided an 

example from that section of the document to support their 

explanation.

Partial comprehension responses discussed the landlord’s 

rights described in this section but did not explain how the 

language favors the landlord.

Little or no comprehension responses provided incorrect 

information or irrelevant details.

The sample student response below received a score of 

“Full comprehension” because it correctly explains how the 

vague terms give the landlord liberty to enter the residence at 

any time. Specific terms from the section are provided in the 

explanation. Seven percent of twelfth-graders received a rating 

of “Full comprehension” on their responses to this question.

Percentage of twelfth-grade students in each response category: 2009

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because the percentage of responses rated as “Off-task” is not shown. Off-task 

responses are those that do not provide any information related to the assessment task.

The table below shows the percentage of students within 

each achievement level whose responses to the question 

were rated as “Full comprehension.” For example, among the 

students who answered this question, 3 percent of twelfthgraders performing at the Basic level provided a response rated 

as “Full comprehension.”

Percentage of answers rated as “Full comprehension” for twelfth-grade 

students at each achievement level: 2009

# Rounds to zero.

SAMPLE QUESTION:

Explain how the language used in Section 12 favors the landlord. Support your answer with an example 

from Section 12.

Full comprehension response:

GRADE 12 READING AND MATHEMATICS 2009 NATIONAL READING RESULTS 23

Full 

comprehension

Partial 

comprehension

Little or no 

comprehension Omitted

7 59 24 9

Overall Below Basic At Basic At Proficient At Advanced

7 # 3 12 34

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2009 Reading Assessment.
New Background Photo Here

24 THE NATION’S REPORT CARD 

National Mathematics

Results

Mathematics score higher than

in 2005

The average mathematics score for the nation’s twelfth-graders in 2009 was

3 points higher than in 2005. All racial/ethnic and gender groups made 

gains since 2005. Approximately one-quarter of students performed at or 

above the Proficient level in 2009, and about two-thirds performed at or 

above Basic. 

Students who took more advanced mathematics courses scored higher on 

average than students who took lower-level courses, with those taking 

calculus scoring highest. Average scores also varied by students’ 

expectations of their main activity after high school, with a higher average 

score for students expecting to attend a four-year college. 

24 THE NATION’S REPORT CARD 
The Mathematics Framework

To ensure an appropriate balance of content, the Mathematics 

Framework for the 2009 National Assessment of Educational Progress

specifies that each question in the grade 12 assessment measures 

one of four mathematical content areas—number properties and 

operations; measurement and geometry; data analysis, statistics, 

and probability; and algebra. Unlike the assessments for grades 4 

and 8, the geometry and measurement content areas have been 

combined into one at grade 12 because the majority of measurement topics at this level are geometric in nature. The framework also 

defines levels of mathematical complexity to allow for a variety of 

ways of knowing and doing mathematics.

For 2009, the National Assessment Governing Board adopted a 

new mathematics framework that would better enable NAEP to 

report on how well-prepared twelfth-grade students are for postsecondary education and training. Analysis of the 2005 framework 

had revealed it would need revisions to meet that challenge. The 

goal of the new framework was an assessment that would measure 

the use of quantitative tools, mathematical reasoning, the essential 

mathematics required for postsecondary education and training, 

and the ability to integrate and apply mathematics in diverse 

problem-solving contexts. The content areas described in the 

2009 framework are unchanged from 2005, but new subtopics 

addressing mathematical reasoning were added in each content 

area. A few objectives from the 2005 framework were eliminated 

or revised. Several new objectives included in the 2009 framework 

describe mathematics content that is beyond what is typically 

taught in a standard three-year course of study in high school (the 

equivalent of one year of geometry and two years of algebra). 

Major changes in the framework for the 2005 assessment resulted 

in the content of the 2005 mathematics assessment being substantially different from the content of earlier assessments. A decision 

was made to establish a new trend in mathematics in 2005, and 

results from 2005 could not be compared to previous assessment 

years. However, results of a 2009 mathematics trend study 

determined that the 2009 grade 12 mathematics results could be 

compared to results from the 2005 assessment, even though 

additional changes were made to the framework for 2009. A 

summary of the special analyses conducted, which included a 

detailed comparison of the frameworks and test questions in 

addition to examining how the same students performed on the 

2009 assessment and on questions from the earlier assessment 

that were readministered in 2009, is available at http://nces.ed.gov/

nationsreportcard/mathematics/trend_study.asp.

Mathematics content areas

Number properties and operations measures students’ knowledge 

and understanding of ways to represent, calculate, and estimate 

with real numbers, and students’ ability to reason about numerical 

relationships. New objectives in this content area include properties 

of number systems and proof by mathematical induction.

Measurement and geometry assesses students’ knowledge and 

understanding of units of measurement for such attributes as 

length, area, volume, angles, and rates; trigonometric relationships; 

shapes in two and three dimensions; relationships between shapes 

such as symmetry and transformations; and coordinate geometry 

and vectors; and students’ ability to reason about geometric 

relationships. New objectives in this content area include topics in 

trigonometry, addition and multiplication of vectors, ellipses and 

hyperbolas, polar coordinates, and geometric proof.

Data analysis, statistics, and probability measures students’ 

knowledge and understanding of data representation and analysis, 

statistical inference, experiments and samples, and probability, and 

students’ ability to reason about results based on data and statistics. New objectives in this content area include data presented in 

spreadsheets, least-squares regression lines with a graphing 

calculator, the binomial theorem, and appropriate interpretations of 

data.

Algebra measures students’ knowledge and understanding of 

functional relationships, algebraic representation, variables, 

expressions, equations, and inequalities, and students’ ability to 

provide valid mathematical arguments. New objectives in this 

content area include logarithms, trigonometric functions, inverse 

functions, properties of functions, function notation, operations on 

functions, sums of arithmetic and geometric series, and logical 

reasoning.

Levels of mathematical complexity

The three levels of mathematical complexity (low, moderate, and 

high) described in the framework form an ordered description of 

the demands that questions make on students’ thinking. Mathematical complexity involves what a question asks students to do, 

and not how they might undertake it. The complexity of a question 

is not directly related to its format, and therefore it is possible for 

some multiple-choice questions to assess complex mathematics 

and for some constructed-response (i.e., open-ended) questions to 

assess routine mathematical ideas.

Levels of Mathematical Complexity

Low complexity questions typically specify what a student is 

to do, which is often to carry out a routine mathematical 

procedure.

Moderate complexity questions involve more flexibility of 

thinking and often require a response with multiple steps.

High complexity questions make heavier demands and often 

require abstract reasoning or analysis in a novel situation.

The complete mathematics framework for 2009 is available at 

http://nagb.org/publications/frameworks/math-framework09.pdf.

GRADE 12 READING AND MATHEMATICS 2009 NATIONAL MATHEMATICS RESULTS 25
* Significantly different (p < .05) from 2009.

Mathematics score up 3 points since 2005

The average mathematics score for the 

nation’s twelfth-graders was 3 points 

higher in 2009 than in 2005 (figure 11). 

Scores increased across most of the 

performance distribution (figure 12). In 

comparison to 2005, scores were higher 

for all but the highest performing students 

(those at the 90th percentile).

* Significantly different (p < .05) from 2009.

Figure 11. Average scale scores in twelfthgrade NAEP mathematics: 2005 

and 2009

150* 153

’05 ’09 Year

0

120

110

140

130

150

170

160

300

Scale score

Figure 12. Percentile scores in twelfth-grade 

NAEP mathematics: 2005 and 

2009

0

120

150

140

170

160

180

200

190

130

100

110

300

Scale score

151* 154

174* 177

194 197

127* 130

105*

110

’05

10th

25th

50th

75th

90th

Percentile

’09 Year

One-quarter of twelfth-graders perform at or above Proficient

Figure 13. Achievement-level results in twelfth-grade NAEP mathematics: 2005 and 2009

* Significantly different (p < .05) from 2009.

Twenty-six percent of twelfth-graders performed at or above the Proficient level in 

mathematics in 2009. The percentages of 

students performing at or above Proficient

and at or above Basic were higher in 2009 

than in 2005 (figure 13). The percentage 

of students performing at the Advanced

level in 2009 did not change significantly 

from 2005. 

100

80

60

40

20

0

Percent

61*

2

23*

64

3

26

’05 ’09 Year

% at Advanced

% at or above Proficient

% at or above Basic

26 THE NATION’S REPORT CARD 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2005 and 2009 Mathematics Assessments. 
All racial/ethnic groups make gains since 2005

Just as the overall average mathematics 

score increased since 2005, average scores 

for White, Black, Hispanic, Asian/Pacific 

Islander, and American Indian/Alaska 

Native students were higher in 2009 than 

in 2005 (figure 14). The average score for 

Asian/Pacific Islander students was up 

13 points1 from 2005, and the average 

score for American Indian/Alaska Native 

students was up 10 points over the same 

period. 

In 2009, both White and Asian/Pacific 

Islander students scored higher on average 

than Black, Hispanic, and American Indian/

Alaska Native students. The average score 

for Asian/Pacific Islander students was 

14 points higher than the score for White 

students. Hispanic and American Indian/

Alaska Native students scored higher on 

average than Black students.

1

 The score-point difference is based on the difference 

between the unrounded scores as opposed to the 

rounded scores shown in the figure.

Figure 14. Average scale scores in twelfth-grade NAEP mathematics, by race/ethnicity: 2005 

and 2009

’09

’05 157*

161

’09

’05 134*

144

’09

’05 163*

175

’09

’05 133*

138

Year

’09

’05 127*

131

Hispanic

Black

Asian/

Pacific Islander

White

American Indian/

Alaska Native

100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 300

Scale score

0

* Significantly different (p < .05) from 2009.

NOTE: Black includes African American, Hispanic includes Latino, and Pacific Islander includes Native Hawaiian. Race categories exclude 

Hispanic origin.

Racial/ethnic gaps persist 

Score gaps persisted between White 

students and their Black and Hispanic peers 

in 2009 (figure 15). With all three racial/

ethnic groups making gains in 2009, neither 

the White – Black nor the White – Hispanic 

score gap in 2009 was significantly different 

from corresponding gaps in 2005.

Figure 15. Average scale scores and score gaps in twelfth-grade NAEP mathematics, 

by selected racial/ethnic groups: 2005 and 2009

Score gap

’05 ’09

127* 131

Year

157*

31 30

161

White

Black

0

120

110

140

130

150

170

160

300

Scale score

157* 161

Score gap 24 23

138

133*

White

Hispanic

’05 ’09 Year

0

120

110

140

130

150

170

160

300

Scale score

* Significantly different (p < .05) from 2009.

NOTE: Black includes African American, and Hispanic includes Latino. Race categories exclude Hispanic origin. Score gaps are calculated 

based on differences between unrounded average scores.

27

Achievement-Level Results

Information is available on mathematics 

achievement-level results for racial/ethnic 

groups and other reporting categories at 

http://nationsreportcard.gov/math_2009/

gr12_national.asp.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2005 and 2009 Mathematics Assessments. 

GRADE 12 READING AND MATHEMATICS 2009 NATIONAL MATHEMATICS RESULTS
Scores increase for both male and female students 

Average mathematics scores increased Figure 16. Average scale scores and score gaps 

from 2005 to 2009 for both male and 

female students (figure 16). The 3-point 

score gap between male and female 

students in 2009 was unchanged from 

the gap in 2005. 

in twelfth-grade NAEP mathematics, 

by gender: 2005 and 2009

3 3

149*

Female

152

151* Male

155

Score gap

0

120

110

140

130

150

170

160

300

Scale score

’05 ’09 Year

* Significantly different (p < .05) from 2009.

NOTE: Score gaps are calculated based on differences between unrounded 

average scores.

Performance varies based on school location 

Students’ performance on the mathe- Figure 17. Average scale scores in twelfth-grade NAEP mathematics, by school location: 2009

matics assessment varied based on the 

location of the schools they attended 

(figure 17). In 2009, students attending 

suburban schools scored higher on average 

than students attending schools in towns 

and rural locations, but not significantly 

different from students attending city 

schools. There were no significant differences among the average scores of 

students attending schools in cities, 

towns, and rural locations. 

151

151

157

152

Rural

Town

Suburb

City

100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 300

Scale score

0

28 THE NATION’S REPORT CARD 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2005 and 2009 Mathematics Assessments. 
Higher levels of parental education associated with higher scores

In 2009, students who reported higher levels of parental education 

had higher average mathematics scores than those who reported 

lower levels (figure 18). Students whose parents graduated from 

college scored higher than students whose parents had lower 

levels of education. Students whose parents did not finish high 

school scored lowest. 

Average scores were higher in 2009 than in 2005 for students 

whose parents did not finish high school, graduated from high 

school, and graduated from college. The average score in 2009 

for students whose parents had some education after high school 

was not significantly different from 2005. 

Figure 18. Average scale scores in twelfth-grade NAEP 

mathematics, by student-reported highest level of 

parental education: 2005 and 2009

* Significantly different (p < .05) from 2009.

161* 164

148 150

138* 142

130*

135

’05 ’09 Year

0

120

110

140

130

150

170

160

300

Scale score

Did not finish high school

Graduated from high school

Some education after high school

Graduated from college

Students taking advanced mathematics courses score higher 

Twelfth-grade students assessed in mathematics in 2009 

were asked what mathematics courses they had completed since eighth-grade. The results were collapsed into five 

categories based on the most advanced course the 

student had taken: calculus, pre-calculus, algebra II/

trigonometry, geometry, and algebra I or lower. 

Students completing higher-level courses had higher 

average mathematics scores (figure 19). In 2009, 

students who reported taking a calculus class scored 

higher on average than students in other coursetaking 

categories. Similarly, students who had completed 

pre-calculus scored higher than students whose highest 

level courses were algebra II/trigonometry, geometry, or 

algebra I or lower. More coursetaking results can be found 

in the NAEP Data Explorer at http://nces.ed.gov/

nationsreportcard/naepdata/.

Figure 19. Average scale scores in twelfth-grade NAEP mathematics, by studentreported highest level mathematics course taken: 2009

166

143

127

121

Calculus 189

Algebra II/trigonometry

Pre-calculus

Algebra I or lower

Geometry

100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 300

Scale score

0

A higher percentage of twelfthgraders in 2009 than in 2005 reported 

that pre-calculus was the highest level 

mathematics course taken (table 5). 

Smaller percentages of students in 2009 

reported the highest level course taken was 

either geometry or algebra I or lower. 

Table 5. Percentage of students assessed in twelfth-grade 

NAEP mathematics, by student-reported highest level 

mathematics course taken: 2005 and 2009

Highest level mathematics course taken 2005 2009

Algebra I or lower 8* 5

Geometry 12* 10

Algebra II/trigonometry 41 42

Pre-calculus 21* 24

Calculus 18 18

* Significantly different (p < .05) from 2009. 

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding.

29

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2005 and 2009 Mathematics Assessments. 

GRADE 12 READING AND MATHEMATICS 2009 NATIONAL MATHEMATICS RESULTS
Twelfth-graders were asked what they 

expected their main activity to be the year 

after leaving high school. Students who 

expected that they would be attending a 

four-year college had higher mathematics 

scores on average than did students who 

expected to work full time, attend a 

vocational/business school, attend a 

two-year college, or serve in the military 

(figure 20). The average scores of students who expected to work full time and 

those who expected to attend a vocational/

business school were not significantly 

different from each other and were lower 

than the scores of students who had 

different expectations regarding their main 

activity after high school.

Almost two-thirds of students reported 

that they planned to attend a four-year 

college, service academy, or university. The 

percentage of students planning to attend 

a two-year college was larger than the 

percentages of students planning to work 

full time or attend a vocational/technical 

school.

Scores vary by students’ plans after high school

Figure 20. Average scale scores in twelfth-grade NAEP mathematics, by student-reported 

main activities they plan to do in the year after leaving high school: 2009

166

138

135

133

Attend a four-year college, 

service academy, or university

Serve in the military 140

Attend a two-year college 

Attend a vocational,

technical, or business school

Work full time

100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 300

Scale score

0

What do students plan to do in the year after 

leaving high school?

• 6% plan to work full time.

• 5% plan to attend vocational, technical, or business school.

• 19% plan to attend two-year college.

• 62% plan to attend four-year college, service academy, or

 university.

• 4% plan to serve in the military.

30 THE NATION’S REPORT CARD 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2009 Mathematics Assessment. 
Assessment Content at Grade 12

The distribution of items among the four content areas reflects the relative emphasis in 

each area specified in the mathematics framework for grade 12. Some of the topics are 

beyond what is typically taught in a traditional three-year curriculum (the equivalent of 

one year of geometry and two years of algebra) and are included in the assessment with 

less frequency than other topics.

 10%

Number properties and operations 

These questions focus on the real and complex 

number systems; various representations of numbers including absolute value, scientific notation, 

exponents and logarithms; estimation; numerical 

properties; and mathematical argument.

 30%

Measurement and geometry

These questions focus on the measurement of area, 

volume, angles, and rates; properties of plane 

figures and solids; similarity, congruence, and 

transformation of shapes; analytic geometry; 

trigonometry; and geometric proof.

 25%

Data analysis, statistics, and probability

These questions focus on organizing and summarizing data and comparing data sets; the design of 

experiments, analyzing statistical claims, and 

making inferences; techniques for fitting models to 

data; reasoning with data; and topics in probability 

including independence, dependence, and conditional probability.

 35%

Algebra

These questions focus on functions, including 

linear, quadratic, power, exponential, and trigonometric; algebraic representations and translations 

between representations; manipulating and 

interpreting algebraic expressions; solving equations, inequalities, and systems of equations; and 

mathematical argument and logical reasoning. 

GRADE 12 READING AND MATHEMATICS 2009 NATIONAL MATHEMATICS RESULTS 31

The 348 questions that made up the entire twelfth-grade mathematics assessment 

were divided into 22 sections, each containing between 13 and 21 questions, depending on the balance between multiple-choice and constructed-response questions. 

Because the assessment included more questions than any one student could answer, 

each student took just a portion of the assessment and responded to questions in two 

25-minute sections. 

Some questions incorporated the use of a calculator, ruler/protractor, or other manipulatives that were provided. Twelfth-graders were permitted to use their own scientific 

or graphing calculator or were provided with a scientific calculator to use on approximately one-third of the assessment.
NAEP Mathematics Achievement-Level Descriptions for Grade 12

The specific descriptions of what twelfth-graders should know and be able to do at the Basic, Proficient, and Advanced mathematics achievement levels are presented below. (Note: Shaded text is a short, general summary to describe performance at each achievement level.) NAEP 

achievement levels are cumulative; therefore, student performance at the Proficient level includes the competencies associated with the Basic

level, and the Advanced level also includes the skills and knowledge associated with both the Basic and the Proficient levels. The cut score 

indicating the lower end of the score range for each level is noted in parentheses. 

Basic (141) 

Twelfth-grade students performing at the Basic

level should be able to solve mathematical 

problems that require the direct application of 

concepts and procedures in familiar mathematical and real-world settings.

Students performing at the Basic level should 

be able to compute, approximate, and estimate 

with real numbers, including common irrational 

numbers. They should be able to order and 

compare real numbers and be able to perform 

routine arithmetic calculations with and 

without a scientific calculator or spreadsheet. 

They should be able to use rates and proportions to solve numeric and geometric 

problems.

At this level, students should be able to 

interpret information about functions presented in various forms, including verbal, graphical, 

tabular, and symbolic. They should be able to 

evaluate polynomial functions and recognize 

the graphs of linear functions. Twelfth-grade 

students should also understand key aspects of 

linear functions, such as slope and intercepts.

These students should be able to extrapolate 

from sample results; calculate, interpret, and 

use measures of center; and compute simple 

probabilities.

Students at this level should be able to solve 

problems involving area and perimeter of plane 

figures, including regular and irregular polygons, and involving surface area and volume of 

solid figures. They should also be able to solve 

problems using the Pythagorean theorem and 

using scale drawings. Twelfth-graders performing at the Basic level should be able to estimate, 

calculate, and compare measures, as well as to 

identify and compare properties of two- and 

three-dimensional figures. They should be able 

to solve routine problems using two-dimensional coordinate geometry, including calculating slope, distance, and midpoint. They should 

also be able to perform single translations or 

reflections of geometric figures in a plane.

Proficient (176) 

Twelfth-grade students performing at the 

Proficient level should be able to recognize 

when particular concepts, procedures, and 

strategies are appropriate, and to select, 

integrate, and apply them to solve problems. 

They should also be able to test and validate 

geometric and algebraic conjectures using a 

variety of methods, including deductive 

reasoning and counterexamples. 

Twelfth-grade students performing at the 

Proficient level should be able to compute, 

approximate, and estimate the values of 

numeric expressions using exponents (including fractional exponents), absolute value, order 

of magnitude, and ratios. They should be able 

to apply proportional reasoning, when necessary, to solve problems in nonroutine settings, 

and to understand the effects of changes in 

scale. They should be able to predict how 

transformations, including changes in scale, of 

one quantity affect related quantities. 

These students should be able to write equivalent forms of algebraic expressions, including 

rational expressions, and use those forms to 

solve equations and systems of equations. 

They should be able to use graphing tools and 

to construct formulas for spreadsheets; to use 

function notation; and to evaluate quadratic, 

rational, piecewise-defined, power, and 

exponential functions. At this level, students 

should be able to recognize the graphs and 

families of graphs of these functions and to 

recognize and perform transformations on the 

graphs of these functions. They should be able 

to use properties of these functions to model 

and solve problems in mathematical and 

real-world contexts, and they should understand the benefits and limits of mathematical 

modeling. Twelfth-graders performing at the 

Proficient level should also be able to translate 

between representations of functions, including verbal, graphical, tabular, and symbolic 

representations; to use appropriate representations to solve problems; and to use 

graphing tools and to construct formulas for 

spreadsheets.

Students performing at this level should be 

able to use technology to calculate summary 

statistics for distributions of data. They should 

be able to recognize and determine a method 

to select a simple random sample, identify a 

source of bias in a sample, use measures of 

center and spread of distributions to make 

decisions and predictions, describe the impact 

of linear transformations and outliers on 

measures of center, calculate combinations 

and permutations to solve problems, and 

understand the use of the normal distribution 

to describe real-world situations. Twelfth-grade 

students should be able to use theoretical 

probability to predict experimental outcomes 

involving multiple events.

These students should be able to solve problems involving right triangle trigonometry, use 

visualization in three dimensions, and perform 

successive transformations of a geometric 

figure in a plane. They should be able to 

understand the effects of transformations, 

including changes in scale, on corresponding 

measures and to apply slope, distance, and 

midpoint formulas to solve problems. 

Advanced (216) 

Twelfth-grade students performing at the 

Advanced level should demonstrate in-depth 

knowledge of and be able to reason about 

mathematical concepts and procedures. They 

should be able to integrate this knowledge to 

solve nonroutine and challenging problems, 

provide mathematical justifications for their 

solutions, and make generalizations and 

provide mathematical justifications for those 

generalizations. These students should reflect 

on their reasoning, and they should understand 

the role of hypotheses, deductive reasoning, 

and conclusions in geometric proofs and 

algebraic arguments made by themselves and 

others. Students should also demonstrate this 

deep knowledge and level of awareness in 

solving problems, using appropriate mathematical language and notation. 

Students at this level should be able to reason 

about functions as mathematical objects. They 

should be able to evaluate logarithmic and 

trigonometric functions and recognize the 

properties and graphs of these functions. They 

should be able to use properties of functions 

to analyze relationships and to determine 

and construct appropriate representations 

for solving problems, including the use of 

advanced features of graphing calculators 

and spreadsheets.

These students should be able to describe the 

impact of linear transformations and outliers 

on measures of spread (including standard 

deviation), analyze predictions based on 

multiple data sets, and apply probability and 

statistical reasoning to solve problems involving conditional probability and compound 

probability.

Twelfth-grade students performing at the 

Advanced level should be able to solve

problems and analyze properties of threedimensional figures. They should be able to 

describe the effects of transformations of 

geometric figures in a plane or in three dimensions, to reason about geometric properties 

using coordinate geometry, and to do computations with vectors and to use vectors to 

represent magnitude and direction.

32 THE NATION’S REPORT CARD 
What Twelfth-Graders Know and Can Do in Mathematics

The item map below illustrates the range of mathematics 

knowledge and skills demonstrated by twelfth-graders. The 

scale scores on the left represent the scores for students who 

were likely to get the items correct. The cut score at the lower 

end of the range for each achievement level is shown in a box 

on the scale. The descriptions of selected assessment questions indicating what students need to do to answer the 

questions correctly are listed on the right, along with the 

corresponding mathematics content areas. 

For example, students performing in the middle of the Basic

range (with a score of 163) were likely to be able to determine 

a nonequivalent expression. Students performing in the 

middle of the Proficient range (with a score of 193) were likely 

to be able to use an algebraic model to solve a geometric 

problem.

GRADE 12 NAEP MATHEMATICS ITEM MAP

	 Scalescore	 Contentarea Question description Advanced Proficient Basic

300

//

235 Algebra Find the annual rate of population growth (calculator available) (shown on pages 36 and 37)

233 Measurement and geometry Identify the equation of an ellipse with a given property

230 Algebra Solve an inequality involving absolute value

226 Data analysis, statistics, and probability Critique a misleading data graph

224 Algebra Find the domain of a function in mathematical context

220 Data analysis, statistics, and probability Compare correlation coefficients from scatterplots (calculator available)

216 Measurement and geometry Prove that a given figure is a parallelogram

216

215 Data analysis, statistics, and probability Identify the linear equation that best fits the data in a scatterplot

209 Measurement and geometry Find the length of a diagonal in a 3-D figure

208 Number properties and operations Determine the cost after multiple discounts (calculator available)

199 Measurement and geometry Use trigonometry to find the height of an object (calculator available) (shown on page 35)

193 Algebra Use an algebraic model to solve a geometric problem (calculator available)

188 Algebra Solve a system of linear equations

186 Data analysis, statistics, and probability Identify an appropriate method for selecting a random sample (shown on page 38)

178 Number properties and operations Estimate the amount of time for a problem in context (calculator available)

176 Measurement and geometry Recognize the dilation of a figure in the xy-plane

176

175 Number properties and operations Give a counterexample to a numerical conjecture

174 Measurement and geometry Use the scale on a map to determine distance (ruler/protractor available)

172 Algebra Identify an algebraic expression that models a scenario (calculator available)

171 Number properties and operations Multiply a 3-digit number by a decimal number (shown on page 34)

167 Data analysis, statistics, and probability Make a prediction from the data in a scatterplot

163 Algebra Determine a nonequivalent expression

147 Measurement and geometry Solve a problem involving area in context (calculator available)

145 Data analysis, statistics, and probability Read a graph of normally distributed data

144 Data analysis, statistics, and probability Determine a conditional probability in context

141

140 Algebra Identify the solution to a system of equations from a graph

136 Measurement and geometry Draw a line of symmetry on a geometric figure (calculator available)

125 Number properties and operations Solve a problem in context using a percentage (calculator available)

122 Algebra Evaluate the function at a point

121 Number properties and operations Solve a story problem using multiple operations (calculator available)

118 Number properties and operations Determine the distance on a map given the scale

111 Measurement and geometry Identify the property of parallel lines in the plane

//

0

NOTE: Regular type denotes a constructed-response question. Italic type denotes a multiple-choice question. The position of a question on the scale represents the scale score attained by students who had a 65 percent probability 

of successfully answering a constructed-response question, or a 72 percent probability of correctly answering a five-option multiple-choice question. For constructed-response questions, the question description represents students’ 

performance at the highest scoring level. Scale score ranges for mathematics achievement levels are referenced on the map. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2009 Mathematics Assessment. 

GRADE 12 READING AND MATHEMATICS 2009 NATIONAL MATHEMATICS RESULTS 33
Sample Question: Number Properties and Operations

This sample multiple-choice question measures the performance of grade 12 students in the number properties and 

operations content area. The question assesses students’ 

skill in performing arithmetic operations involving whole 

numbers and decimals. Students were not permitted to use

a calculator to answer this question.

The correct answer to this question is 108 (Choice B). Two of 

the incorrect answer choices (Choice A and Choice E) are 

place-value errors resulting from the incorrect placement of the

	 	 360 × 0.3 =

	 10.8

	 108

	 120

	 980

	 1,080

A

C

D

E

SAMPLE QUESTION:

B

decimal point in the product. Choice C is the result of dividing 

360 by 3, which would be obtained if 0.3 were incorrectly 

converted to the fraction 1

3

 (the exact value of 1

3

 is 0.3 = 

0.333...). Choice D results from a combination of a multiplication error and a place-value error.

Sixty-four percent of twelfth-graders selected the correct 

answer for this question.

Percentage of twelfth-grade students in each response category:

2009

Choice A Choice B Choice C Choice D Choice E Omitted

12 64 10 5 8 1 

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding.

The table below shows the percentage of twelfth-graders 

within each achievement level who answered this question 

correctly. For example, 67 percent of twelfth-graders at the 

Basic level correctly selected Choice B.

Percentage correct for twelfth-grade students at each achievement

level: 2009

Overall Below Basic At Basic At Proficient At Advanced

64 49 67 79 98

34 THE NATION’S REPORT CARD 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2009 Mathematics Assessment.
Sample Question: Measurement and Geometry

This sample twelfth-grade question in the measurement 

and geometry content area assesses the use of indirect 

measurement in triangles. The solution to this multiple-choice 

question is based on properties of right triangles. Students 

were permitted to use a scientific or graphing calculator to 

answer this question.

The correct answer (Choice B) can be found using a trigonometric relationship. Since h feet is the length of the leg opposite the given angle and 200 feet is the length of the leg 

adjacent to the given angle, the value of h can be found using 

the trigonometric ratio tan(21°) = h feet

200 feet or, equivalently,

h = 200 · tan(21°). Using a calculator to determine that 

tan(21°) ≈ 0.384, it follows that h ≈ 0.384 × 200 = 76.8. 

Rounding this to the nearest foot gives the correct answer

of 77. The most common incorrect answer (Choice C) is

the value of 200 · cos(21°). Choice A is the value of

200 · sin(21°). Choice D can be obtained by incorrectly using 

the two values given in the question in the Pythagorean 

Theorem ( 2002

 + 212 √ ≈ 201). Choice E is the value of 

200

tan(21°).

This question was answered correctly by 30 percent of 

twelfth-grade students. 

Percentage of twelfth-grade students in each response category: 2009

Choice A Choice B Choice C Choice D Choice E Omitted

9 30 24 23 10 4 

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding.

The table below shows the percentage of twelfth-graders 

within each achievement level who answered this question 

correctly. For example, 59 percent of twelfth-graders at the 

Proficient level selected the correct answer for this question.

Percentage correct for twelfth-grade students at each achievement

level: 2009

Overall Below Basic At Basic At Proficient At Advanced

30 16 23 59 95

SAMPLE QUESTION:

	 On level ground from a distance of

200 feet, the angle of elevation to

the top of a building is 21°, as

shown in the figure above. What is

the height h of the building, to the

nearest foot?

	 	 72

	 	 77

	 187

	 201

	 521

A

C

E

B

D

GRADE 12 READING AND MATHEMATICS 2009 NATIONAL MATHEMATICS RESULTS 35

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2009 Mathematics Assessment.
Sample Question: Algebra

This sample constructed-response question measures student performance in the algebra content area. The question is 

based on an algebraic representation for exponential growth. 

Students were permitted to use a calculator to answer this 

question.

There are two parts to this question. Part (a) of this

question can be answered by recognizing that 1990

corresponds to the value t = 0 and then determining that

P = 50,000(1 + r)0 = 50,000 · 1 = 50,000. Part (b) of this 

question can be answered by recognizing that 2001 is 11 years 

after 1990 and corresponds to the value t = 11. Solving the 

equation 100,000 = 50,000(1 + r)11 for r, the correct answer 

can be presented either as an exact value, 2 – 1 11 r = √ , or as 

an approximation, r = 0.065 or 6.5%. Student responses that 

ranged from 6 to 7 percent were given credit for part (b).

Student responses to this question were rated as “Correct,” 

“Partial,” or “Incorrect” as described below. Note that two 

different types of partially correct responses were captured 

during scoring.

Correct responses correctly answered both parts of the 

question.

Partial 1 responses correctly answered part (a) only.

Partial 2 responses correctly answered part (b) only.

Incorrect responses did not answer either part correctly.

The sample student response on the right was rated 

“Correct,” with answers of “50,000 people” for part (a) and 

“r ≈ .065” for part (b). Although it is not required, this 

response shows complete work for both parts of the question.

SAMPLE QUESTION:

	 The population P of a certain town is

given by the equation P = 50,000(1 + r)

t

, where r is the annual rate of population

increase and t is the number of years

since 1990.

Correct response:

(a)	 What was the population in 1990 ?

Answer:

36 THE NATION’S REPORT CARD 

(b)	 In 2001 the population was

100,000. What was the annual rate

of population increase?

Answer:

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2009 Mathematics Assessment.
The first sample student response on the right was rated 

“Partial 1,” with a correct answer of “50,000” for part (a) and 

an incorrect answer of “ 2 – 1 19√ ” for part (b), which results 

from using an incorrect value of t = 19. The second sample 

response was rated “Partial 2,” with an incorrect answer of 

“72,000” for part (a) and a correct answer of “6%” for 

part (b). No work is shown in this response.

Nine percent of twelfth-grade students correctly answered 

both parts of the question, and the responses were rated 

“Correct.” Forty-six percent of the responses correctly 

answered part (a)—these were responses that were rated 

“Partial 1.” One percent of the responses that did not correctly 

answer part (a) were able to correctly answer part (b), which 

were rated “Partial 2.”

Percentage of twelfth-grade students in each response category: 2009

Correct Partial 1 Partial 2 Incorrect Omitted

9 46 1 34 8 

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because the percentage of responses rated as “Off-task” is not shown. Off-task 

responses are those that do not provide any information related to the assessment task.

The table below shows the percentage of twelfth-graders 

within each achievement level whose answers were rated 

as “Correct” or “Partial” for this question. The results for 

“Partial 1” and “Partial 2” were combined into a single “Partial” 

category. For example, 31 percent of twelfth-graders at the 

Proficient level provided answers that were rated as “Correct,” 

and 59 percent of twelfth-graders at the Proficient level provided answers that were rated as “Partial.”

Percentage of answers rated as “Correct” and “Partial” for twelfthgrade students at each achievement level: 2009

Scoring

level Overall

Below

Basic

At

Basic

At

Proficient

At

Advanced

Correct 9 # 2 31 71

Partial 47 30 58 59 28

# Rounds to zero.

SAMPLE QUESTION:

	 The population P of a certain town is

given by the equation P = 50,000(1 + r)

t

, where r is the annual rate of population

increase and t is the number of years

since 1990.

Partial 1 response:

(a)	 What was the population in 1990 ?

Answer:

(b)	 In 2001 the population was

100,000. What was the annual rate

of population increase?

Answer:

Partial 2 response:

(a)	 What	was	the	population	in	1990	?

Answer:

(b)	 In 2001 the population was

100,000. What was the annual rate

of population increase?

Answer:

GRADE 12 READING AND MATHEMATICS 2009 NATIONAL MATHEMATICS RESULTS 37

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2009 Mathematics Assessment.
Sample Question: Data Analysis, Statistics, and Probability

This sample multiple-choice question measures the performance of grade 12 students in the data analysis, statistics, 

and probability content area. The question assesses understanding of the design of a simple random sample. Students 

were not permitted to use a calculator to answer this 

question.

An appropriate sample for this survey is a random sample 

that includes students who have stopped buying food in the 

school’s cafeteria. There is likely to be a variety of reasons for 

the decline in cafeteria use. To make an accurate probabilistic 

statement about the decline, the sample must not be biased 

by the overrepresentation or underrepresentation of any 

particular group; that is, it must be a random sample from the 

general population. 

Among the choices presented, the correct answer (Choice C) 

provides the best method since it favors no particular group. 

Choice A and Choice B are samples of particular subgroups 

in the school, and they are not likely to be representative 

of all students in the school. For example, students in the 

senior class might be permitted to leave school at lunchtime. 

Choice D is limited to students who eat in the cafeteria and 

therefore may not be representative of students who no 

longer choose to buy food from the cafeteria. Choice E 

lacks an element of randomness in its design since it favors 

students who arrive early.

Sixty percent of students in twelfth grade selected the correct 

answer for this question. 

Percentage of twelfth-grade students in each response category: 2009

Choice A Choice B Choice C Choice D Choice E Omitted

5 2 60 30 3 # 

# Rounds to zero.

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding.

The table below shows the percentage of twelfth-graders 

within each achievement level who answered this question 

correctly. For example, 66 percent of twelfth-graders at the 

Basic level correctly selected Choice C.

Percentage correct for twelfth-grade students at each achievement

level: 2009

Overall Below Basic At Basic At Proficient At Advanced

60 43 66 72 82

SAMPLE QUESTION:

	 The principal of a high school

would like to determine why there

has been a large decline during the

year in the number of students who

buy food in the school’s cafeteria.

To do this, 25 students from the

school will be surveyed. Which

method would be the most appro- priate for selecting the 25 students

to participate in the survey?

	 Randomly select 25 students

from the senior class.

	 Randomly select 25 students

from those taking physics.

	 Randomly select 25 students

from a list of all students at

the school.

	 Randomly select 25 students

from a list of students who eat

in the cafeteria.

	 Give the survey to the first

25 students to arrive at school

in the morning.

A

C

E

B

D

38 THE NATION’S REPORT CARD 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2009 Mathematics Assessment.
State Results

While twelfth-grade results were only reported for the nation in previous assessment years, results from the 2009 reading and mathematics assessments are 

presented for the first time for twelfth-grade public school students in the following 

11 states that volunteered to participate in the twelfth-grade state pilot program:

Arkansas Massachusetts

Connecticut New Hampshire

Florida New Jersey

Idaho South Dakota

Illinois West Virginia

Iowa

Various reasons were cited by NAEP state testing coordinators for participating in 

the pilot program. These included using NAEP results as a common yardstick for 

comparing twelfth-grade students in their state to students in the nation and in 

other pilot states, and establishing a benchmark for how their students are 

performing at the end of their high school careers.

GRADE 12 READING AND MATHEMATICS 2009 STATE RESULTS 39
Seven states score higher than the national average in reading 

The map below shows how the average reading scores for 

twelfth-graders in the 11 participating states compare to the 

score for public school students in the nation (figure 21). 

Average scores in seven states (Connecticut, Idaho, Illinois, 

Iowa, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, and South Dakota) 

Figure 21. Comparison of state and national average scale scores in NAEP reading for twelfth-grade public school students: 2009

were higher than the score for the nation, and scores for three 

states (Arkansas, Florida, and West Virginia) were lower. The 

average score for New Jersey was not significantly different 

from the score for the nation.

CT

NJ

MA

NH

AR

SD ID

IA

FL

IL

WV

Higher than the nation

Not significantly different from the nation

Lower than the nation

Did not participate in the twelfth-grade

state pilot program

40 THE NATION’S REPORT CARD 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2009 Reading Assessment.
States show range of reading comprehension skills

Among the 11 states that participated in the 2009 state pilot, 

the percentages of students performing at or above the 

Proficient level in reading ranged from 29 percent in Arkansas 

and West Virginia to 46 percent in Massachusetts (figure 22). 

All the states had some students performing at the Advanced

level. 

Four of the seven states with higher overall average scores 

than the score for the nation (Connecticut, Massachusetts, 

New Hampshire, and South Dakota) also had higher percentages of students performing at or above Proficient. The 

percentages of students at or above Proficient in Idaho, Illinois, 

Iowa, and New Jersey were not significantly different from the 

percentage for the nation, and the percentages in Arkansas, 

Florida, and West Virginia were lower.

Additional state reading results for grade 12 are provided in 

appendix tables A-6 through A-10.

Figure 22. Average scale scores and achievement-level results in NAEP reading for twelfth-grade public school 

students, by state/jurisdiction: 2009

32 39 27 3

21 35 38 6

22 39 35 4

32 39 27 2

27 37 31 5

21 40 35 4

22 34 36 7

18 41 38 2

20 34 38 8

22 38 35 5

Average score Below Basic Basic Proficient Advanced

30 38 28 4

Arkansas

New Hampshire

Idaho

West Virginia

Nation (public)

Iowa

Connecticut

South Dakota

Massachusetts

Illinois

Florida

New Jersey

280

287

293

290

279

291

292

292

295

292

283

288 26 35 32 6

Percent

100 80 70 90 60 50 40 20 10 30 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 100

NOTE: Eleven states participated in the assessment and met the reporting criteria. Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding.

GRADE 12 READING AND MATHEMATICS 2009 STATE RESULTS 41

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2009 Reading Assessment.
Six states score higher than the nation in mathematics

The map below shows how the overall average mathematics 

scores for twelfth-graders in the 11 participating states compare to the score for public school students in the nation 

(figure 23). Average scores in six states (Connecticut, 

Iowa, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, and 

South Dakota) were higher than the score for the nation, and 

scores for three states (Arkansas, Florida, and West Virginia) 

were lower. The average scores for Idaho and Illinois were not 

significantly different from the score for the nation. 

Figure 23. Comparison of state and national average scale scores in NAEP mathematics for twelfth-grade public school students: 2009

NJ

MA

NH

AR

SD ID

IA

FL

IL

WV

CT

Higher than the nation

Not significantly different from the nation

Lower than the nation

Did not participate in the twelfth-grade

state pilot program

42 THE NATION’S REPORT CARD 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2009 Mathematics Assessment.
States show range of mathematics knowledge and skills

Among the 11 states that participated in the 2009 state pilot, 

the percentages of students performing at or above the 

Proficient level in mathematics ranged from 13 percent in 

West Virginia to 36 percent in Massachusetts (figure 24). 

Of the six states where overall scores were higher than the 

average score for the nation, five states (Connecticut, 

Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, and 

South Dakota) also had higher percentages of students 

performing at or above the Proficient level. The percentages of 

students at or above Proficient in Idaho, Illinois, and Iowa were 

not significantly different from the percentage for the nation, 

and the percentages in Arkansas, Florida, and West Virginia 

were lower.

Additional state mathematics results for grade 12 are provided 

in appendix tables A-16 through A-20.

Figure 24. Average scale scores and achievement-level results in NAEP mathematics for twelfth-grade 

public school students, by state/jurisdiction: 2009

41 43 15 #

34 44 22 1

33 37 27 4

33 41 24 2

26 42 29 3

31 40 26 3

23 48 28 1

29 46 24 1

25 39 31 5

41 40 18 1

48 39 12 1

37 38 22 3

Below Basic Basic Proficient Advanced

Percent

100 80 70 90 60 50 40 20 10 30 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 100

Average score

Arkansas

New Hampshire

Idaho

West Virginia

Nation (public)

Iowa

Connecticut

South Dakota

Massachusetts

Illinois

Florida

New Jersey

146

152

160

153

141

156

156

160

163

154

148

156

# Rounds to zero.

NOTE: Eleven states participated in the assessment and met the reporting criteria. Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding.

GRADE 12 READING AND MATHEMATICS 2009 STATE RESULTS 43

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2009 Mathematics Assessment.
44 THE NATION’S REPORT CARD 

States vary in demographic makeup

Table 6. Percentage of twelfth-grade public school students assessed in NAEP mathematics, by state/jurisdiction and selected characteristics: 2009

Characteristic Nation (pub il c)

Arkansas

Connecticut

Florida

Idaho

Illinois

Iowa

Massachusetts

New Hampshire

New Jersey

South Dakota

West Virginia

Race/ethnicity

White 59 70 71 51 86 64 90 78 94 57 89 94

Black 16 22 13 20 1 16 4 8 1 17 2 4

Hispanic 18 6 13 24 10 14 4 8 2 16 2 1

Asian/Pacific Islander 6 2 3 3 2 4 2 5 2 9 1 1

American Indian/Alaska Native 1 1 # # 1 # # # # # 6 #

School location

City 28 25 24 23 30 27 24 17 15 12 25 13

Suburb 36 10 56 53 16 51 7 68 40 78 # 15

Town 12 24 6 3 24 11 25 2 21 2 31 27

Rural 24 42 14 21 30 11 45 13 25 9 44 46

Parents’ highest education level

Did not finish high school 9 9 5 9 8 8 3 6 4 5 3 7

Graduated from high school 19 25 18 19 17 18 18 16 17 17 15 29

Some education after high school 22 25 21 25 24 23 21 17 19 19 23 24

Graduated from college 47 38 54 43 49 48 55 59 59 55 58 38

Students with disabilities 8 10 8 8 7 9 8 10 14 12 7 13

English language learners 3 3 2 4 2 1 1 2 1 2 1 1

# Rounds to zero.

NOTE: Eleven states participated in the assessment and met the reporting criteria. Black includes African American, Hispanic includes Latino, and Pacific Islander includes Native Hawaiian. Race categories exclude Hispanic origin. For the race/

ethnicity category, results are not shown for students whose race/ethnicity was unclassified. Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding.

Information about the demographic makeup of twelfth-grade 

public school students in the nation and in the 11 participating 

states helps to provide context when making comparisons. 

(Because the percentages of students assessed in reading and 

mathematics are so similar, only the percentages of students 

assessed in mathematics are presented in the table below.) 

While White students made up 59 percent of twelfth-grade 

students in the nation, the percentage of White students in 

the participating states ranged from 51 percent in Florida to 

94 percent in New Hampshire and West Virginia (table 6). 

The percentage of Black students ranged from 1 percent in 

Idaho and New Hampshire to 22 percent in Arkansas, and the 

percentage of Hispanic students ranged from 1 percent in 

West Virginia to 24 percent in Florida. 

The percentage of students attending schools in the suburbs 

in 2009 ranged from less than 1 percent in South Dakota to 

78 percent in New Jersey. The states also varied in the 

percentage of students whose parents graduated from 

college. Thirty-eight percent of the students in Arkansas 

and West Virginia had parents who graduated from 

college, compared to 59 percent in Massachusetts and 

New Hampshire. 

The participating states also differed from the nation in 

the percentage of students with disabilities (SD) and 

English language learners (ELL). Arkansas, Massachusetts, 

New Hampshire, New Jersey, and West Virginia had larger 

percentages of SD students than the nation overall, and Idaho 

had a lower percentage. Florida had a higher percentage of ELL 

students than the nation. The remaining participating states 

had lower percentages, except Arkansas where the percentage 

of ELL students was not significantly different from the nation. 

Web-generated profiles or “snapshots” of state results are 

available for each participating state at http://nces.ed.gov/

nationsreportcard/states/. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2009 Mathematics Assessment.
A Closer Look at State Reading Results

Even though scores for 7 of the 11 participating states were 

higher than the national average overall, not all student demographic groups in those states scored higher than their peers in 

the nation (table 7). White students in Iowa and Hispanic 

students in Idaho scored lower on average than their peers in 

the nation, even though the overall scores in those states were 

higher.

Although the overall score in New Jersey was not significantly 

different from the national average, the score for Asian/Pacific 

Islander students in the state was higher than the score for 

Asian/Pacific Islander students nationally.

Table 7. Average scale scores in NAEP reading for twelfth-grade public school students, by selected characteristics and state/jurisdiction: 2009

State/jurisdiction Overall

Race/ethnicity Gender

Parents’ highest 

education level

White Black Hispanic

Asian/

Pacific 

Islander

American 

Indian/

Alaska 

Native Male Female

Did not 

finish high 

school

Graduated 

from college

Nation (public) 287 295 268 273 298 283 281 293 269 297

Arkansas 280* 287* 259* 269 ‡ ‡ 271* 289* 265 288*

Connecticut 292* 301* 265 273 296 ‡ 285* 300* 269 304*

Florida 283* 289* 269 277 296 ‡ 276* 289* 266 291*

Idaho 290* 293 ‡ 267* ‡ ‡ 285* 296* 266 299

Illinois 292* 299* 273 276 308 ‡ 286* 297 271 302*

Iowa 291* 292* 273 278 295 ‡ 284* 298* 269 296

Massachusetts 295* 299* 273 273 303 ‡ 290* 301* 267 305*

New Hampshire 293* 293 ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ 284 302* 265 302*

New Jersey 288 295 268 273 307* ‡ 282 294 266 299

South Dakota 292* 294 ‡ ‡ ‡ 276 286* 299* 264 297

West Virginia 279* 279* 275 ‡ ‡ ‡ 271* 288* 256* 290*

‡ Reporting standards not met. Sample size insufficient to permit a reliable estimate.

* Significantly different (p < .05) from the nation.

NOTE: Eleven states participated in the assessment and met the reporting criteria. Black includes African American, Hispanic includes Latino, and Pacific Islander includes Native Hawaiian. Race categories exclude Hispanic origin. For the 

parents’ highest education level category, results are shown for the lowest and highest education levels reported by students.

GRADE 12 READING AND MATHEMATICS 2009 STATE RESULTS 45

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2009 Reading Assessment.
A Closer Look at State Mathematics Scores

Even though the overall average score in Florida was lower than 

the national average, Hispanic students in that state scored 

higher than their peers in the nation (table 8).

The average score for Hispanic students in Idaho was lower 

than the score for Hispanic students nationally, even though the 

overall score for Idaho was not significantly different from the 

national average.

Table 8. Average scale scores in NAEP mathematics for twelfth-grade public school students, by selected characteristics and state/jurisdiction: 

2009

Race/ethnicity Gender

Parents’ highest

education level

State/jurisdiction Overall White Black Hispanic

Asian/

Pacific 

Islander

American 

Indian/

Alaska 

Native Male Female

Did not

finish high 

school

Graduated 

from college

Nation (public) 152 160 131 137 175 145 154 151 134 163

Arkansas 146* 154* 121* 136 ‡ ‡ 146* 146* 137 154*

Connecticut 156* 165* 131 132 173 ‡ 157 156* 133 169*

Florida 148* 156* 133 142* 165 ‡ 150* 146* 136 156*

Idaho 153 155* ‡ 131* ‡ ‡ 153 152 130 160

Illinois 154 162 130 141 171 ‡ 156 153 134 164

Iowa 156* 158* 138 134 ‡ ‡ 156 156* 135 163

Massachusetts 163* 167* 135 137 176 ‡ 162* 163* 138 173*

New Hampshire 160* 161 ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ 161* 160* 134 169*

New Jersey 156* 165* 134 139 179 ‡ 157 156* 135 167*

South Dakota 160* 162* ‡ ‡ ‡ 140 160* 159* 134 165

West Virginia 141* 142* 121* ‡ ‡ ‡ 142* 141* 123* 153*

‡ Reporting standards not met. Sample size insufficient to permit a reliable estimate.

* Significantly different (p < .05) from the nation. 

NOTE: Eleven states participated in the assessment and met the reporting criteria. Black includes African American, Hispanic includes Latino, and Pacific Islander includes Native Hawaiian. Race categories exclude Hispanic origin. For the 

parents’ highest education level category, results are shown for the lowest and highest education levels reported by students.

46 THE NATION’S REPORT CARD 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2009 Mathematics Assessment.
State Profiles

Individual state profiles provide a closer look at some key findings for twelfth-grade public 

school students in each state that participated in the 2009 state pilot program, including 

how states’ average scores, percentile scores, and achievement-level performance compare 

with the nation. In addition, information from the student NAEP questionnaires provides 

a context for interpreting results for reading and mathematics. 

GRADE 12 READING AND MATHEMATICS 2009 STATE RESULTS 47
Reading

For Arkansas twelfth-graders in 2009,

•	 the overall average reading score of 280 was lower than the

score for the nation.

Percentile score results showed

•	 a lower score at the 25th percentile compared to the nation.

•	 a lower score at the 75th percentile compared to the nation.

Results for racial/ethnic groups showed

•	 a White – Black score gap of 28 points.

•	 a White – Hispanic score gap of 18 points.

Results for parental education level showed

•	 a 23-point score gap between students who reported neither

of their parents finished high school and those who reported

at least one parent graduated from college.

•	 no significant difference in the score gap compared to the

28-point score gap for the nation.

Results for how often students wrote long answers to 

questions that involved reading

•	 33% wrote long answers at least once a week.

•	 38% wrote long answers once or twice a month.

•	 22% wrote long answers once or twice a year.

•	 	 7% never wrote long answers.

What is the highest level of education 

students plan to complete?

•	 18% plan to go to graduate school.

•	 62% plan to graduate from college.

•	 10% plan to complete some education after high school.

•	 	 7% plan to graduate from high school.

•	 	 1%do not plan to finish high school.

Average scale scores in NAEP reading for twelfth-grade public 

school students in the nation and Arkansas: 2009

* Significantly different (p < .05) from the nation.

Arkansas 280*

Nation (public) 287

200 210 220 230 240 250 260 270 280 290 500

Scale score

0

Percentile scores in NAEP reading for twelfth-grade public school 

students in the nation and Arkansas: 2009

* Significantly different (p < .05) from the nation.

0 500

237 263 289 314 334

Nation (public)

Arkansas

228* 257* 283* 307* 326*

220 230 240 250 260 270 280 290 300 310 320 330 340

10th 25th 50th 75th 90th

Scale score

Average scale scores in NAEP reading for twelfth-grade public 

school students in Arkansas, by race/ethnicity: 2009

287

Black 259

White

Hispanic 269

200 210 220 230 240 250 260 270 280 290

Scale score

0 500

NOTE: Results are not shown for all race/ethnicity categories because of insufficient sample sizes. 

Black includes African American, and Hispanic includes Latino. Race categories exclude Hispanic 

origin.

Achievement-level results in NAEP reading for twelfth-grade 

public school students in the nation and Arkansas: 2009

* Significantly different (p < .05) from the nation.

100

80

60

40

20

0

Percent

Nation Arkansas

(public)

73

37

5

68*

29*

3*

% at Advanced

% at or above Proficient

% at or above Basic

48 THE NATION’S REPORT CARD

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2009 Reading Assessment.
Mathematics

For Arkansas twelfth-graders in 2009,

•	 the overall average mathematics score of 146 was lower

than the score for the nation.

Percentile score results showed

•	 a lower score at the 25th percentile compared to the nation.

•	 a lower score at the 75th percentile compared to the nation.

Results for racial/ethnic groups showed

•	 a White – Black score gap of 33 points.

•	 a White – Hispanic score gap of 18 points.

Results for parental education level showed

•	 a 17-point score gap between students who reported neither

of their parents finished high school and those who reported

at least one parent graduated from college.

•	 a smaller score gap compared to the 29-point score gap for

the nation.

Results for the highest level mathematics course taken by 

students showed

•	 	10% took calculus.

•	 	24% took pre-calculus.

•	 53% took algebra II/trigonometry.

•	 	11% took geometry.

•	 2% took algebra I or lower.

What do students plan to do in the year after 

leaving high school?

•	 	 9% plan to work full time.

•	 	 7% plan to attend vocational, technical, or business school.

•	 16% plan to attend two-year college.

•	 58% plan to attend four-year college, service academy, or

	 	 university.

•	 	 5% plan to serve in the military.

Average scale scores in NAEP mathematics for twelfth-grade 

public school students in the nation and Arkansas: 2009

Arkansas 146*

Nation (public) 152

100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 300

Scale score

0

* Significantly different (p < .05) from the nation.

Percentile scores in NAEP mathematics for twelfth-grade public 

school students in the nation and Arkansas: 2009

* Significantly different (p < .05) from the nation.

129109 153 176 196

106 126* 148* 167* 182*

10th 25th 50th 75th 90th

0 300

Nation (public)

Arkansas

100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200

Scale score

Average scale scores in NAEP mathematics for twelfth-grade public 

school students in Arkansas, by race/ethnicity: 2009

121

154

Black

White

Hispanic 136

100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 300

Scale score

0

# Rounds to zero.

* Significantly different (p < .05) from the nation.

NOTE: Results are not shown for all race/ethnicity categories because of insufficient sample sizes. 

Black includes African American, and Hispanic includes Latino. Race categories exclude Hispanic 

origin.

Achievement-level results in NAEP mathematics for twelfth-grade 

public school students in the nation and Arkansas: 2009

63

3

25

59*

#*

16*

Arkansas

100

80

60

40

20

0

Percent

Nation

(public)

% at Advanced

% at or above Proficient

% at or above Basic

49

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2009 Mathematics Assessment.

GRADE 12 READING AND MATHEMATICS 2009 STATE RESULTS

Arkansas
Reading

Average scale scores in NAEP reading for twelfth-grade public 

school students in the nation and Connecticut: 2009

* Significantly different (p < .05) from the nation.

Connecticut 292*

Nation (public) 287

200 210 220 230 240 250 260 270 280 290 300

Scale score

0 500

Percentile scores in NAEP reading for twelfth-grade public school 

students in the nation and Connecticut: 2009

* Significantly different (p < .05) from the nation.

0 500

237 263 289 314 334

Nation (public)

Connecticut

238 269* 296* 320* 341*

230 240 250 260 270 280 290 300 310 320 330 340 350

10th 25th 50th 75th 90th

Scale score

Average scale scores in NAEP reading for twelfth-grade public 

school students in Connecticut, by race/ethnicity: 2009

301

Black 265

White

273

296 Asian/

Pacific Islander

Hispanic

200 210 220 230 240 250 260 270 280 290 300 310

Scale score

0 500

NOTE: Results are not shown for all race/ethnicity categories because of insufficient sample sizes. 

Black includes African American, Hispanic includes Latino, and Pacific Islander includes Native 

Hawaiian. Race categories exclude Hispanic origin.

Achievement-level results in NAEP reading for twelfth-grade 

public school students in the nation and Connecticut: 2009

* Significantly different (p < .05) from the nation.

100

80

60

40

20

0

Percent

Connecticut

78*

Nation

(public)

73

5

37 43*

7*

% at Advanced

% at or above Proficient

% at or above Basic

50 THE NATION’S REPORT CARD

For Connecticut twelfth-graders in 2009,

•	 the overall average reading score of 292 was higher than the

score for the nation.

Percentile score results showed

•	 a higher score at the 25th percentile compared to the nation.

•	 a higher score at the 75th percentile compared to the nation.

Results for racial/ethnic groups showed

•	 a White – Black score gap of 36 points.

•	 a White – Hispanic score gap of 27 points.2

2The score gap is based on the difference between the unrounded scores as opposed to the

rounded scores shown in the figure.

Results for parental education level showed

•	 a 34-point score gap between students who reported neither

of their parents finished high school and those who reported

at least one parent graduated from college.

•	 no significant difference in the score gap compared to the

28-point score gap for the nation.

Results for how often students wrote long answers to 

questions that involved reading

•	 42% wrote long answers at least once a week.

•	 39% wrote long answers once or twice a month.

•	 16% wrote long answers once or twice a year.

•	 	 3% never wrote long answers.

What is the highest level of education 

students plan to complete?

•	 31%	plan	to	go	to	graduate	school.

•	 56%	plan	to	graduate	from	college.

•	 	 6%	plan	to	complete	some	education	after	high	school.

•	 	 4% plan	to	graduate	from	high	school.

•	 	 1%	do	not	plan	to	finish	high	school.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2009 Reading Assessment.
Mathematics Connecticut

Average scale scores in NAEP mathematics for twelfth-grade 

public school students in the nation and Connecticut: 2009

Connecticut 156*

Nation (public) 152

100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 300

Scale score

0

* Significantly different (p < .05) from the nation.

Percentile scores in NAEP mathematics for twelfth-grade public 

school students in the nation and Connecticut: 2009

* Significantly different (p < .05) from the nation.

129109 153 176 196

113 135* 157* 180* 199

10th 25th 50th 75th 90th

0 300

Nation (public)

Connecticut

100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200

Scale score

Average scale scores in NAEP mathematics for twelfth-grade public 

school students in Connecticut, by race/ethnicity: 2009

131

165

Black

White

173

Hispanic 132

100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 300

Scale score

0

Asian/

Pacific Islander

* Significantly different (p < .05) from the nation.

NOTE: Results are not shown for all race/ethnicity categories because of insufficient sample sizes. 

Black includes African American, Hispanic includes Latino, and Pacific Islander includes Native 

Hawaiian. Race categories exclude Hispanic origin.

Achievement-level results in NAEP mathematics for twelfth-grade 

public school students in the nation and Connecticut: 2009

63

3

25

69*

3

29*

Connecticut

100

80

60

40

20

0

Percent

Nation

(public)

% at Advanced

% at or above Proficient

% at or above Basic

51

For Connecticut twelfth-graders in 2009,

•	 the overall average mathematics score of 156 was higher

than the score for the nation.

Percentile score results showed

•	 a higher score at the 25th percentile compared to the nation.

•	 a higher score at the 75th percentile compared to the nation.

Results for racial/ethnic groups showed

•	 a White – Black score gap of 33 points.3

•	 a White – Hispanic score gap of 32 points.3

3The score gap is based on the difference between the unrounded scores as opposed to the

rounded scores shown in the figure.

Results for parental education level showed

•	 a 36-point score gap between students who reported neither

of their parents finished high school and those who reported

at least one parent graduated from college.

•	 no significant difference in the score gap compared to the

29-point score gap for the nation.

Results for the highest level mathematics course taken by 

students showed

•	 	18% took calculus.

•	 	30% took pre-calculus.

•	 40% took algebra II/trigonometry.

•	 8% took geometry.

•	 4% took algebra I or lower.

What do students plan to do in the year after 

leaving high school?

•	 	 7% plan to work full time.

•	 	 3% plan to attend vocational, technical, or business school.

•	 12% plan to attend two-year college.

•	 71% plan to attend four-year college, service academy, or

	 	 university.

•	 	 3% plan to serve in the military.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2009 Mathematics Assessment.

GRADE 12 READING AND MATHEMATICS 2009 STATE RESULTS
Reading

For Florida twelfth-graders in 2009,

•	 the overall average reading score of 283 was lower than the

score for the nation.

Percentile score results showed

•	 no significant difference in the score at the 25th percentile

compared to the nation.

•	 no significant difference in the score at the 75th percentile

compared to the nation.

Results for racial/ethnic groups showed

•	 a White – Black score gap of 20 points.

•	 a White – Hispanic score gap of 12 points.

Results for parental education level showed

•	 a 25-point score gap between students who reported neither

of their parents finished high school and those who reported

at least one parent graduated from college.

•	 no significant difference in the score gap compared to the

28-point score gap for the nation.

Results for how often students wrote long answers to 

questions that involved reading

•	 34% wrote long answers at least once a week.

•	 35% wrote long answers once or twice a month.

•	 23% wrote long answers once or twice a year.

•	 	 7% never wrote long answers.

What is the highest level of education 

students plan to complete?

•	 25% plan to go to graduate school.

•	 60% plan to graduate from college.

•	 	 7% plan to complete some education after high school.

•	 	 4% plan to graduate from high school.

•	 	 1%do not plan to finish high school.

Average scale scores in NAEP reading for twelfth-grade public 

school students in the nation and Florida: 2009

* Significantly different (p < .05) from the nation.

Florida 283*

Nation (public) 287

200 210 220 230 240 250 260 270 280 290 500

Scale score

0

Percentile scores in NAEP reading for twelfth-grade public school 

students in the nation and Florida: 2009

237 263 289 314 334

Nation (public)

Florida

232* 259 285* 309 330*

10th 25th 50th 75th 90th

230 240 250 260 270 280 290 300 310 320 330 340

Scale score

0 500

Average scale scores in NAEP reading for twelfth-grade public 

school students in Florida, by race/ethnicity: 2009

289

Black 269

White

277

296 Asian/

Pacific Islander

Hispanic

200 210 220 230 240 250 260 270 280 290 300 500

Scale score

0

* Significantly different (p < .05) from the nation.

NOTE: Results are not shown for all race/ethnicity categories because of insufficient sample sizes. 

Black includes African American, Hispanic includes Latino, and Pacific Islander includes Native 

Hawaiian. Race categories exclude Hispanic origin.

Achievement-level results in NAEP reading for twelfth-grade 

public school students in the nation and Florida: 2009

* Significantly different (p < .05) from the nation.

100

80

60

40

20

0

Percent

Nation Florida

(public)

73

5

37

70

4

32*

% at Advanced

% at or above Proficient

% at or above Basic

52 THE NATION’S REPORT CARD

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2009 Reading Assessment.
Mathematics Florida

For Florida twelfth-graders in 2009,

•	 the overall average mathematics score of 148 was lower

than the score for the nation.

Percentile score results showed

•	 no significant difference in the score at the 25th percentile

compared to the nation.

•	 a lower score at the 75th percentile compared to the nation.

Results for racial/ethnic groups showed

•	 a White – Black score gap of 23 points.

•	 a White – Hispanic score gap of 14 points.

Results for parental education level showed

•	 a 20-point score gap between students who reported neither

of their parents finished high school and those who reported

at least one parent graduated from college.

•	 a smaller score gap compared to the 29-point score gap for

the nation.

Results for the highest level mathematics course taken by 

students showed

•	 	12% took calculus.

•	 	17% took pre-calculus.

•	 56% took algebra II/trigonometry.

•	 	13% took geometry.

•	 2% took algebra I or lower.

What do students plan to do in the year after 

leaving high school?

•	 	 5% plan to work full time.

•	 	 6% plan to attend vocational, technical, or business school.

•	 22% plan to attend two-year college.

•	 57% plan to attend four-year college, service academy, or

	 	 university.

•	 	 6% plan to serve in the military.

Average scale scores in NAEP mathematics for twelfth-grade 

public school students in the nation and Florida: 2009

Florida 148*

Nation (public) 152

100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 300

Scale score

0

* Significantly different (p < .05) from the nation.

Percentile scores in NAEP mathematics for twelfth-grade public 

school students in the nation and Florida: 2009

* Significantly different (p < .05) from the nation.

129109 153 176 196

127109 148* 170* 187*

10th 25th 50th 75th 90th

0 300

Nation (public)

Florida

100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200

Scale score

Average scale scores in NAEP mathematics for twelfth-grade public 

school students in Florida, by race/ethnicity: 2009

133

156

Black

White

165

Hispanic 142

100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 300

Scale score

0

Asian/

Pacific Islander

* Significantly different (p < .05) from the nation.

NOTE: Results are not shown for all race/ethnicity categories because of insufficient sample sizes. 

Black includes African American, Hispanic includes Latino, and Pacific Islander includes Native 

Hawaiian. Race categories exclude Hispanic origin.

Achievement-level results in NAEP mathematics for twelfth-grade 

public school students in the nation and Florida: 2009

63

3

25

59*

1*

19*

Florida

100

80

60

40

20

0

Percent

Nation

(public)

% at Advanced

% at or above Proficient

% at or above Basic

53

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2009 Mathematics Assessment.

GRADE 12 READING AND MATHEMATICS 2009 STATE RESULTS
Reading

Average scale scores in NAEP reading for twelfth-grade public 

school students in the nation and Idaho: 2009

* Significantly different (p < .05) from the nation.

Idaho 290*

Nation (public) 287

200 210 220 230 240 250 260 270 280 290 500

Scale score

0

Percentile scores in NAEP reading for twelfth-grade public school 

students in the nation and Idaho: 2009

237 263 289 314 334

Nation (public)

Idaho

244* 268* 293* 315 333

10th 25th 50th 75th 90th

0 230 240 250 260 270 280 290 300 310 320 330 340 500

Scale score

* Significantly different (p < .05) from the nation.

Average scale scores in NAEP reading for twelfth-grade public 

school students in Idaho, by race/ethnicity: 2009

White 293

Hispanic 267

200 210 220 230 240 250 260 270 280 290 300 500

Scale score

0

NOTE: Results are not shown for all race/ethnicity categories because of insufficient sample sizes. 

White excludes Hispanic origin. Hispanic includes Latino.

Achievement-level results in NAEP reading for twelfth-grade 

public school students in the nation and Idaho: 2009

* Significantly different (p < .05) from the nation.

100

80

60

40

20

0

Percent

Nation Idaho

(public)

73

5

37

78*

4

39

For Idaho twelfth-graders in 2009,

•	 the overall average reading score of 290 was higher than the

score for the nation.

Percentile score results showed

•	 a higher score at the 25th percentile compared to the nation.

•	 no significant difference in the score at the 75th percentile

compared to the nation.

Results for racial/ethnic groups showed

•	 a White – Hispanic score gap of 26 points.

Results for parental education level showed

•	 a 33-point score gap between students who reported neither

of their parents finished high school and those who reported

at least one parent graduated from college.

•	 no significant difference in the score gap compared to the

28-point score gap for the nation.

Results for how often students wrote long answers to 

questions that involved reading

•	 32% wrote long answers at least once a week.

•	 39% wrote long answers once or twice a month.

•	 24% wrote long answers once or twice a year.

•	 	 5% never wrote long answers.

What is the highest level of education 

students plan to complete?

•	 17% plan to go to graduate school.

•	 62% plan to graduate from college.

•	 11% plan to complete some education after high school.

•	 	 6% plan to graduate from high school.

•	 	 1%do not plan to finish high school.

% at Advanced

% at or above Proficient

% at or above Basic

54 THE NATION’S REPORT CARD

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2009 Reading Assessment.
Mathematics Idaho

Average scale scores in NAEP mathematics for twelfth-grade 

public school students in the nation and Idaho: 2009

Idaho 153

Nation (public) 152

100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 300

Scale score

0

Percentile scores in NAEP mathematics for twelfth-grade public 

school students in the nation and Idaho: 2009

* Significantly different (p < .05) from the nation.

129109 153 176 196

113* 154133* 174 191*

10th 25th 50th 75th 90th

0 300

Nation (public)

Idaho

100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200

Scale score

Average scale scores in NAEP mathematics for twelfth-grade public 

school students in Idaho, by race/ethnicity: 2009

White 155

Hispanic 131

100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 300

Scale score

0

NOTE: Results are not shown for all race/ethnicity categories because of insufficient sample sizes. 

White excludes Hispanic origin. Hispanic includes Latino.

* Significantly different (p < .05) from the nation.

Achievement-level results in NAEP mathematics for twelfth-grade 

public school students in the nation and Idaho: 2009

63

3

25

66

1*

23

Idaho

100

80

60

40

20

0

Percent

Nation

(public)

% at Advanced

% at or above Proficient

% at or above Basic

GRADE 12 READING AND MATHEMATICS 2009 STATE RESULTS 55

For Idaho twelfth-graders in 2009,

•	 the overall average mathematics score of 153 was not

significantly different from the score for the nation.

Percentile score results showed

•	 a higher score at the 25th percentile compared to the nation.

•	 no significant difference in the score at the 75th percentile

compared to the nation.

Results for racial/ethnic groups showed

•	 a White – Hispanic score gap of 25 points.4

4 The score gap is based on the difference between the unrounded scores as opposed to the

rounded scores shown in the figure.

Results for parental education level showed

•	 a 30-point score gap between students who reported neither

of their parents finished high school and those who reported

at least one parent graduated from college.

•	 no significant difference in the score gap compared to the

29-point score gap for the nation.

Results for the highest level mathematics course taken by 

students showed

•	 	13% took calculus.

•	 	20% took pre-calculus.

•	 38% took algebra II/trigonometry.

•	 	17% took geometry.

•	 11% took algebra I or lower.

What do students plan to do in the year after 

leaving high school?

•	 13% plan to work full time.

•	 	 6% plan to attend vocational, technical, or business school.

•	 16% plan to attend two-year college.

•	 50% plan to attend four-year college, service academy, or

	 	 university.

•	 	 6% plan to serve in the military.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2009 Mathematics Assessment.
Reading

Average scale scores in NAEP reading for twelfth-grade public 

school students in the nation and Illinois: 2009

* Significantly different (p < .05) from the nation.

Illinois 292*

Nation (public) 287

200 210 220 230 240 250 260 270 280 290 300

Scale score

0 500

Percentile scores in NAEP reading for twelfth-grade public school 

students in the nation and Illinois: 2009

* Significantly different (p < .05) from the nation.

237 263 289 314 334

Nation (public)

Illinois

245* 269* 293* 317 335

10th 25th 50th 75th 90th

230 240 250 260 270 280 290 300 310 320 330 340

Scale score

0 500

Average scale scores in NAEP reading for twelfth-grade public 

school students in Illinois, by race/ethnicity: 2009

299

Black 273

White

276

308 Asian/

Pacific Islander

Hispanic

200 210 220 230 240 250 260 270 280 290 300 310

Scale score

0 500

NOTE: Results are not shown for all race/ethnicity categories because of insufficient sample sizes. 

Black includes African American, Hispanic includes Latino, and Pacific Islander includes Native 

Hawaiian. Race categories exclude Hispanic origin.

Achievement-level results in NAEP reading for twelfth-grade 

public school students in the nation and Illinois: 2009

* Significantly different (p < .05) from the nation.

100

80

60

40

20

0

Percent

Illinois

78*

Nation

(public)

73

5 5

37 40

% at Advanced

% at or above Proficient

% at or above Basic

56 THE NATION’S REPORT CARD

For Illinois twelfth-graders in 2009,

•	 the overall average reading score of 292 was higher than the

score for the nation.

Percentile score results showed

•	 a higher score at the 25th percentile compared to the nation.

•	 no significant difference in the score at the 75th percentile

compared to the nation.

Results for racial/ethnic groups showed

•	 a White – Black score gap of 26 points.

•	 a White – Hispanic score gap of 22 points.5

5The score gap is based on the difference between the unrounded scores as opposed to the rounded scores shown in the figure.

Results for parental education level showed

•	 a 31-point score gap between students who reported neither

of their parents finished high school and those who reported

at least one parent graduated from college.

•	 no significant difference in the score gap compared to the

28-point score gap for the nation.

Results for how often students wrote long answers to 

questions that involved reading

•	 33% wrote long answers at least once a week.

•	 39% wrote long answers once or twice a month.

•	 23% wrote long answers once or twice a year.

•	 	 5% never wrote long answers.

What is the highest level of education 

students plan to complete?

•	 27% plan to go to graduate school.

•	 62% plan to graduate from college.

•	 	 6% plan to complete some education after high school.

•	 	 3% plan to graduate from high school.

•	 Less than 1%do not plan to finish high school.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2009 Reading Assessment.
Mathematics Illinois

Average scale scores in NAEP mathematics for twelfth-grade 

public school students in the nation and Illinois: 2009

Illinois 154

Nation (public) 152

100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 300

Scale score

0

Percentile scale scores in NAEP mathematics for twelfth-grade public 

school students in the nation and Illinois: 2009

129109 153 176 196

133112 155 177 195

10th 25th 50th 75th 90th

0 300

Nation (public)

Illinois

100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200

Scale score

Average scale scores in NAEP mathematics for twelfth-grade public 

school students in Illinois, by race/ethnicity: 2009

130

162

Black

White

171

Hispanic 141

100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 300

Scale score

0

Asian/

Pacific Islander

NOTE: Results are not shown for all race/ethnicity categories because of insufficient sample sizes. 

Black includes African American, Hispanic includes Latino, and Pacific Islander includes Native 

Hawaiian. Race categories exclude Hispanic origin.

Achievement-level results in NAEP mathematics for twelfth-grade 

public school students in the nation and Illinois: 2009

63

3

25

67

2

26

Illinois

100

80

60

40

20

0

Percent

Nation

(public)

% at Advanced

% at or above Proficient

% at or above Basic

GRADE 12 READING AND MATHEMATICS 2009 STATE RESULTS 57

For Illinois twelfth-graders in 2009,

•	 the overall average mathematics score of 154 was not

significantly different from the score for the nation.

Percentile score results showed

•	 no significant difference in the score at the 25th percentile

compared to the nation.

•	 no significant difference in the score at the 75th percentile

compared to the nation.

Results for racial/ethnic groups showed

•	 a White – Black score gap of 32 points.

•	 a White – Hispanic score gap of 20 points.6

6The score gap is based on the difference between the unrounded scores as opposed to the

rounded scores shown in the figure.

Results for parental education level showed

•	 a 30-point score gap between students who reported neither of

their parents finished high school and those who reported at least

one parent graduated from college.

•	 no significant difference in the score gap compared to the

29-point score gap forthe nation.

Results for the highest level mathematics course taken by 

students showed

•	 	14% took calculus.

•	 	25% took pre-calculus.

•	 48% took algebra II/trigonometry.

•	 	10% took geometry.

•	 3% took algebra I or lower.

What do students plan to do in the year after 

leaving high school?

•	 	 6% plan to work full time.

•	 	 4% plan to attend vocational, technical, or business school.

•	 20% plan to attend two-year college.

•	 61% plan to attend four-year college, service academy, or

	 	 university.

•	 	 4% plan to serve in the military.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2009 Mathematics Assessment.
Reading

For Iowa twelfth-graders in 2009,

•	 the overall average reading score of 291 was higher than the

score for the nation.

Percentile score results showed

•	 a higher score at the 25th percentile compared to the nation.

•	 no significant difference in the score at the 75th percentile

compared to the nation.

Results for racial/ethnic groups showed

•	 a White – Black score gap of 19 points.

•	 a White – Hispanic score gap of 13 points.7

7The score gap is based on the difference between the unrounded scores as opposed to the

rounded scores shown in the figure.

Results for parental education level showed

•	 a 27-point score gap between students who reported neither

of their parents finished high school and those who reported

at least one parent graduated from college.

•	 no significant difference in the score gap compared to the

28-point score gap for the nation.

Results for how often students wrote long answers to 

questions that involved reading

•	 25% wrote long answers at least once a week.

•	 39% wrote long answers once or twice a month.

•	 28% wrote long answers once or twice a year.

•	 	 8% never wrote long answers.

What is the highest level of education 

students plan to complete?

•	 18% plan to go to graduate school.

•	 67% plan to graduate from college.

•	 	 8% plan to complete some education after high school.

•	 	 5% plan to graduate from high school.

•	 	 1%do not plan to finish high school.

Average scale scores in NAEP reading for twelfth-grade public 

school students in the nation and Iowa: 2009

* Significantly different (p < .05) from the nation.

Iowa 291*

Nation (public) 287

200 210 220 230 240 250 260 270 280 290 300

Scale score

0 500

Percentile scores in NAEP reading for twelfth-grade public school 

students in the nation and Iowa: 2009

237 263 289 314 334

Nation (public)

Iowa

246* 270* 293* 314 332

10th 25th 50th 75th 90th

230 240 250 260 270 280 290 300 310 320 330 340

Scale score

0 500

Average scale scores in NAEP reading for twelfth-grade public 

school students in Iowa, by race/ethnicity: 2009

R-SG-IA-reading

292

Black 273

White

278

295 Asian/

Pacific Islander

Hispanic

200 210 220 230 240 250 260 270 280 290 300 500

Scale score

0

* Significantly different (p < .05) from the nation.

NOTE: Results are not shown for all race/ethnicity categories because of insufficient sample sizes. 

Black includes African American, Hispanic includes Latino, and Pacific Islander includes Native 

Hawaiian. Race categories exclude Hispanic origin.

Achievement-level results in NAEP reading for twelfth-grade 

public school students in the nation and Iowa: 2009

* Significantly different (p < .05) from the nation.

100

80

60

40

20

0

Percent

Nation Iowa

(public)

73

5

37

79*

4

39

% at Advanced

% at or above Proficient

% at or above Basic

58 THE NATION’S REPORT CARD

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2009 Reading Assessment.
Mathematics

For Iowa twelfth-graders in 2009,

•	 the overall average mathematics score of 156 was higher

than the score for the nation.

Percentile score results showed

•	 a higher score at the 25th percentile compared to the nation.

•	 no significant difference in the score at the 75th percentile

compared to the nation.

Results for racial/ethnic groups showed

•	 a White – Black score gap of 20 points.

•	 a White – Hispanic score gap of 24 points.

Results for parental education level showed

•	 a 29-point score gap between students who reported neither

of their parents finished high school and those who reported

at least one parent graduated from college.

•	 no significant difference in the score gap compared to the

29-point score gap for the nation.

Results for the highest level mathematics course taken by 

students showed

•	 	14% took calculus.

•	 	21% took pre-calculus.

•	 41% took algebra II/trigonometry.

•	 	11% took geometry.

•	 13% took algebra I or lower.

What do students plan to do in the year after 

leaving high school?

•	 	 8% plan to work full time.

•	 	 4% plan to attend vocational, technical, or business school.

•	 28% plan to attend two-year college.

•	 51% plan to attend four-year college, service academy, or

	 	 university.

•	 	 4% plan to serve in the military.

Iowa

Average scale scores in NAEP mathematics for twelfth-grade 

public school students in the nation and Iowa: 2009

Iowa 156*

Nation (public) 152

100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 300

Scale score

0

Percentile scores in NAEP mathematics for twelfth-grade public 

school students in the nation and Iowa: 2009

* Significantly different (p < .05) from the nation.

129109 153 176 196

138*119* 158* 176 192*

10th 25th 50th 75th 90th

0 300

Nation (public)

Iowa

100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200

Scale score

* Significantly different (p < .05) from the nation.

Average scale scores in NAEP mathematics for twelfth-grade public 

school students in Iowa, by race/ethnicity: 2009

138

158

Black

White

Hispanic 134

100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 300

Scale score

0

* Significantly different (p < .05) from the nation.

NOTE: Results are not shown for all race/ethnicity categories because of insufficient sample sizes. 

Black includes African American, and Hispanic includes Latino. Race categories exclude Hispanic 

origin.

Achievement-level results in NAEP mathematics for twelfth-grade 

public school students in the nation and Iowa: 2009

63

3

25

71*

1*

25

Iowa

100

80

60

40

20

0

Percent

Nation

(public)

% at Advanced

% at or above Proficient

% at or above Basic

59

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2009 Mathematics Assessment.

GRADE 12 READING AND MATHEMATICS 2009 STATE RESULTS
Reading

[State]

For Massachusetts twelfth-graders in 2009,

•	 the overall average reading score of 295 was higher than the

score for the nation.

Percentile score results showed

•	 a higher score at the 25th percentile compared to the nation.

•	 a higher score at the 75th percentile compared to the nation.

Results for racial/ethnic groups showed

•	 a White – Black score gap of 26 points.

•	 a White – Hispanic score gap of 26 points.

Results for parental education level showed

•	 a 37-point score gap between students who reported neither

of their parents finished high school and those who reported

at least one parent graduated from college.

•	 no significant difference in the score gap compared to the

28-point score gap for the nation.

Results for how often students wrote long answers to 

questions that involved reading

•	 36% wrote long answers at least once a week.

•	 43% wrote long answers once or twice a month.

•	 17% wrote long answers once or twice a year.

•	 	 4% never wrote long answers.

What is the highest level of education 

students plan to complete?

•	 30% plan to go to graduate school.

•	 57% plan to graduate from college.

•	 	 6% plan to complete some education after high school.

•	 	 4% plan to graduate from high school.

•	 	 1%do not plan to finish high school.

Average scale scores in NAEP reading for twelfth-grade public 

school students in the nation and Massachusetts: 2009

* Significantly different (p < .05) from the nation.

Massachusetts 295*

Nation (public) 287

200 210 220 230 240 250 260 270 280 290 300

Scale score

0 500

Percentile scores in NAEP reading for twelfth-grade public school 

students in the nation and Massachusetts: 2009

* Significantly different (p < .05) from the nation.

0 500

237 263 289 314 334

Nation (public)

Massachusetts

245* 272* 298* 322* 341*

230 240 250 260 270 280 290 300 310 320 330 340 350

10th 25th 50th 75th 90th

Scale score

Average scale scores in NAEP reading for twelfth-grade public 

school students in Massachusetts, by race/ethnicity: 2009

299

Black 273

White

273

303 Asian/

Pacific Islander

Hispanic

200 210 220 230 240 250 260 270 280 290 300 310

Scale score

0 500

NOTE: Results are not shown for all race/ethnicity categories because of insufficient sample sizes. 

Black includes African American, Hispanic includes Latino, and Pacific Islander includes Native 

Hawaiian. Race categories exclude Hispanic origin.

Achievement-level results in NAEP reading for twelfth-grade 

public school students in the nation and Massachusetts: 2009

* Significantly different (p < .05) from the nation.

100

80

60

40

20

0

Percent

Massachusetts

80*

Nation

(public)

73

5

8*

37 46*

% at Advanced

% at or above Proficient

% at or above Basic

60 THE NATION’S REPORT CARD

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2009 Reading Assessment.
Mathematics

For Massachusetts twelfth-graders in 2009,

•	 the overall average mathematics score of 163 was higher

than the score for the nation.

Percentile score results showed

•	 a higher score at the 25th percentile compared to the nation.

•	 a higher score at the 75th percentile compared to the nation.

Results for racial/ethnic groups showed

•	 a White – Black score gap of 32 points.

•	 a White – Hispanic score gap of 30 points.

Results for parental education level showed

•	 a 34-point score gap between students who reported neither

of their parents finished high school and those who reported

at least one parent graduated from college.

•	 no significant difference in the score gap compared to the

29-point score gap for the nation.

Results for the highest level mathematics course taken by 

students showed

•	 	27% took calculus.

•	 	27% took pre-calculus.

•	 38% took algebra II/trigonometry.

•	 7% took geometry.

•	 1% took algebra I or lower.

What do students plan to do in the year after 

leaving high school?

•	 	 7% plan to work full time.

•	 	 4% plan to attend vocational, technical, or business school.

•	 11% plan to attend two-year college.

•	 71% plan to attend four-year college, service academy, or

	 	 university.

•	 	 3% plan to serve in the military.

Average scale scores in NAEP mathematics for twelfth-grade 

public school students in the nation and Massachusetts: 2009

Massachusetts 163*

Nation (public) 152

100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 300

Scale score

0

* Significantly different (p < .05) from the nation.

Percentile scores in NAEP mathematics for twelfth-grade public 

school students in the nation and Massachusetts: 2009

129109 153 176 196

119* 141* 164* 186* 205*

10th 25th 50th 75th 90th

0

Nation (public)

Massachusetts

100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 210 300

Scale score

Average scale scores in NAEP mathematics for twelfth-grade public 

school students in Massachusetts, by race/ethnicity: 2009

135

167

Black

White

176

Hispanic 137

100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 300

Scale score

0

Asian/

Pacific Islander

* Significantly different (p < .05) from the nation.

Massachusetts

* Significantly different (p < .05) from the nation.

NOTE: Results are not shown for all race/ethnicity categories because of insufficient sample sizes. 

Black includes African American, Hispanic includes Latino, and Pacific Islander includes Native 

Hawaiian. Race categories exclude Hispanic origin.

Achievement-level results in NAEP mathematics for twelfth-grade 

public school students in the nation and Massachusetts: 2009

63

3

25

75*

5*

36*

Massachusetts

100

80

60

40

20

0

Percent

Nation

(public)

% at Advanced

% at or above Proficient

% at or above Basic

GRADE 12 READING AND MATHEMATICS 2009 STATE RESULTS 61

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2009 Mathematics Assessment.
Reading

[State]

For New Hampshire twelfth-graders in 

2009,

•	 the overall average reading score of 293 was higher than the

score for the nation.

Percentile score results showed

•	 a higher score at the 25th percentile compared to the nation.

•	 a higher score at the 75th percentile compared to the nation.

Results for racial/ethnic groups showed

•	 an average score of 293 for White students.

Results for parental education level showed

•	 a 36-point score gap between students who reported neither

of their parents finished high school and those who reported

at least one parent graduated from college.

•	 no significant difference in the score gap compared to the

28-point score gap for the nation.

Results for how often students wrote long answers to 

questions that involved reading

•	 34% wrote long answers at least once a week.

•	 38% wrote long answers once or twice a month.

•	 22% wrote long answers once or twice a year.

•	 	 6% never wrote long answers.

What is the highest level of education 

students plan to complete?

•	 24% plan to go to graduate school.

•	 59% plan to graduate from college.

•	 	 9% plan to complete some education after high school.

•	 	 4% plan to graduate from high school.

•	 	 1%do not plan to finish high school.

Average scale scores in NAEP reading for twelfth-grade public 

school students in the nation and New Hampshire: 2009

* Significantly different (p < .05) from the nation.

New Hampshire 293*

Nation (public) 287

200 210 220 230 240 250 260 270 280 290 300

Scale score

0 500

Percentile scores in NAEP reading for twelfth-grade public school 

students in the nation and New Hampshire: 2009

R-NH-br-04

237 263 289 314 334

Nation (public)

New Hampshire

243 270* 297* 319* 338*

10th 25th 50th 75th 90th

230 240 250 260 270 280 290 300 310 320 330 340

Scale score

0 500

Average scale scores in NAEP reading for twelfth-grade public 

school students in New Hampshire, by race/ethnicity: 2009

White 293

200 210 220 230 240 250 260 270 280 290 300 500

Scale score

0

* Significantly different (p < .05) from the nation.

NOTE: Results are not shown for all race/ethnicity categories because of insufficient sample sizes. 

White excludes Hispanic origin.

Achievement-level results in NAEP reading for twelfth-grade 

public school students in the nation and New Hampshire: 2009

* Significantly different (p < .05) from the nation.

100

80

60

40

20

0

Percent

Nation New Hampshire

(public)

73

5

37

79*

6

44*

% at Advanced

% at or above Proficient

% at or above Basic

62 THE NATION’S REPORT CARD

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2009 Reading Assessment.
Mathematics

For New Hampshire twelfth-graders in 

2009,

•	 the overall average mathematics score of 160 was higher

than the score for the nation.

Percentile score results showed

•	 a higher score at the 25th percentile compared to the nation.

•	 a higher score at the 75th percentile compared to the nation.

Results for racial/ethnic groups showed

•	 an average score of 161 for White students.

Results for parental education level showed

•	 a 35-point score gap between students who reported neither

of their parents finished high school and those who reported

at least one parent graduated from college.

•	 no significant difference in the score gap compared to the

29-point score gap for the nation.

Results for the highest level mathematics course taken by 

students showed

•	 	20% took calculus.

•	 	23% took pre-calculus.

•	 42% took algebra II/trigonometry.

•	 9% took geometry.

•	 7% took algebra I or lower.

What do students plan to do in the year after 

leaving high school?

•	 	 9% plan to work full time.

•	 	 7% plan to attend vocational, technical, or business school.

•	 10% plan to attend two-year college.

•	 66% plan to attend four-year college, service academy, or

	 	 university.

•	 	 4% plan to serve in the military.

Average scale scores in NAEP mathematics for twelfth-grade 

public school students in the nation and New Hampshire: 2009

New Hampshire 160*

Nation (public) 152

100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 300

Scale score

0

* Significantly different (p < .05) from the nation.

Percentile scores in NAEP mathematics for twelfth-grade public 

school students in the nation and New Hampshire: 2009

* Significantly different (p < .05) from the nation.

129109 153 176 196

119* 140* 161* 183* 200*

10th 25th 50th 75th 90th

0 300

Nation (public)

New Hampshire

100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200

Scale score

Average scale scores in NAEP mathematics for twelfth-grade public 

school students in New Hampshire, by race/ethnicity: 2009

White 161

100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 300

Scale score

0

New Hampshire

* Significantly different (p < .05) from the nation.

NOTE: Results are not shown for all race/ethnicity categories because of insufficient sample sizes. 

White excludes Hispanic origin.

Achievement-level results in NAEP mathematics for twelfth-grade 

public school students in the nation and New Hampshire: 2009

63

3

25

74*

3

32*

New Hampshire

100

80

60

40

20

0

Percent

Nation

(public)

% at Advanced

% at or above Proficient

% at or above Basic

63

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2009 Mathematics Assessment.

GRADE 12 READING AND MATHEMATICS 2009 STATE RESULTS
Reading

[State]

For New Jersey twelfth-graders in 2009,

•	 the overall average reading score of 288 was not significantly

different from the nation.

Percentile score results showed

•	 no significant difference in the score at the 25th percentile

compared to the nation.

•	 no significant difference in the score at the 75th percentile

compared to the nation.

Results for racial/ethnic groups showed

•	 a White – Black score gap of 28 points.8

•	 a White – Hispanic score gap of 22 points.

8The score gap is based on the difference between the unrounded scores as opposed to the rounded scores shown in the figure.

Results for parental education level showed

•	 a 33-point score gap between students who reported neither

of their parents finished high school and those who reported

at least one parent graduated from college.

•	 no significant difference in the score gap compared to the

28-point score gap for the nation.

Results for how often students wrote long answers to 

questions that involved reading

•	 40% wrote long answers at least once a week.

•	 39% wrote long answers once or twice a month.

•	 17% wrote long answers once or twice a year.

•	 	 4% never wrote long answers.

What is the highest level of education 

students plan to complete?

•	 31% plan to go to graduate school.

•	 57% plan to graduate from college.

•	 	 5% plan to complete some education after high school.

•	 	 4% plan to graduate from high school.

•	 	 1%do not plan to finish high school.

Average scale scores in NAEP reading for twelfth-grade public 

school students in the nation and New Jersey: 2009

New Jersey 288

Nation (public) 287

200 210 220 230 240 250 260 270 280 290 500

Scale score

0

Percentile scores in NAEP reading for twelfth-grade public school 

students in the nation and New Jersey: 2009

R-NJ-br-04

237 263 289 314 334

Nation (public)

New Jersey

234 263 291 316 337

10th 25th 50th 75th 90th

230 240 250 260 270 280 290 300 310 320 330 340

Scale score

0 500

Average scale scores in NAEP reading for twelfth-grade public 

school students in New Jersey, by race/ethnicity: 2009

295

Black 268

White

273

307 Asian/

Pacific Islander

Hispanic

200 210 220 230 240 250 260 270 280 290 300 310

Scale score

0 500

NOTE: Results are not shown for all race/ethnicity categories because of insufficient sample sizes. 

Black includes African American, Hispanic includes Latino, and Pacific Islander includes Native 

Hawaiian. Race categories exclude Hispanic origin.

Achievement-level results in NAEP reading for twelfth-grade 

public school students in the nation and New Jersey: 2009

100

80

60

40

20

0

Percent

New Jersey

74

Nation

(public)

73

5 6

37 39

% at Advanced

% at or above Proficient

% at or above Basic

64 THE NATION’S REPORT CARD

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2009 Reading Assessment.
Mathematics

For New Jersey twelfth-graders in 2009,

•	 the overall average mathematics score of 156 was higher

than the score for the nation.

Percentile score results showed

•	 a higher score at the 25th percentile compared to the nation.

•	 a higher score at the 75th percentile compared to the nation.

Results for racial/ethnic groups showed

•	 a White – Black score gap of 31 points.

•	 a White – Hispanic score gap of 26 points.

Results for parental education level showed

•	 a 32-point score gap between students who reported neither

of their parents finished high school and those who reported

at least one parent graduated from college.

•	 no significant difference in the score gap compared to the

29-point score gap for the nation.

Results for the highest level mathematics course taken by 

students showed

•	 	23% took calculus.

•	 	24% took pre-calculus.

•	 42% took algebra II/trigonometry.

•	 7% took geometry.

•	 4% took algebra I or lower.

What do students plan to do in the year after 

leaving high school?

•	 	 5% plan to work full time.

•	 	 3% plan to attend vocational, technical, or business school.

•	 16% plan to attend two-year college.

•	 70% plan to attend four-year college, service academy, or

	 	 university.

•	 	 3% plan to serve in the military.

Average scale scores in NAEP mathematics for twelfth-grade 

public school students in the nation and New Jersey: 2009

New Jersey 156*

Nation (public) 152

100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 300

Scale score

0

* Significantly different (p < .05) from the nation.

Percentile scores in NAEP mathematics for twelfth-grade public 

school students in the nation and New Jersey: 2009

M-NJ-br-04

129109 153 176 196

111 133* 157* 181* 201*

10th 25th 50th 75th 90th

Nation (public)

New Jersey

0 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 210 300

Scale score

Average scale scores in NAEP mathematics for twelfth-grade public 

school students in New Jersey, by race/ethnicity: 2009

134

165

Black

White

179

Hispanic 139

100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 300

Scale score

0

Asian/

Pacific Islander

* Significantly different (p < .05) from the nation.

New Jersey

* Significantly different (p < .05) from the nation.

NOTE: Results are not shown for all race/ethnicity categories because of insufficient sample sizes. 

Black includes African American, Hispanic includes Latino, and Pacific Islander includes Native 

Hawaiian. Race categories exclude Hispanic origin.

Achievement-level results in NAEP mathematics for twelfth-grade 

public school students in the nation and New Jersey: 2009

63

3

25

67*

4

31*

New Jersey

100

80

60

40

20

0

Percent

Nation

(public)

% at Advanced

% at or above Proficient

% at or above Basic

65

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2009 Mathematics Assessment.

GRADE 12 READING AND MATHEMATICS 2009 STATE RESULTS
Reading

[State]

For South Dakota twelfth-graders in 2009,

•	 the overall average reading score of 292 was higher than the

score for the nation.

Percentile score results showed

•	 a higher score at the 25th percentile compared to the nation.

•	 no significant difference in the score at the 75th percentile

compared to the nation.

Results for racial/ethnic groups showed

•	 a White – American Indian/Alaska Native score gap of

18 points.

Results for parental education level showed

•	 a 33-point score gap between students who reported neither

of their parents finished high school and those who reported

at least one parent graduated from college.

•	 no significant difference in the score gap compared to the

28-point score gap for the nation.

Results for how often students wrote long answers to 

questions that involved reading

•	 27% wrote long answers at least once a week.

•	 41% wrote long answers once or twice a month.

•	 25% wrote long answers once or twice a year.

•	 	 6% never wrote long answers.

What is the highest level of education 

students plan to complete?

•	 20% plan to go to graduate school.

•	 63% plan to graduate from college.

•	 10% plan to complete some education after high school.

•	 	 4% plan to graduate from high school.

•	 	 1%do not plan to finish high school.

Average scale scores in NAEP reading for twelfth-grade public 

school students in the nation and South Dakota: 2009

* Significantly different (p < .05) from the nation.

South Dakota 292*

Nation (public) 287

200 210 220 230 240 250 260 270 280 290 300

Scale score

0 500

Percentile scores in NAEP reading for twelfth-grade public school 

students in the nation and South Dakota: 2009

* Significantly different (p < .05) from the nation.

R-SD-br-04

237 263 289 314 334

Nation (public)

South Dakota

251* 273* 295* 313 328*

10th 25th 50th 75th 90th

230 240 250 260 270 280 290 300 310 320 330 340

Scale score

0 500

Average scale scores in NAEP reading for twelfth-grade public 

school students in South Dakota, by race/ethnicity: 2009

200 210 220 230 240 250 260 270 280 290 300 500

Scale score

0

294

276 American Indian/

Alaska Native

White

NOTE: Results are not shown for all race/ethnicity categories because of insufficient sample sizes. 

Race categories exclude Hispanic origin.

Achievement-level results in NAEP reading for twelfth-grade 

public school students in the nation and South Dakota: 2009

* Significantly different (p < .05) from the nation.

100

80

60

40

20

0

Percent

South Dakota

82*

Nation

(public)

73

5

2*

37 40*

% at Advanced

% at or above Proficient

% at or above Basic

66 THE NATION’S REPORT CARD

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2009 Reading Assessment.
Mathematics

For South Dakota twelfth-graders in 2009,

•	 the overall average mathematics score of 160 was higher

than the score for the nation.

Percentile score results showed

•	 a higher score at the 25th percentile compared to the nation.

•	 a higher score at the 75th percentile compared to the nation.

Results for racial/ethnic groups showed

•	 a White – American Indian/Alaska Native score gap of

22 points.

Results for parental education level showed

•	 a 31-point score gap between students who reported neither

of their parents finished high school and those who reported

at least one parent graduated from college.

•	 no significant difference in the score gap compared to the

29-point score gap for the nation.

Results for the highest level mathematics course taken by 

students showed

•	 	17% took calculus.

•	 	28% took pre-calculus.

•	 41% took algebra II/trigonometry.

•	 	 8% took geometry.

•	 5% took algebra I or lower.

What do students plan to do in the year after 

leaving high school?

•	 	 7% plan to work full time.

•	 15% plan to attend vocational, technical, or business school.

•	 	 7% plan to attend two-year college.

•	 62% plan to attend four-year college, service academy, or

	 	 university.

•	 	 5% plan to serve in the military.

Average scale scores in NAEP mathematics for twelfth-grade 

public school students in the nation and South Dakota: 2009

South Dakota 160*

Nation (public) 152

100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 300

Scale score

0

* Significantly different (p < .05) from the nation.

Percentile scores in NAEP mathematics for twelfth-grade public 

school students in the nation and South Dakota: 2009

* Significantly different (p < .05) from the nation.

129109 153 176 196

161*143*125* 179* 193

10th 25th 50th 75th 90th

0 300

Nation (public)

South Dakota

100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200

Scale score

South Dakota

Average scale scores in NAEP mathematics for twelfth-grade public 

school students in South Dakota, by race/ethnicity: 2009

100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 300

Scale score

0

162

140 American Indian/

Alaska Native

White

* Significantly different (p < .05) from the nation.

NOTE: Results are not shown for all race/ethnicity categories because of insufficient sample sizes. 

Race categories exclude Hispanic origin.

Achievement-level results in NAEP mathematics for twelfth-grade 

public school students in the nation and South Dakota: 2009

63

3

25

77*

1*

29*

South Dakota

100

80

60

40

20

0

Percent

Nation

(public)

% at Advanced

% at or above Proficient

% at or above Basic

67

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2009 Mathematics Assessment.

GRADE 12 READING AND MATHEMATICS 2009 STATE RESULTS
Reading

Average scale scores in NAEP reading for twelfth-grade public [State] school students in the nation and West Virginia: 2009

West Virginia 279*

Nation (public) 287

200 210 220 230 240 250 260 270 280 290 500

Scale score

0

* Significantly different (p < .05) from the nation.

Percentile scores in NAEP reading for twelfth-grade public school 

students in the nation and West Virginia: 2009

* Significantly different (p < .05) from the nation.

0 500

237 263 289 314 334

Nation (public)

West Virginia

229* 257* 283* 306* 325*

220 230 240 250 260 270 280 290 300 310 320 330 340

10th 25th 50th 75th 90th

Scale score

Average scale scores in NAEP reading for twelfth-grade public 

school students in West Virginia, by race/ethnicity: 2009

279

Black 275

White

200 210 220 230 240 250 260 270 280 290 500

Scale score

0

NOTE: Results are not shown for all race/ethnicity categories because of insufficient sample sizes.

Black includes African American. Race categories exclude Hispanic origin.

Achievement-level results in NAEP reading for twelfth-grade 

public school students in the nation and West Virginia: 2009

* Significantly different (p < .05) from the nation.

100

80

60

40

20

0

Percent

West Virginia

68*

Nation

(public)

73

5 2*

37 29*

% at Advanced

% at or above Proficient

% at or above Basic

68 THE NATION’S REPORT CARD

For West Virginia twelfth-graders in 2009,

•	 the overall average reading score of 279 was lower than the

score for the nation.

Percentile score results showed

•	 a lower score at the 25th percentile compared to the nation.

•	 a lower score at the 75th percentile compared to the nation.

Results for racial/ethnic groups showed

•	 no significant difference in the average scores for White and

Black students.

Results for parental education level showed

•	 a 35-point score gap between students who reported neither

of their parents finished high school and those who reported

at least one parent graduated from college.

•	 a larger score gap compared to the 28-point score gap for the

nation.

Results for how often students wrote long answers to 

questions that involved reading

•	 34% wrote long answers at least once a week.

•	 34% wrote long answers once or twice a month.

•	 25% wrote long answers once or twice a year.

•	 	 8% never wrote long answers.

What is the highest level of education 

students plan to complete?

•	 19% plan to go to graduate school.

•	 57% plan to graduate from college.

•	 10% plan to complete some education after high school.

•	 	 9% plan to graduate from high school.

•	 	 1% do not plan to finish high school.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2009 Reading Assessment.
Mathematics

Average scale scores in NAEP mathematics for twelfth-grade 

public school students in the nation and West Virginia: 2009

West Virginia 141*

Nation (public) 152

100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 300

Scale score

0

* Significantly different (p < .05) from the nation.

Percentile scores in NAEP mathematics for twelfth-grade public 

school students in the nation and West Virginia: 2009

* Significantly different (p < .05) from the nation.

129109 153 176 196

121*102* 142* 162* 181*

10th 25th 50th 75th 90th

0 300

Nation (public)

West Virginia

100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200

Scale score

Average scale scores in NAEP mathematics for twelfth-grade public 

school students in West Virginia, by race/ethnicity: 2009

121

142

Black

White

100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 300

Scale score

0

West Virginia

* Significantly different (p < .05) from the nation.

NOTE: Results are not shown for all race/ethnicity categories because of insufficient sample sizes. 

Black includes African American. Race categories exclude Hispanic origin.

Achievement-level results in NAEP mathematics for twelfth-grade 

public school students in the nation and West Virginia: 2009

63

3

25

52*

1*

13*

West Virginia

100

80

60

40

20

0

Percent

Nation

(public)

% at Advanced

% at or above Proficient

% at or above Basic

GRADE 12 READING AND MATHEMATICS 2009 STATE RESULTS 69

For West Virginia twelfth-graders in 2009,

•	 the overall average mathematics score of 141 was lower

than the score for the nation.

Percentile score results showed

•	 a lower score at the 25th percentile compared to the nation.

•	 a lower score at the 75th percentile compared to the nation.

Results for racial/ethnic groups showed

•	 a White – Black score gap of 21 points.

Results for parental education level showed

•	 a 30-point score gap between students who reported neither

of their parents finished high school and those who reported

at least one parent graduated from college.

•	 no significant difference in the score gap compared to the

29-point score gap for the nation.

Results for the highest level mathematics course taken by 

students showed

•	 	11% took calculus.

•	 16% took pre-calculus.

•	 57% took algebra II/trigonometry.

•	 	14% took geometry.

•	 2% took algebra I or lower.

What do students plan to do in the year after 

leaving high school?

•	 13% plan to work full time.

•	 	 9% plan to attend vocational, technical, or business school.

•	 12% plan to attend two-year college.

•	 56% plan to attend four-year college, service academy, or

	 	 university.

•	 	 4% plan to serve in the military.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2009 Mathematics Assessment.
Technical Notes

Sampling and Weighting

The schools and students participating in NAEP assessments 

are selected to be representative of all students nationally and

of public school students in participating states. The national 

sample of schools and students is drawn from across the country, 

and results from the assessed students are combined to provide 

accurate estimates of the overall performance of twelfth-graders 

in the nation. 

While national results reflect the performance of students in 

both public schools and private schools, state-level results reflect 

the performance of public school students only and are being 

reported for the first time in 2009 for grade 12. More information 

on sampling can be found at http://nces.ed.gov/

nationsreportcard/about/nathow.asp.

Because each school that participated in the assessment, and 

each student assessed, represents a portion of the population of 

interest, the results are weighted to account for the disproportionate representation of certain groups in the selected sample. 

This includes the oversampling of schools with high concentrations of students from certain racial/ethnic groups and the lower 

sampling rates of students who attend very small private schools.

School and Student Participation

National participation

Twelfth-graders from 1,670 schools (1,500 public schools and 

170 private schools) participated in the 2009 assessments in 

reading and mathematics (table TN-1). To ensure unbiased 

samples, NAEP statistical standards require that participation 

rates for original school samples be 70 percent or higher to 

report national results separately for public and private schools. 

The weighted national school participation rate in 2009 was 

83 percent (86 percent for public schools and 52 percent for 

private schools) for both twelfth-grade reading and mathematics 

assessments. The school participation rate for private schools 

fell below the standard for reporting. The weighted student 

participation rate based on public and private schools combined 

was 81 percent for reading and 80 percent for mathematics.

Because the weighted student participation rate in public schools 

was below 85 percent (80 percent for reading and 79 percent for 

mathematics), a student nonresponse bias analysis was conducted. That analysis showed that the responding student sample 

differed from the original student sample with respect to race, 

relative age, and student disability status. After adjusting the 

sampling weights to account for student nonresponse, the 

remaining bias was small, with the nonresponse adjusted 

estimates for the three identified variables differing from the 

unadjusted estimates by plus or minus 0.1 percentage points. 

Table TN-1. Public school and student participation rates in twelfthgrade NAEP reading and mathematics, by state/

jurisdiction: 2009

State/jurisdiction

School participation Student participation

Studentweighted 

percent

Number of 

schools 

participating

Studentweighted 

percent

Number of 

students 

assessed

Reading

Nation 83 1,670 81 51,700

Nation (public) 86 1,500 80 48,900

Arkansas 100 100 87 2,700

Connecticut 100 100 75 2,800

Florida 100 80 80 3,400

Idaho 100 100 89 3,100

Illinois 85 80 79 2,800

Iowa 100 120 84 2,700

Massachusetts 100 90 82 3,100

New Hampshire 92 60 69 2,200

New Jersey 99 90 78 3,200

South Dakota 100 130 84 2,700

West Virginia 100 90 82 3,000

Mathematics

Nation 83 1,670 80 48,900

Nation (public) 86 1,500 79 46,400

Arkansas 100 100 87 2,700

Connecticut 100 90 76 2,800

Florida 100 80 80 3,200

Idaho 100 100 89 3,000

Illinois 85 80 79 2,700

Iowa 100 120 83 2,600

Massachusetts 100 90 81 2,900

New Hampshire 92 60 68 2,100

New Jersey 99 90 78 3,100

South Dakota 100 130 83 2,600

West Virginia 100 90 82 3,000

NOTE: Eleven states participated in the reading and mathematics assessments and met the reporting criteria. The 

number of schools is rounded to the nearest ten. The number of students is rounded to the nearest hundred. 

70 THE NATION’S REPORT CARD 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2009 Reading and Mathematics Assessments. 
State participation

Standards established by the National Assessment Governing 

Board require that school participation rates for the original state 

samples need to be at least 85 percent for results to be reported. 

Because the weighted school participation rate in Illinois was 

84.5 percent, a school nonresponse bias analysis was conducted 

for the grade 12 public school sample in that state. That analysis 

showed that the responding school sample in Illinois differed from 

the original sample with respect to school size and estimated 

grade enrollment. The potential nonresponse bias was effectively 

reduced by including substitute schools and adjusting the sampling weights to account for school nonresponse. The school 

participation rates for the remaining 10 states all met the required 

standard with weighted participation rates ranging from 92 to 

100 percent.

The results from the student nonresponse bias analysis for 

participating states will be available at http://nationsreportcard

.gov/reading_2009/participation.asp.

Interpreting Statistical Significance

Comparisons over time or between groups are based on 

statistical tests that consider both the size of the differences 

and the standard errors of the two statistics being compared. 

Standard errors are margins of error, and estimates based on 

smaller groups are likely to have larger margins of error. The size 

of the standard errors may also be influenced by other factors 

such as how representative the assessed students are of the 

entire population.

When an estimate has a large standard error, a numerical 

difference that seems large may not be statistically significant. 

Differences of the same magnitude may or may not be statistically significant depending upon the size of the standard errors 

of the estimates. For example, a 3-point change in the average 

score for White students may be statistically significant, while a 

4-point change for American Indian/Alaska Native students may 

not be. Standard errors for the estimates presented in this report 

are available at http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/naepdata/.

When estimates of percentages are close to 0 or 100, reliable 

standard errors cannot be estimated. As a result, significance 

tests are not conducted when comparisons involve an extreme 

percentage. More information about how extreme percentages 

are defined in NAEP is available at http://nces.ed.gov/

nationsreportcard/tdw/analysis/infer_guidelines_extreme.asp.

To ensure that significant differences in NAEP data reflect 

actual differences and not mere chance, error rates need to 

be controlled when making multiple simultaneous comparisons. 

The more comparisons that are made (e.g., comparing the 

performance of White, Black, Hispanic, Asian/Pacific Islander, 

and American Indian/Alaska Native students), the higher the 

probability of finding significant differences by chance. In NAEP, 

the Benjamini-Hochberg False Discovery Rate (FDR) procedure 

is used to control the expected proportion of falsely rejected 

hypotheses relative to the number of comparisons that are 

conducted. (The term “falsely rejected hypotheses” refers to 

mistakenly finding a statistically significant difference when, in 

truth, the difference is not statistically different.) A detailed 

explanation of the FDR procedure can be found at http://nces

.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/tdw/analysis/2000_2001/

infer_multiplecompare_fdr.asp.

NAEP employs a number of rules to determine the number of 

comparisons conducted, which in most cases is simply the 

number of possible statistical tests. However, there are two 

exceptions where the FDR is not applied: when comparing 

multiple years and when comparing multiple states to the nation, 

neither the number of years nor the number of states counts 

toward the number of comparisons. 

School Location

NAEP results are reported for four mutually exclusive categories 

of school location: city, suburb, town, and rural. The categories 

are based on standard definitions established by the Federal 

Office of Management and Budget using population and geographic information from the U.S. Census Bureau. Schools are 

assigned to these categories in the NCES Common Core of Data 

locale codes based on their physical addresses. 

The classification system was revised for 2007; therefore, only 

2009 results are included in this report. The new locale codes 

are based on an address’s proximity to an urbanized area 

(a densely settled core with densely settled surrounding areas). 

This is a change from the previous system based on 

metropolitan statistical areas. To distinguish the 

two, the new system is referred to as “urbancentric locale codes.” More details on 

the classification system can be found at 

http://nces.ed.gov/ccd/rural_locales.asp. 

GRADE 12 READING AND MATHEMATICS 2009 TECHNICAL NOTES 71
Appendix Tables

Tables A-1 through A-10 provide additional results for NAEP reading, and tables A-11

through A-20 provide additional results for NAEP mathematics.

Table A-1. Percentage of twelfth-grade public and nonpublic school students with disabilities (SD) and/or English language learners (ELL) 

identified, excluded, and assessed in NAEP reading, as a percentage of all students, by SD/ELL category: Various years, 1992–2009

SD/ELL category

Accommodations not permitted Accommodations permitted

1992 1994 1998 1998 2002 2005 2009

SD and/or ELL 

 Identified 7 9 7 7 12 14 13

 Excluded 5 5 3 2 4 4 4

 Assessed 2 5 4 5 8 10 9

 Without accommodations 2 5 4 4 6 5 4

 With accommodations † † † 1 2 4 6

SD

Identified 5 7 6 6 9 10 10

 Excluded 4 4 3 2 3 3 3

 Assessed 1 3 3 4 6 7 7

 Without accommodations 1 3 3 3 4 3 2

 With accommodations † † † 1 2 4 5

ELL

 Identified 2 2 2 2 3 4 3

 Excluded 1 1 # # 1 1 1

 Assessed 1 1 2 2 3 3 2

 Without accommodations 1 1 2 2 2 3 2

 With accommodations † † † # # 1 1

72 THE NATION’S REPORT CARD 

† Not applicable. Accommodations were not permitted in this assessment year.

# Rounds to zero.

NOTE: Students identified as both SD and ELL were counted only once under the combined SD and/or ELL category, but were counted separately under the SD and ELL categories. Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), various years, 1992–2009 Reading Assessments.
Table A-2. Percentage of twelfth-grade public and nonpublic school students with disabilities 

(SD) and/or English language learners (ELL) identified, excluded, and assessed in 

NAEP reading, as a percentage of all students, by selected racial/ethnic groups and 

SD/ELL category: 2009

SD/ELL category

Race/ethnicity

White Black Hispanic

SD and/or ELL 

 Identified 11 14 20

 Excluded 3 6 5

 Assessed 8 8 16

 Without accommodations 2 2 9

 With accommodations 6 6 6

SD

 Identified 11 14 10

 Excluded 3 6 3

 Assessed 8 8 6

 Without accommodations 2 2 2

 With accommodations 6 6 4

ELL

 Identified # 1 13

 Excluded # # 3

 Assessed # 1 10

 Without accommodations # # 8

 With accommodations # # 3

# Rounds to zero.

NOTE: Black includes African American, and Hispanic includes Latino. Race categories exclude Hispanic origin. Students identified as both SD and ELL were 

counted only once under the combined SD and/or ELL category, but were counted separately under the SD and ELL categories. Detail may not sum to totals 

because of rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress 

(NAEP), 2009 Reading Assessment.

Table A-3. Percentage of twelfth-grade public and nonpublic school students identified as 

students with disabilities (SD) and/or English language learners (ELL) excluded and 

assessed in NAEP reading, as a percentage of identified SD and/or ELL students, by 

SD/ELL category: 2009

Percentage of identified SD and/or ELL students

Assessed without Assessed with 

SD/ELL category Excluded Assessed accommodations accommodations

SD and/or ELL 28 72 28 45

SD 31 69 18 50

ELL 21 79 57 22

NOTE: Students identified as both SD and ELL were counted only once under the combined SD and/or ELL category, but were counted separately under the SD 

and ELL categories. Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress 

(NAEP), 2009 Reading Assessment. 

GRADE 12 READING AND MATHEMATICS 2009 APPENDIX TABLES 73
Table A-4. Percentage of twelfth-grade public school students with disabilities (SD) and/or English 

language learners (ELL) identified, excluded, and assessed in NAEP reading, as a percentage of 

all students, by SD/ELL category and state/jurisdiction: 2009

SD/ELL category and 

state/jurisdiction

Percentage of all students

Identified

Assessed without 

Excluded Assessed accommodations

Assessed with 

accommodations

SD and/or ELL

Nation (public)

Arkansas

Connecticut

Florida

Idaho

Illinois

Iowa

Massachusetts

New Hampshire

New Jersey

South Dakota

West Virginia

14

15

13

16

10

14

12

16

17

16

10

15

4

3

3

6

2

5

3

5

3

4

3

3

10

13

10

10

7

9

9

12

14

12

7

12

4

3

2

1

4

2

2

3

7

2

3

6

6

9

8

10

4

7

7

9

7

10

4

7

SD

Nation (public)

Arkansas

Connecticut

Florida

Idaho

Illinois

Iowa

Massachusetts

New Hampshire

New Jersey

South Dakota

West Virginia

11

13

11

13

8

12

11

15

16

14

9

15

4

2

2

4

2

5

3

4

3

3

3

3

7

10

9

8

6

8

8

10

13

11

6

12

2

3

1

#

3

1

1

2

6

1

3

5

5

8

7

8

3

6

7

8

7

10

3

7

ELL

Nation (public)

Arkansas

Connecticut

Florida

Idaho

Illinois

Iowa

Massachusetts

New Hampshire

New Jersey

South Dakota

West Virginia

3

3

2

4

2

2

1

2

1

2

1

1

1

#

1

2

#

#

#

1

#

1

#

#

3

3

1

2

2

2

1

1

1

1

1

1

2

1

1

#

1

1

#

1

#

#

#

1

1

2

1

2

1

1

#

#

#

1

#

#

# Rounds to zero.

NOTE: Eleven states participated in the assessment and met the reporting criteria. Students identified as both SD and ELL were counted only once under the combined SD and/or 

ELL category, but were counted separately under the SD and ELL categories. Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2009 

Reading Assessment.

74 THE NATION’S REPORT CARD 
Table A-5. Percentage of twelfth-grade public school students identified as students with 

disabilities (SD) and/or English language learners (ELL) excluded and assessed in 

NAEP reading, as a percentage of identified SD and/or ELL students, by SD/ELL 

category and state/jurisdiction: 2009

SD/ELL category and 

state/jurisdiction

Percentage of identified SD and/or ELL students

Assessed without Assessed with 

Excluded Assessed accommodations accommodations

SD and/or ELL

Nation (public)

Arkansas

Connecticut

Florida

Idaho

Illinois

Iowa

Massachusetts

New Hampshire

New Jersey

South Dakota

West Virginia

29

17

24

37

24

34

28

29

19

24

33

19

71

83

76

63

76

66

72

71

81

76

67

81

28

22

14

4

36

12

14

19

39

11

30

36

43

61

62

59

39

54

58

52

42

65

37

44

SD

Nation (public)

Arkansas

Connecticut

Florida

Idaho

Illinois

Iowa

Massachusetts

New Hampshire

New Jersey

South Dakota

West Virginia

33

19

22

35

27

38

28

28

20

22

35

20

67

81

78

65

73

62

72

72

80

78

65

80

19

20

11

3

31

9

13

15

38

10

29

34

49

61

67

62

42

53

59

57

42

68

36

46

ELL

Nation (public)

Arkansas

Connecticut

Florida

Idaho

Illinois

Iowa

Massachusetts

New Hampshire

New Jersey

South Dakota

West Virginia

21

4

47

48

14

9

35

49

28

51

10

#

79

96

53

52

86

91

65

51

72

49

90

100

57

30

26

6

53

30

25

38

45

14

46

94

22

66

27

45

33

61

39

13

27

36

44

6

# Rounds to zero.

NOTE: Eleven states participated in the assessment and met the reporting criteria. Students identified as both SD and ELL were counted only once under the 

combined SD and/or ELL category, but were counted separately under the SD and ELL categories. Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress 

(NAEP), 2009 Reading Assessment.

GRADE 12 READING AND MATHEMATICS 2009 APPENDIX TABLES 75
Table A-6. Average scale scores and achievement-level results in NAEP reading for twelfth-grade public school 

students, by selected racial/ethnic groups and state/jurisdiction: 2009

Race/ethnicity and 

state/jurisdiction

Average

scale score

Percentage of students

Below Basic

At or above At or above 

Basic Proficient

At 

Advanced

White

Nation (public)

Arkansas

Connecticut

Florida

Idaho

Illinois

Iowa

Massachusetts

New Hampshire

New Jersey

South Dakota

West Virginia

295

287*

301*

289*

293 

299*

292*

299*

293 

295 

294 

279*

20

24*

16*

24*

19 

15*

20 

16*

21 

20 

16*

32*

80

76*

84*

76*

81 

85*

80 

84*

79 

80 

84*

68*

45

36*

52*

39*

42 

48 

40*

50*

44 

47 

42 

29*

7

4*

9*

5 

4*

6 

4*

9 

6 

8 

2*

2*

Black

Nation (public)

Arkansas

Connecticut

Florida

Idaho

Illinois

Iowa

Massachusetts

New Hampshire

New Jersey

South Dakota

West Virginia

268

259*

265

269

‡

273

273

273

‡

268

‡

275

44

54*

46

41

‡

40

36

39

‡

44

‡

35

56

46*

54

59

‡

60

64

61

‡

56

‡

65

16

9*

15

17

‡

20

21

21

‡

16

‡

21

1

#

1

1

‡

1

1

1

‡

1

‡

3

Hispanic

Nation (public)

Arkansas

Connecticut

Florida

Idaho

Illinois

Iowa

Massachusetts

New Hampshire

New Jersey

South Dakota

West Virginia

273

269

273

277

267*

276

278

273

‡

273

‡

‡

39

44

37

35

44

35

31

40

‡

37

‡

‡

61

56

63

65

56

65

69

60

‡

63

‡

‡

21

19

24

26

15*

24

27

21

‡

20

‡

‡

2

1

1

3

#

1

2

2

‡

1

‡

‡

Asian/Pacific Islander

Nation (public)

Arkansas

Connecticut

Florida

Idaho

Illinois

Iowa

Massachusetts

New Hampshire

New Jersey

South Dakota

West Virginia

298

‡

296

296

‡

308

295

303

‡

307*

‡

‡

19

‡

22

21

‡

11

20

16

‡

15

‡

‡

81

‡

78

79

‡

89

80

84

‡

85

‡

‡

49

‡

49

48

‡

61

41

55

‡

60*

‡

‡

10

‡

12

6

‡

13

8

11

‡

15

‡

‡

# Rounds to zero.

‡ Reporting standards not met. Sample size insufficient to permit a reliable estimate.

* Significantly different (p < .05) from the nation.

NOTE: Eleven states participated in the assessment and met the reporting criteria. Black includes African American, Hispanic includes Latino, and Pacific Islander includes Native Hawaiian. 

Race categories exclude Hispanic origin. Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2009 Reading 

Assessment.

76 THE NATION’S REPORT CARD 
Table A-7. Average scale scores and achievement-level results in NAEP reading for twelfth-grade public school 

students, by gender and state/jurisdiction: 2009

Gender and 

state/jurisdiction

Average 

scale score

Percentage of students

Below Basic

At or above At or above 

Basic Proficient

At 

Advanced

Male

Nation (public)

Arkansas

Connecticut

Florida

Idaho

Illinois

Iowa

Massachusetts

New Hampshire

New Jersey

South Dakota

West Virginia

281

271*

285*

276*

285*

286*

284*

290*

284 

282 

286*

271*

33

40*

29*

37*

27*

27*

27*

25*

29 

32 

24*

41*

67

60*

71*

63*

73*

73*

73*

75*

71 

68 

76*

59*

31

22*

37*

26*

33 

34 

31 

41*

35 

34 

32 

22*

4

2*

5*

3 

3 

3 

3 

6 

4 

5 

1*

1*

Female

Nation (public)

Arkansas

Connecticut

Florida

Idaho

Illinois

Iowa

Massachusetts

New Hampshire

New Jersey

South Dakota

West Virginia

293

289*

300*

289*

296*

297

298*

301*

302*

294

299*

288*

21

23 

16*

23 

17*

16*

14*

15*

13*

21 

12*

24

79

77 

84*

77 

83*

84*

86*

85*

87*

79 

88*

76

42

36*

50*

38 

45 

46 

48*

51*

54*

44 

49*

36*

6

4*

10*

5 

5 

7 

5 

9*

8 

8 

3*

3*

* Significantly different (p < .05) from the nation.

NOTE: Eleven states participated in the assessment and met the reporting criteria. Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2009 Reading 

Assessment.

GRADE 12 READING AND MATHEMATICS 2009 APPENDIX TABLES 77
Table A-8. Average scale scores and achievement-level results in NAEP reading for twelfth-grade public school 

students, by student-reported highest level of parental education and state/jurisdiction: 2009

Highest level of 

parental education and 

state/jurisdiction

Average 

scale score

Percentage of students

Below Basic

At or above At or above 

Basic Proficient

At 

Advanced

Did not finish high school

Nation (public)

Arkansas

Connecticut

Florida

Idaho

Illinois

Iowa

Massachusetts

New Hampshire

New Jersey

South Dakota

West Virginia

269

265

269

266

266

271

269

267

265

266

264

256*

43

47

41

46

45

39

46

42

47

45

52

57*

57

53

59

54

55

61

54

58

53

55

48

43*

17

14

22

15

14

17

18

18

22

15

9

11

1

#

1

1

#

#

1

2

1

#

#

#

Graduated from high school

Nation (public)

Arkansas

Connecticut

Florida

Idaho

Illinois

Iowa

Massachusetts

New Hampshire

New Jersey

South Dakota

West Virginia

276

271*

278 

276 

283*

279 

279 

282*

281 

275 

284*

270*

36

39

34

35

28*

30 

31 

29*

30 

35 

25*

41*

64

61 

66 

65 

72*

70 

69 

71*

70 

65 

75*

59*

25

20*

26

24

28

25

28

28

30

24

28

19*

2

2

2

2

2

2

1

2

2

1

#

1

Some education after high school

Nation (public)

Arkansas

Connecticut

Florida

Idaho

Illinois

Iowa

Massachusetts

New Hampshire

New Jersey

South Dakota

West Virginia

287

284 

290 

285 

290*

289 

294*

292*

290 

283 

293*

283*

25

28

22

27

20*

23

16*

20 

22 

29 

16*

29

75

72

78

73

80*

77 

84*

80 

78 

71 

84*

71 

34

32

38

32

37

36

42*

40

39

32

40

29*

3

4

4

3

3

3

4

4

4

4

1*

2

Graduated from college

Nation (public)

Arkansas

Connecticut

Florida

Idaho

Illinois

Iowa

Massachusetts

New Hampshire

New Jersey

South Dakota

West Virginia

297

288*

304*

291*

299

302*

296

305*

302*

299

297

290*

19

24*

14*

23*

15*

13*

17 

14*

14*

18 

14*

22 

81

76*

86*

77*

85*

87*

83 

86*

86*

82 

86*

78 

48

38*

55*

41*

50 

53*

45 

57*

53*

50 

47 

41*

8

3*

11*

6*

6 

8 

6*

11*

8 

10 

3*

4*

# Rounds to zero.

* Significantly different (p < .05) from the nation.

NOTE: Eleven states participated in the assessment and met the reporting criteria. Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2009 Reading 

Assessment.

78 THE NATION’S REPORT CARD 
Table A-9. Average scale scores and achievement-level results in NAEP reading for twelfth-grade public 

school students, by status as students with disabilities (SD) and state/jurisdiction: 2009

SD status and 

state/jurisdiction

Average

scale score

Percentage of students

Below Basic

At or above At or above 

Basic Proficient

At 

Advanced

SD

Nation (public)

Arkansas

Connecticut

Florida

Idaho

Illinois

Iowa

Massachusetts

New Hampshire

New Jersey

South Dakota

West Virginia

250

231*

255 

250 

248

255

243

263*

263*

255

249 

235*

64

82*

56 

63 

65 

60 

72 

50*

49*

58 

71 

76*

36

18*

44 

37 

35 

40 

28 

50*

51*

42 

29 

24*

10

3*

17*

9

7

11

6

16

15

12

3*

5*

#

#

2

1

#

1

#

1

1

1

#

#

Not SD

Nation (public)

Arkansas

Connecticut

Florida

Idaho

Illinois

Iowa

Massachusetts

New Hampshire

New Jersey

South Dakota

West Virginia

290

286*

296*

286*

293*

295*

295*

299*

298*

292 

295*

286*

24

26 

19*

27 

19*

18*

16*

16*

17*

22 

15*

26 

76

74

81*

73 

81*

82*

84*

84*

83*

78 

85*

74

39

33*

46*

34*

41

43

42*

50*

49*

42

43*

33*

5

3*

8*

4 

4 

5 

5 

8*

7 

7 

2*

3*

# Rounds to zero.

* Significantly different (p < .05) from the nation.

NOTE: Eleven states participated in the assessment and met the reporting criteria. Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2009 

Reading Assessment.

GRADE 12 READING AND MATHEMATICS 2009 APPENDIX TABLES 79
Table A-10. Average scale scores and achievement-level results in NAEP reading for twelfth-grade public school 

students, by status as English language learners (ELL) and state/jurisdiction: 2009

ELL status and 

state/jurisdiction

Average 

scale score

Percentage of students

Below Basic

At or above At or above 

Basic Proficient

At 

Advanced

ELL

Nation (public)

Arkansas

Connecticut

Florida

Idaho

Illinois

Iowa

Massachusetts

New Hampshire

New Jersey

South Dakota

West Virginia

240

251*

‡

245

‡

‡

‡

‡

‡

‡

‡

‡

78

64

‡

70

‡

‡

‡

‡

‡

‡

‡

‡

22

36

‡

30

‡

‡

‡

‡

‡

‡

‡

‡

2

7

‡

3

‡

‡

‡

‡

‡

‡

‡

‡

#

#

‡

#

‡

‡

‡

‡

‡

‡

‡

‡

Not ELL

Nation (public)

Arkansas

Connecticut

Florida

Idaho

Illinois

Iowa

Massachusetts

New Hampshire

New Jersey

South Dakota

West Virginia

288

281*

293*

284*

291 

292*

291*

296*

293*

289 

292*

279*

25

31*

22*

29*

21*

21*

21*

19*

21*

25 

18*

32*

75

69*

78*

71*

79*

79*

79*

81*

79*

75 

82*

68*

37

30*

44*

33*

40 

41 

40 

46*

44*

39 

41 

29*

5

3*

7*

4*

4 

5 

4 

8*

6 

6 

2*

2*

# Rounds to zero.

‡ Reporting standards not met. Sample size insufficient to permit a reliable estimate.

* Significantly different (p < .05) from the nation.

NOTE: Eleven states participated in the assessment and met the reporting criteria. Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2009 Reading 

Assessment.

80 THE NATION’S REPORT CARD 
Table A-11. Percentage of twelfth-grade public and nonpublic school students with disabilities 

(SD) and/or English language learners (ELL) identified, excluded, and assessed in 

NAEP mathematics, as a percentage of all students, by SD/ELL category: 2005 and 

2009

SD/ELL category 2005 2009

SD and/or ELL

 Identified 13 13

 Excluded 3 3

 Assessed 10 10

 Without accommodations 5 3

 With accommodations 5 6

SD

Identified 10 11

 Excluded 3 3

 Assessed 7 7

 Without accommodations 3 2

 With accommodations 4 5

ELL

 Identified 4 3

 Excluded 1 #

 Assessed 4 3

 Without accommodations 3 2

 With accommodations 1 1

# Rounds to zero.

NOTE: Students identified as both SD and ELL were counted only once under the combined SD and/or ELL category, but were counted separately under the SD 

and ELL categories. Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress 

(NAEP), 2005 and 2009 Mathematics Assessments.

GRADE 12 READING AND MATHEMATICS 2009 APPENDIX TABLES 81
Table A-12. Percentage of twelfth-grade public and nonpublic school students with disabilities 

(SD) and/or English language learners (ELL) identified, excluded, and assessed in 

NAEP mathematics, as a percentage of all students, by selected racial/ethnic groups 

and SD/ELL category: 2009

SD/ELL category

Race/ethnicity

White Black Hispanic

SD and/or ELL

 Identified 11 14 20

 Excluded 3 4 4

 Assessed 8 9 16

 Without accommodations 2 2 8

 With accommodations 6 7 8

SD

Identified 11 13 10

 Excluded 3 4 4

 Assessed 8 9 7

 Without accommodations 2 2 2

 With accommodations 6 7 5

ELL

 Identified # 1 12

 Excluded # # 2

 Assessed # 1 11

 Without accommodations # # 7

 With accommodations # 1 4

# Rounds to zero.

NOTE: Black includes African American, and Hispanic includes Latino. Race categories exclude Hispanic origin. Students identified as both SD and ELL were 

counted only once under the combined SD and/or ELL category, but were counted separately under the SD and ELL categories. Detail may not sum to totals 

because of rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress 

(NAEP), 2009 Mathematics Assessment.

Table A-13. Percentage of twelfth-grade public and nonpublic school students identified as 

students with disabilities (SD) and/or English language learners (ELL) excluded 

and assessed in NAEP mathematics, as a percentage of identified SD and/or ELL 

students, by SD/ELL category: 2009

Percentage of identified SD and/or ELL students

Assessed without Assessed with 

SD/ELL category Excluded Assessed accommodations accommodations

SD and/or ELL 25 75 27 48

SD 30 70 18 52

ELL 14 86 53 33

NOTE: Students identified as both SD and ELL were counted only once under the combined SD and/or ELL category, but were counted separately under the SD 

and ELL categories. Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress 

(NAEP), 2009 Mathematics Assessment. 

82 THE NATION’S REPORT CARD 
Table A-14. Percentage of twelfth-grade public school students with disabilities (SD) and/or English 

language learners (ELL) identified, excluded, and assessed in NAEP mathematics, as a 

percentage of all students, by SD/ELL category and state/jurisdiction: 2009

SD/ELL category and 

state/jurisdiction

Percentage of all students

Identified

Assessed without 

Excluded Assessed accommodations

Assessed with 

accommodations

SD and/or ELL

Nation (public)

Arkansas

Connecticut

Florida

Idaho

Illinois

Iowa

Massachusetts

New Hampshire

New Jersey

South Dakota

West Virginia

14

15

13

16

10

14

12

16

17

16

10

15

4

3

3

5

2

4

3

5

3

3

2

2

10

12

10

11

8

10

9

12

14

13

7

13

4

3

2

1

3

2

3

3

6

2

3

4

6

9

8

11

5

8

7

9

8

11

5

9

SD

Nation (public)

Arkansas

Connecticut

Florida

Idaho

Illinois

Iowa

Massachusetts

New Hampshire

New Jersey

South Dakota

West Virginia

11

13

11

13

8

12

11

15

16

14

9

15

3

3

3

5

2

4

3

5

3

3

2

2

8

10

8

8

6

8

8

10

13

11

7

13

2

2

1

#

2

2

2

2

6

2

2

4

6

7

7

7

4

7

6

8

7

10

5

9

ELL

Nation (public)

Arkansas

Connecticut

Florida

Idaho

Illinois

Iowa

Massachusetts

New Hampshire

New Jersey

South Dakota

West Virginia

3

3

2

4

2

2

1

2

1

2

1

1

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

3

3

2

4

2

1

1

2

1

1

1

1

2

1

#

#

1

#

1

1

#

#

#

1

1

2

1

4

1

1

#

1

#

1

#

#

# Rounds to zero.

NOTE: Eleven states participated in the assessment and met the reporting criteria. Students identified as both SD and ELL were counted only once under the combined SD and/or 

ELL category, but were counted separately under the SD and ELL categories. Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2009 

Mathematics Assessment.

GRADE 12 READING AND MATHEMATICS 2009 APPENDIX TABLES 83
Table A-15. Percentage of twelfth-grade public school students identified as students with 

disabilities (SD) and/or English language learners (ELL) excluded and assessed 

in NAEP mathematics, as a percentage of identified SD and/or ELL students, by 

SD/ELL category and state/jurisdiction: 2009

Percentage of identified SD and/or ELL students

SD/ELL category and Assessed without Assessed with 

state/jurisdiction Excluded Assessed accommodations accommodations

SD and/or ELL

Nation (public) 26 74 27 47

Arkansas 20 80 23 57

Connecticut 24 76 15 62

Florida 31 69 5 64

Idaho 20 80 30 50

Illinois 29 71 15 56

Iowa 24 76 21 55

Massachusetts 29 71 17 54

New Hampshire 18 82 37 45

New Jersey 21 79 12 67

South Dakota 23 77 27 50

West Virginia 14 86 28 57

SD

Nation (public) 31 69 18 51

Arkansas 24 76 19 57

Connecticut 25 75 13 62

Florida 40 60 3 57

Idaho 23 77 25 52

Illinois 31 69 14 55

Iowa 26 74 16 57

Massachusetts 32 68 15 53

New Hampshire 18 82 37 45

New Jersey 21 79 11 68

South Dakota 25 75 24 51

West Virginia 15 85 26 59

ELL

Nation (public) 14 86 52 34

Arkansas 1 99 37 62

Connecticut 17 83 21 62

Florida 6 94 9 86

Idaho 2 98 56 42

Illinois 17 83 21 62

Iowa 7 93 62 31

Massachusetts 14 86 28 58

New Hampshire 8 92 59 32

New Jersey 24 76 15 61

South Dakota 4 96 53 43

West Virginia # 100 90 10

# Rounds to zero.

NOTE: Eleven states participated in the assessment and met the reporting criteria. Students identified as both SD and ELL were counted only once under the 

combined SD and/or ELL category, but were counted separately under the SD and ELL categories. Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress 

(NAEP), 2009 Mathematics Assessment.

84 THE NATION’S REPORT CARD 
Table A-16. Average scale scores and achievement-level results in NAEP mathematics for twelfth-grade public 

school students, by selected racial/ethnic groups and state/jurisdiction: 2009

Race/ethnicity and 

state/jurisdiction

Average 

scale score

Percentage of students

Below Basic

At or above At or above 

Basic Proficient

At 

Advanced

White

Nation (public)

Arkansas

Connecticut

Florida

Idaho

Illinois

Iowa

Massachusetts

New Hampshire

New Jersey

South Dakota

West Virginia

160

154*

165*

156*

155*

162 

158*

167*

161 

165*

162*

142*

26

30*

21*

31

30 

24

27 

20*

26 

23 

20*

47*

74

70*

79*

69

70 

76

73 

80*

74 

77 

80*

53*

31

20*

37*

24*

24*

32 

26*

40*

32 

39*

31 

13*

3

1*

3

1*

1*

2 

1*

5*

3 

4 

1*

#*

Black

Nation (public)

Arkansas

Connecticut

Florida

Idaho

Illinois

Iowa

Massachusetts

New Hampshire

New Jersey

South Dakota

West Virginia

131

121*

131 

133 

‡ 

130 

138 

135 

‡ 

134 

‡ 

121*

64

77*

61

62

‡

62

57

59

‡

58

‡

74

36

23*

39

38

‡

38

43

41

‡

42

‡

26

6

2*

5

7

‡

6

10

9

‡

9

‡

1

#

#

#

#

‡

1

#

#

‡

#

‡

#

Hispanic

Nation (public)

Arkansas

Connecticut

Florida

Idaho

Illinois

Iowa

Massachusetts

New Hampshire

New Jersey

South Dakota

West Virginia

137

136 

132 

142* 

131*

141 

134 

137 

‡ 

139 

‡ 

‡ 

55

56

58

49*

65*

52

58

54

‡

51

‡

‡

45

44

42

51*

35*

48

42

46

‡

49

‡

‡

10

7

6*

13

9

13

6

12

‡

10

‡

‡

#

#

#

1

#

#

1

1

‡

1

‡

‡

Asian/Pacific Islander

Nation (public)

Arkansas

Connecticut

Florida

Idaho

Illinois

Iowa

Massachusetts

New Hampshire

New Jersey

South Dakota

West Virginia

175

‡

173

165

‡

171

‡

176

‡

179

‡

‡

17

‡

18

23

‡

18

‡

15

‡

13

‡

‡

83

‡

82

77

‡

82

‡

85

‡

87

‡

‡

52

‡

50

39

‡

46

‡

50

‡

55

‡

‡

11

‡

10

5

‡

4

‡

12

‡

13

‡

‡

# Rounds to zero.

‡ Reporting standards not met. Sample size insufficient to permit a reliable estimate.

* Significantly different (p < .05) from the nation.

NOTE: Eleven states participated in the assessment and met the reporting criteria. Black includes African American, Hispanic includes Latino, and Pacific Islander includes Native Hawaiian. 

Race categories exclude Hispanic origin. Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2009 Mathematics 

Assessment.

GRADE 12 READING AND MATHEMATICS 2009 APPENDIX TABLES 85
Table A-17. Average scale scores and achievement-level results in NAEP mathematics for twelfth-grade public 

school students, by gender and state/jurisdiction: 2009

Gender and 

state/jurisdiction

Average 

scale score

Percentage of students

Below Basic

At or above At or above 

Basic Proficient

At 

Advanced

Male

Nation (public)

Arkansas

Connecticut

Florida

Idaho

Illinois

Iowa

Massachusetts

New Hampshire

New Jersey

South Dakota

West Virginia

154

146*

157 

150*

153 

156 

156 

162*

161*

157 

160*

142*

36

42*

31

39

33

33

30*

27*

27*

33 

24*

47*

64

58*

69

61

67

67

70*

73*

73*

67 

76*

53*

27

18*

30

21*

25 

29 

28 

36*

35*

32 

30 

15*

3

1*

4

1*

2*

2 

1*

6 

4 

5 

1*

1*

Female

Nation (public)

Arkansas

Connecticut

Florida

Idaho

Illinois

Iowa

Massachusetts

New Hampshire

New Jersey

South Dakota

West Virginia

151

146*

156*

146*

152

153

156*

163*

160*

156*

159*

141*

38

40 

31*

43*

34*

34

27*

23*

25*

32*

22*

48*

62

60 

69*

57*

66*

66

73*

77*

75*

68*

78*

52*

23

13*

28*

16*

21 

24 

22

35*

30*

29*

27*

10*

2

#*

2

1*

#*

1 

1 

3*

2 

3 

#*

#

# Rounds to zero.

* Significantly different (p < .05) from the nation.

NOTE: Eleven states participated in the assessment and met the reporting criteria. Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2009 Mathematics 

Assessment.

86 THE NATION’S REPORT CARD 
Table A-18. Average scale scores and achievement-level results in NAEP mathematics for twelfth-grade public 

school students, by student-reported highest level of parental education and state/jurisdiction: 2009

Highest level of 

parental education and 

state/jurisdiction

Average 

scale score

Percentage of students

Below Basic

At or above At or above 

Basic Proficient

At 

Advanced

Did not finish high school

Nation (public)

Arkansas

Connecticut

Florida

Idaho

Illinois

Iowa

Massachusetts

New Hampshire

New Jersey

South Dakota

West Virginia

134

137

133

136

130

134

135

138

134

135

134

123*

60

55

59

57

62

60

56

54

55

57

61

71*

40

45

41

43

38

40

44

46

45

43

39

29*

8

7

6

7

7

7

5

14

10

7

6

5

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

1

#

1

#

#

Graduated from high school

Nation (public)

Arkansas

Connecticut

Florida

Idaho

Illinois

Iowa

Massachusetts

New Hampshire

New Jersey

South Dakota

West Virginia

141

138*

141 

141 

142 

144 

144 

149*

150*

142 

153*

134*

49

53 

47

51

46

45

44

37*

35*

47 

30*

59*

51

47 

53

49

54

55

56

63*

65*

53 

70*

41*

14

10*

13

13

12

15

13

18

19*

15

19*

6*

1

#

#

#

#

1

#

1

#

1

#

#

Some education after high school

Nation (public)

Arkansas

Connecticut

Florida

Idaho

Illinois

Iowa

Massachusetts

New Hampshire

New Jersey

South Dakota

West Virginia

150

147 

148 

148 

154*

152 

154*

157*

152 

150 

157*

141*

37

39 

39

38 

29*

34

31*

28*

33

38 

25*

50*

63

61 

61

62 

71*

66

69*

72*

67

62 

75*

50*

19

14*

17

14*

22 

21 

20

24*

20

20 

24*

10*

1

#

#

#

#

1

#

2

1

1

#

#

Graduated from college

Nation (public)

Arkansas

Connecticut

Florida

Idaho

Illinois

Iowa

Massachusetts

New Hampshire

New Jersey

South Dakota

West Virginia

163

154*

169*

156*

160

164

163

173*

169*

167*

165

153*

25

31*

18*

32*

25

22

20*

16*

18*

22 

18*

32*

75

69*

82*

68*

75

78

80*

84*

82*

78 

82*

68*

37

23*

43*

28*

30*

37 

33

48*

43*

43*

35

22*

5

1*

5

2*

2*

3 

2*

7

5 

6 

1*

1*

# Rounds to zero.

* Significantly different (p < .05) from the nation.

NOTE: Eleven states participated in the assessment and met the reporting criteria. Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2009 Mathematics 

Assessment.

GRADE 12 READING AND MATHEMATICS 2009 APPENDIX TABLES 87
Table A-19. Average scale scores and achievement-level results in NAEP mathematics for twelfth-grade public 

school students, by status as students with disabilities (SD) and state/jurisdiction: 2009

SD status and 

state/jurisdiction

Average 

scale score

Percentage of students

Below Basic

At or above At or above 

Basic Proficient

At 

Advanced

SD

Nation (public)

Arkansas

Connecticut

Florida

Idaho

Illinois

Iowa

Massachusetts

New Hampshire

New Jersey

South Dakota

West Virginia

118

109*

127*

122 

118 

111*

118 

136*

135*

121 

121 

104*

76

88*

67*

77 

79 

82 

81 

55*

60*

73 

79 

89*

24

12*

33*

23 

21 

18 

19 

45*

40*

27 

21 

11*

6

1*

13*

3

3

2*

2*

12

13*

8

2

2*

#

#

1

#

#

#

#

1

#

1

#

#

Not SD

Nation (public)

Arkansas

Connecticut

Florida

Idaho

Illinois

Iowa

Massachusetts

New Hampshire

New Jersey

South Dakota

West Virginia

155

150*

159*

150*

155 

158 

160*

166*

165*

161*

163*

147*

34

36

28*

38*

30

29*

24*

22*

21*

27*

19*

42*

66

64

72*

62*

70

71*

76*

78*

79*

73*

81*

58*

26

17*

31*

20*

24

28

27

38*

35*

33*

30*

14*

3

1*

3

1*

1*

2

1*

5*

4

4 

1*

1*

# Rounds to zero.

* Significantly different (p < .05) from the nation.

NOTE: Eleven states participated in the assessment and met the reporting criteria. Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2009 Mathematics 

Assessment.

88 THE NATION’S REPORT CARD 
Table A-20. Average scale scores and achievement-level results in NAEP mathematics for twelfth-grade public 

school students, by status as English language learners (ELL) and state/jurisdiction: 2009

ELL status and 

state/jurisdiction

Average 

scale score

Percentage of students

Below Basic

At or above At or above 

Basic Proficient

At 

Advanced

ELL

Nation (public)

Arkansas

Connecticut

Florida

Idaho

Illinois

Iowa

Massachusetts

New Hampshire

New Jersey

South Dakota

West Virginia

116

123

‡

111

‡

‡

‡

121

‡

‡

‡

‡

81

77

‡

84

‡

‡

‡

74

‡

‡

‡

‡

19

23

‡

16

‡

‡

‡

26

‡

‡

‡

‡

4

4

‡

3

‡

‡

‡

8

‡

‡

‡

‡

#

#

‡

#

‡

‡

‡

2

‡

‡

‡

‡

Not ELL

Nation (public)

Arkansas

Connecticut

Florida

Idaho

Illinois

Iowa

Massachusetts

New Hampshire

New Jersey

South Dakota

West Virginia

153

146*

157*

150*

153 

155 

157*

163*

161*

157*

160*

141*

36

40*

30*

39

33

33

28*

24*

26*

32

23*

48*

64

60*

70*

61

67

67

72*

76*

74*

68

77*

52*

25

16*

30*

19*

23

26

25

36*

32*

31*

29*

13*

3

#*

3

1*

1*

2

1*

5*

3

4

1*

#*

# Rounds to zero.

‡ Reporting standards not met. Sample size insufficient to permit a reliable estimate.

* Significantly different (p < .05) from the nation.

NOTE: Eleven states participated in the assessment and met the reporting criteria. Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2009 Mathematics 

Assessment.

GRADE 12 READING AND MATHEMATICS 2009 APPENDIX TABLES 89
THE NATION’S 

REPORT CARD

Grade 12

Reading and

Mathematics

2009

National and 

Pilot State 

Results

NOVEMBER 2010

M O R E I N F O R M A T I O N

The report release site is 

http://nationsreportcard.gov.

The NCES web electronic 

catalog is http://nces.ed.gov/

pubsearch.

For ordering information, write to

ED Pubs

U.S. Department of Education

P.O. Box 22207

Alexandria, VA 22304

or call toll free 1-877-4-ED-Pubs

or order online at 

http://www.edpubs.gov.

S U G G E S T E D C I T A T I O N

National Center for Education 

Statistics (2010).

The Nation’s Report Card: 

Grade 12 Reading and Mathematics 2009 

National and Pilot State Results

(NCES 2011–455). 

Institute of Education Sciences, 

U.S. Department of Education, 

Washington, D.C.

C O N T E N T C O N T A C T

Samantha Burg

202-502-7335

samantha.burg@ed.gov

Prepared by Educational Testing Service 

under contract with the National Center 

for Education Statistics.

U.S. Department of Education

The National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) is a congressionally authorized project sponsored by the 

U.S. Department of Education. The National Center for Education Statistics, within the Institute of Education Sciences, 

administers NAEP. The Commissioner of Education Statistics is responsible by law for carrying out the NAEP project.

Arne Duncan

Secretary

U.S. Department 

of Education

John Q. Easton

Director

Institute of 

Education Sciences

Stuart Kerachsky

Acting Commissioner

National Center for 

Education Statistics

The National Assessment Governing Board

In 1988, Congress created the National Assessment Governing Board to set policy for the National Assessment of 

Educational Progress, commonly known as The Nation's Report CardTM. The Governing Board is an independent, 

bipartisan group whose members include governors, state legislators, local and state school officials, educators, 

business representatives, and members of the general public.

Honorable David P. Driscoll, Chair

Former Commissioner of Education

Melrose, Massachusetts

Amanda P. Avallone, Vice Chair

Assistant Principal and 

Eighth-Grade Teacher

Summit Middle School

Boulder, Colorado

David J. Alukonis

Former Chairman

Hudson School Board

Hudson, New Hampshire

Louis M. Fabrizio

Director, Accountability Policy and 

Communications

North Carolina Department of Public 

Instruction

Raleigh, North Carolina

Honorable Anitere Flores

Member

Florida House of Representatives

Miami, Florida

Alan J. Friedman

Consultant

Museum Development and Science 

Communication

New York, New York

David W. Gordon

County Superintendent of Schools

Sacramento County Office of Education

Sacramento, California

Doris R. Hicks

Principal and Chief Executive Officer

Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Charter School 

for Science and Technology

New Orleans, Louisiana

Kathi M. King

Twelfth-Grade Teacher

Messalonskee High School

Oakland, Maine

Kim Kozbial-Hess

Fourth-Grade Teacher and 

Educational Technology Trainer

Toledo, Ohio

Henry Kranendonk

Mathematics Curriculum Specialist

Milwaukee Public Schools

Milwaukee, Wisconsin

Tonya Miles

General Public Representative

Mitchellville, Maryland

Honorable Steven L. Paine

State Superintendent of Schools

West Virginia Department of Education

Charleston, West Virginia

Honorable Sonny Perdue

Governor of Georgia

Atlanta, Georgia

Susan Pimentel

Educational Consultant

Hanover, New Hampshire

W. James Popham

Professor Emeritus 

Graduate School of Education and 

Information Studies

University of California, Los Angeles

Los Angeles, California

Andrew C. Porter

Dean

Graduate School of Education

University of Pennsylvania

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

Warren T. Smith

Vice President

Washington State Board of Education

Olympia, Washington

Mary Frances Taymans

Sisters of Notre Dame

National Education Office

Bethesda, Maryland

Oscar A. Troncoso

Principal

Anthony High School

Anthony Independent School District

Anthony, Texas

Honorable Leticia Van de Putte

Senator

Texas State Senate

San Antonio, Texas

Eileen L. Weiser

General Public Representative

Ann Arbor, Michigan

Darvin M. Winick

President

Winick & Associates

Austin, Texas

John Q. Easton (Ex officio)

Director 

Institute of Education Sciences

U.S. Department of Education

Washington, D.C.

Cornelia S. Orr

Executive Director 

National Assessment Governing Board

Washington, D.C.

“The Depar tment of Education’s mission is to promote student 

achievement and preparation for global competitiveness by 

fostering educational excellence and ensuring equal access.”

www.ed.gov