DATA FOR

THE NATIONAL EDUCATION

GOALS REPORT

Volume One:

National Data
For sale by the U.S. Government Printing Office

Superintendent of Documents, Mail Stop: SSOP, Washington, DC 20402
Foreword

On behalf of the National Education Goals Panel, I am pleased to present the 1995 National Education Goals Report, the fifth ina series of annual reports to measure progress toward the National Education Goals through the year 2000. The 1995 Goals

Report consists of four documents, the Core Report, the National and State Data Volumes, and the Executive Summary. The Core

Report focuses on approximately two dozen core indicators to convey to parents, educators, and policymakers how far we are from

achievement of the Goals and what we must do in order to reach our destination. The National and State Data Volumes include

additional comprehensive sets of measures to describe our progress at the national level and the amount of progress that individual states have made against their own baselines. The fourth document, the Executive Summary, condenses this information and

presents it in a format suitable for all audiences.

This year marks the halfway point between 1990, the year that President Bush and the nation’s Governors established the

National Education Goals, and our target date for achieving them, the year 2000. While the nation and states have made encouraging progress in mathematics achievement; participation in Advanced Placement examinations in core areas such as English,

mathematics, science, and history; and early prenatal care, there is still work to be done in other areas.

What must we do to accelerate our progress? One essential step is for schools and families to form strong partnerships to

improve education. This year’s Core Report and Executive Summary focus on the essential role that families play in helping to

achieve the National Education Goals and suggest ways in which schools can involve them in partnerships to increase our

chances of reaching our targets. They also highlight promising family involvement practices in several schools that have been

recognized for their programs. The four schools profiled are Katy Elementary School in Katy, Texas; Sarah Scott Middle School in

Terre Haute, Indiana; Booker T. Washington Elementary School in Champaign, Illinois; and Kettering Middle School in Upper

Marlboro, Maryland. These schools were selected as the winners of the 1995 Strong Families, Strong Schools Most Promising

Practices Competition sponsored by Scholastic, Inc., Apple Computer, the U.S. Secretary of Education, and the National Education Goals Panel. The students, families, and staff in these schools and communities are to be congratulated on their success. 

Sincerely,

Evan Bayh, Chair

(1994-1995)

National Education Goals Panel, and

Governor of Indiana 

Governors

David M. Beasley,

Governor of South Carolina

John Engler,

Governor of Michigan

Kirk Fordice,

Governor of Mississippi

James B. Hunt,

Governor of North Carolina

Roy Romer,

Governor of Colorado

John G. Rowland,

Governor of Connecticut

Christine Todd Whitman,

Governor of New Jersey

Members of

the Administration

Carol H. Rasco,

Assistant to the President

for Domestic Policy

Richard W. Riley,

Secretary of Education

Members of Congress

Jeff Bingaman,

U.S. Senator, New Mexico

Judd Gregg,

U.S. Senator, New Hampshire

William F. Goodling,

U.S. Representative, Pennsylvania

Dale E. Kildee,

U.S. Representative, Michigan

State Legislators

Anne C. Barnes,

State Representative, North Carolina

G. Spencer Coggs,

State Representative, Wisconsin

Robert T. Connor,

State Senator, Delaware

Douglas R. Jones,

State Representative, Idaho
4
5

Preface

Planning, design, and production of the four documents which comprise the 1995 National Education Goals Report

were the responsibility of Leslie Lawrence and Cynthia Prince, with assistance from Jennifer Ballen and Hyong Yi.

Babette Gutmann, Allison Henderson, and Ann Webber of Westat, Inc., assisted by Justin Boesel, supplied invaluable technical assistance and statistical support services. Kelli Hill and Jim Page of Impact Design, Inc., contributed

expertise in graphic design, layout, and report production. Beth Glaspie and Scott Miller of Editorial Experts, Inc.,

provided essential editorial support. Additional graphics were designed by Ogilvy, Adams and Rinehart and by the

National Geographic Society.

Special thanks go to members of the National Education Goals Panel’s Working Group for helpful critiques of earlier drafts of the Report, especially members of the Reporting Committee: Patricia Brown, Kim Burdick, William

Christopher, Lori Gremel, Mary Rollefson, and Emily Wurtz.

The 1995 Goals Report would not have been possible without the hard work, thoughtful planning, and careful

review provided by all of these individuals. Their dedication and assistance are gratefully acknowledged.

Ken Nelson

Executive Director

National Education Goals Panel
6
7

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

Foreword ................................................................................................................................................... 3

Preface ...................................................................................................................................................... 5

The National Education Goals ............................................................................................................... 10

Introduction ............................................................................................................................................. 15

Indicators for the National Volume ....................................................................................................... 21

Goal 1: Ready to Learn ................................................................................................................... 23

Exhibit 1: Prenatal Care .................................................................................................................. 26

Exhibit 2: Birthweight ..................................................................................................................... 27

Exhibit 3: Children’s Health Index ................................................................................................. 28

Exhibit 4: Immunizations ................................................................................................................. 30

Exhibit 5: Medical and Dental Care ............................................................................................... 31

Exhibit 6: Family-Child Language and Literacy Activities ............................................................ 32

Exhibit 7: Family-Child Arts Activities .......................................................................................... 33

Exhibit 8: Family-Child Learning Opportunities ............................................................................ 34

Exhibit 9: Preschool Participation ................................................................................................... 35

Exhibit 10: Preschool Programs for Children With Disabilities ....................................................... 36

Exhibit 11: Quality of Preschool Centers .......................................................................................... 37

Exhibit 12: Quality of Home-Based Preschool Settings ................................................................... 38

Goal 2: School Completion ............................................................................................................. 41

Exhibit 13: High School Completion Rates ...................................................................................... 44

Exhibit 14: Dropouts Who Completed High School ........................................................................ 45

Exhibit 15: High School Dropout Rates ........................................................................................... 46

Goal 3: Student Achievement and Citizenship ............................................................................. 49

Exhibit 16: Reading Achievement .................................................................................................... 53

Exhibit 17: Reading Achievement – Grade 4 ................................................................................... 54

Exhibit 18: Reading Achievement – Grade 8 ................................................................................... 56

Exhibit 19: Reading Achievement – Grade 12 ................................................................................. 58

Exhibit 20: Writing Achievement – Grade 4 ................................................................................... 60

Exhibit 21: Writing Achievement – Grades 8 and 12 ...................................................................... 62

Exhibit 22: Mathematics Achievement ............................................................................................ 65

Exhibit 23: Mathematics Achievement – Grade 4 ........................................................................... 66

Exhibit 24: Mathematics Achievement – Grade 8 ........................................................................... 68

Exhibit 25: Mathematics Achievement – Grade 12 ......................................................................... 70

Exhibit 26: History Achievement ..................................................................................................... 72

Exhibit 27: History Achievement – Grade 4 .................................................................................... 72

Exhibit 28: History Achievement – Grade 8 .................................................................................... 74

Exhibit 29: History Achievement – Grade 12 .................................................................................. 76

Exhibit 30: Geography Achievement ............................................................................................... 78

Exhibit 31: Geography Achievement – Grade 4 .............................................................................. 78

Exhibit 32: Geography Achievement – Grade 8 .............................................................................. 80

Exhibit 33: Geography Achievement – Grade 12 ............................................................................ 82

Exhibit 34: Trends in Science Proficiency ........................................................................................ 84

Exhibit 35: Advanced Placement Results – English, Mathematics, Science, 

Foreign Languages, Civics and Government, Economics,

Fine Arts, and History .................................................................................................... 85
8

Exhibit 36: Community Service ........................................................................................................ 86

Exhibit 37: Young Adult Voter Registration and Voting .................................................................. 88

Goal 4: Teacher Education and Professional Development ......................................................... 91

Exhibit 38: Teacher Preparation ........................................................................................................ 94

Exhibit 39: Teacher Certification in Main Teaching Assignment ................................................... 95

Exhibit 40: Temporary or Emergency Teacher Certification ............................................................. 96

Exhibit 41: Participation in Professional Development Activities on Selected Topics ................... 97

Exhibit 42: Support for Professional Development ........................................................................... 98

Exhibit 43: Participation in Different Types of Professional Development Activities .................... 99

Exhibit 44: Preparation to Teach Limited English Proficient (LEP) Students ................................ 100

Exhibit 45: Support Through Formal Teacher Induction Programs ................................................. 102

Exhibit 46: Teacher Influence Over School Policy .......................................................................... 103

Goal 5: Mathematics and Science ................................................................................................. 105

Exhibit 47: International Mathematics and Science Achievement Comparisons .......................... 108

Exhibit 48: Mathematics Instructional Practices – Grade 4 ............................................................. 109

Exhibit 49: Mathematics Instructional Practices – Grade 8 ............................................................. 110

Exhibit 50: Science Instructional Practices ...................................................................................... 111

Exhibit 51: Trends in Mathematics Degrees Earned, by Sex ............................................................ 112

Exhibit 52: Trends in Science Degrees Earned, by Sex .................................................................... 112

Exhibit 53: Trends in Mathematics Degrees Earned, by Race/Ethnicity .......................................... 113

Exhibit 54: Trends in Science Degrees Earned, by Race/Ethnicity .................................................. 114

Exhibit 55: Mathematics and Science Degrees ................................................................................. 115

Goal 6: Adult Literacy and Lifelong Learning .............................................................................. 117

Exhibit 56: Adult Literacy ................................................................................................................. 120

Exhibit 57: Adults’ Perceptions of Own Literacy Abilities, by Literacy Level ................................ 122

Exhibit 58: Perceived Usefulness of Skills in the Future .................................................................. 123

Exhibit 59: Perceived Responsibility for Improving Job Performance ............................................. 124

Exhibit 60: Participation in Adult Education ................................................................................... 125

Exhibit 61: Participation in Adult Education, by Occupation ......................................................... 126

Exhibit 62: Worker Training ............................................................................................................. 128

Exhibit 63: College Enrollment ......................................................................................................... 129

Exhibit 64: College Completion ....................................................................................................... 130

Exhibit 65: Voter Registration and Voting ........................................................................................ 131

Goal 7: Safe, Disciplined, and Alcohol- and Drug-free Schools ................................................ 133

Exhibit 66: Sale of Drugs at School .................................................................................................. 136

Exhibit 67: Obtaining Illegal Drugs at School .................................................................................. 137

Exhibit 68: Use of Drugs at School by 8th and 10th Graders .......................................................... 138

Exhibit 69: Use of Drugs at School by 12th Graders ........................................................................ 139

Exhibit 70: Overall Student Drug Use .............................................................................................. 140

Exhibit 71: Being Under the Influence of Alcohol or Other Drugs While at School ..................... 142

Exhibit 72: Carrying Weapons to School .......................................................................................... 143

Exhibit 73: Student Victimization ..................................................................................................... 144

Exhibit 74: Student Membership in Gangs ....................................................................................... 145

Exhibit 75: Student Safety ................................................................................................................. 146

Exhibit 76: Teacher Safety ................................................................................................................. 148

Exhibit 77: Teacher Victimization ..................................................................................................... 149

Exhibit 78: Disruptions in Class by Students...................................................................................... 150

Exhibit 79: Skipping School and Classes............................................................................................ 152

Exhibit 80: Teacher Beliefs About the School Environment............................................................. 154

Exhibit 81: Student Attitudes Toward Drug Use ................................................................................ 155
9

Goal 8: Parental Participation ....................................................................................................... 157

Exhibit 82: Teachers’ Reports of Parent Involvement in School Activities .................................... 160

Exhibit 83: Principals’ Reports of Parent Involvement in School Activities .................................. 161

Exhibit 84: Parent Participation in Specific School Activities ........................................................ 162

Exhibit 85: Parents’ Reports of Their Involvement in School Activities ........................................ 163

Exhibit 86: Parent Involvement in Academic Activities With Their Children ............................. 164

Exhibit 87: Parents’ Perceptions of Quality of School Performance ................................................ 165

Exhibit 88: School Reports to Parents About Student Academics .................................................. 167

Exhibit 89: School Communication With Parents ........................................................................... 168

Appendix A: Technical Notes and Sources ......................................................................................... 173

Appendix B: Acknowledgements .......................................................................................................... 193

National Education Goals Panel Staff ................................................................................................... 199
10

The National Education Goals

GOAL 1: Ready to Learn 

By the year 2000, all children in America will start school ready to learn.

Objectives:

■ All children will have access to high-quality and developmentally appropriate

preschool programs that help prepare children for school.

■ Every parent in the United States will be a child’s first teacher and devote 

time each day to helping such parent’s preschool child learn, and parents will have

access to the training and support parents need.

■ Children will receive the nutrition, physical activity experiences, and health care

needed to arrive at school with healthy minds and bodies, and to maintain the mental 

alertness necessary to be prepared to learn, and the number of low-birthweight babies

will be significantly reduced through enhanced prenatal health systems.

Goal 2: School Completion 

By the year 2000, the high school graduation rate will increase to at least 90 percent.

Objectives:

■ The Nation must dramatically reduce its school dropout rate, and 75

percent of the students who do drop out will successfully complete a 

high school degree or its equivalent.

■ The gap in high school graduation rates between American students from minority

backgrounds and their non-minority counterparts will be eliminated.
11

Goal 3: Student Achievement and Citizenship 

By the year 2000, all students will leave grades 4, 8, and 12 having demonstrated competency over challenging subject matter including English, mathematics, science, foreign

languages, civics and government, economics, arts, history, and geography, and every

school in America will ensure that all students learn to use their minds well, so they may

be prepared for responsible citizenship, further learning, and productive employment in

our Nation’s modern economy.

Objectives:

■ The academic performance of all students at the elementary and secondary level will

increase significantly in every quartile, and the distribution of minority students in each

quartile will more closely reflect the student population as a whole.

■ The percentage of all students who demonstrate the ability to reason, solve problems,

apply knowledge, and write and communicate effectively will increase substantially.

■ All students will be involved in activities that promote and demonstrate good

citizenship, good health, community service, and personal responsibility.

■ All students will have access to physical education and health education to ensure 

they are healthy and fit.

■ The percentage of all students who are competent in more than one language will

substantially increase.

■ All students will be knowledgeable about the diverse cultural heritage of this Nation

and about the world community.

Goal 4: Teacher Education and Professional Development

By the year 2000, the Nation’s teaching force will have access to programs for the continued improvement of their professional skills and the opportunity to acquire the knowledge

and skills needed to instruct and prepare all American students for the 

next century.

Objectives:

■ All teachers will have access to preservice teacher education and continuing 

professional development activities that will provide such teachers with the knowledge

and skills needed to teach to an increasingly diverse student population with a variety

of educational, social, and health needs.

■ All teachers will have continuing opportunities to acquire additional knowledge and

skills needed to teach challenging subject matter and to use emerging new methods,

forms of assessment, and technologies.

■ States and school districts will create integrated strategies to attract, recruit, 

prepare, retrain, and support the continued professional development of teachers,

administrators, and other educators, so that there is a highly talented work force of 

professional educators to teach challenging subject matter.
12

■ Partnerships will be established, whenever possible, among local educational agencies,

institutions of higher education, parents, and local labor, business, and professional

associations to provide and support programs for the professional development of

educators.

Goal 5: Mathematics and Science 

By the year 2000, United States students will be first in the world in mathematics and science achievement.

Objectives:

■ Mathematics and science education, including the metric system of measurement, will

be strengthened throughout the system, especially in the early grades.

■ The number of teachers with a substantive background in mathematics and science,

including the metric system of measurement, will increase by 50 percent.

■ The number of United States undergraduate and graduate students, especially women

and minorities, who complete degrees in mathematics, science, and engineering will

increase significantly.

Goal 6: Adult Literacy and Lifelong Learning 

By the year 2000, every adult American will be literate and will possess the knowledge

and skills necessary to compete in a global economy and exercise the rights and responsibilities of citizenship.

Objectives:

■ Every major American business will be involved in strengthening the connection

between education and work.

■ All workers will have the opportunity to acquire the knowledge and skills, from basic

to highly technical, needed to adapt to emerging new technologies, work methods, and

markets through public and private educational, vocational, technical, workplace, or

other programs.

■ The number of quality programs, including those at libraries, that are designed to serve

more effectively the needs of the growing number of part-time and midcareer students

will increase substantially.

■ The proportion of the qualified students, especially minorities, who enter college,

who complete at least two years, and who complete their degree programs will

increase substantially.

■ The proportion of college graduates who demonstrate an advanced ability to think

critically, communicate effectively, and solve problems will increase substantially.

■ Schools, in implementing comprehensive parent involvement programs, will offer more

adult literacy, parent training and lifelong learning opportunities to improve the ties

between home and school, and enhance parents’ work and home lives.
13

Goal 7: Safe, Disciplined, and Alcohol- and

Drug-free Schools 

By the year 2000, every school in the United States will be free of drugs, violence, and the

unauthorized presence of firearms and alcohol and will offer a disciplined environment

conducive to learning.

Objectives:

■ Every school will implement a firm and fair policy on use, possession,

and distribution of drugs and alcohol.

■ Parents, businesses, governmental and community organizations will work together to

ensure the rights of students to study in a safe and secure environment that is free of

drugs and crime, and that schools provide a healthy environment and are a safe haven

for all children.

■ Every local educational agency will develop and implement a policy to ensure that all

schools are free of violence and the unauthorized presence of weapons.

■ Every local educational agency will develop a sequential, comprehensive kindergarten

through twelfth grade drug and alcohol prevention education program.

■ Drug and alcohol curriculum should be taught as an integral part of sequential, 

comprehensive health education.

■ Community-based teams should be organized to provide students and teachers with

needed support.

■ Every school should work to eliminate sexual harassment.

Goal 8: Parental Participation

By the year 2000, every school will promote partnerships that will increase parental

involvement and participation in promoting the social, emotional, and academic growth 

of children.

Objectives:

■ Every State will develop policies to assist local schools and local educational agencies 

to establish programs for increasing partnerships that respond to the varying needs of 

parents and the home, including parents of children who are disadvantaged or bilingual, 

or parents of children with disabilities.

■ Every school will actively engage parents and families in a partnership which supports

the academic work of children at home and shared educational decisionmaking

at school.

■ Parents and families will help to ensure that schools are adequately supported and will

hold schools and teachers to high standards of accountability.
14
15

The 1995 National Education Goals Report represents

the mid-point of an unprecedented national, state,

and community commitment to reform and renew education — the achievement of the National Education

Goals. These Goals state that by the year 2000:

1)All children in America will start school ready to

learn.

2) The high school graduation rate will increase to at

least 90 percent.

3) All students will leave Grades 4, 8, and 12 having

demonstrated competency over challenging subject

matter including English, mathematics, science, foreign languages, civics and government, economics,

arts, history, and geography, and every school in

America will ensure that all students learn to use

their minds well, so they may be prepared for responsible citizenship, further learning, and productive

employment in our Nation’s modern economy.

4) The Nation’s teaching force will have access to programs for the continued improvement of their professional skills and the opportunity to acquire the

knowledge and skills needed to instruct and prepare

all American students for the next century.

5) United States students will be first in the world in

mathematics and science achievement.

6)Every adult American will be literate and will possess the knowledge and skills necessary to compete

in a global economy and exercise the rights and

responsibilities of citizenship.

7)Every school in the United States will be free of

drugs, violence, and the unauthorized presence of

firearms and alcohol and will offer a disciplined

environment conducive to learning.

8)Every school will promote partnerships that will

increase parental involvement and participation in

promoting the social, emotional, and academic

growth of children.

The National Education Goals represent a framework

for improvement — an understanding that a quality education can no longer be viewed as an “event” that happens

within four walls, but begins before birth, continues

throughout life, and involves all sectors of the community.

Progress Since the 1989 Summit

This fifth report represents a chance to reflect on

progress made since the 1989 Education Summit and

the adoption of the Goals in 1990. At the national

level, we have made positive strides in many areas,

including the following:

Goal 1 — Ready to Learn:

• From 1990 to 1992, the percentage of mothers receiving prenatal care in the first trimester increased from

76% to 78%. Increases occurred for each racial/ethnic group.

• The percentage of children born with one or more

health risks decreased from 37% to 35% from 1990 to

1992.

Goal 3 — Student Achievement and Citizenship:

• The percentage of 4th and 8th graders who scored at

the Proficient or Advanced levels on the National

Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) mathematics assessments increased from 1990 to 1992. For

4th graders, the percentage increased from 13% to

18%, while for 8th graders, the percentage increased

from 20% to 25%.

Introduction
16

• Participation rates in the Advanced Placement program, though still relatively low, climbed from 1991

to 1995, particularly in core subject areas such as

English, mathematics, science, and history.

• Voter registration and voting, indicators of responsible citizenship, increased from 1988 to 1992. Among

young voters (18 to 20 years old), registration rates

climbed from 48% to 53%, while voting rates

climbed from 35% to 42%.

Goal 5 — Mathematics and Science:

• The number of undergraduate and graduate science

degrees awarded increased for both men and women

and in each racial/ethnic group from 1990 to 1993. 

Goal 6 — Adult Literacy and Lifelong Learning:

• More adults reported taking adult education courses

in 1995 than in 1991. 

However, in other cases, we have fallen further

behind:

Goal 6 — Adult Literacy and Lifelong Learning:

• Although overall participation in adult education

increased from 1991 to 1995, the gap widened

between adults who have a high school diploma or

less and those who have additional postsecondary

education or technical training.

Goal 7 — Safe, Disciplined, and Alcohol- and 

Drug-free Schools:

• Overall use of drugs, particularly marijuana, increased

in Grades 8, 10, and 12. From 1991 to 1994, atschool drug use also increased among 8th and 10th

graders.

• From 1991 to 1994, disapproval of marijuana use

declined among students in Grades 8, 10, and 12.

Eighth and 10th graders’ disapproval of binge drinking also declined.

• More 12th graders reported skipping class in 1994

than in 1990.

• A larger percentage of public school teachers reported being threatened or injured by a student from their

school in 1994 than in 1991.

• From 1991 to 1994, more secondary school teachers

reported that student misbehavior often interfered

with their teaching.

Among the states, there have also been improvements:

Goal 1 — Ready to Learn:

• Rates of prenatal care in the first trimester improved

in 45 states and the District of Columbia.

• The proportion of young children with disabilities

served by preschool programs increased in 44 states.

Goal 3 — Student Achievement and Citizenship:

• From 1991 to 1995, more than 40 states had an

increase in the number of English, mathematics, and

science Advanced Placement examinations receiving

grades of 3 or higher; more than 30 had an increase in

the number of history examinations receiving grades

of 3 or higher.

Goal 5 — Mathematics and Science:

• The use of calculators in the classroom is a type of

instruction recommended by mathematics education

experts. Between 1990 and 1992, the percentage of

teachers reporting at least weekly calculator use in the

classroom increased in 23 of 34 states.

Goal 6 — Adult Literacy and Lifelong Learning:

• Between 1988 and 1992, voter registration rates

increased in 19 states and the District of Columbia,

and voting rates increased in 31 states and the District of Columbia. 

But, there are also areas where the news is not as

encouraging:

Goal 3 — Student Achievement and Citizenship:

• The percentage of 8th graders scoring at the Proficient

or Advanced levels on the NAEP mathematics assessment increased in only 9 states from 1990 to 1992.

Goal 5 — Mathematics and Science:

• Only three states came close to the two highest performing countries on an international mathematics

comparison conducted in 1991.
17

Goal 7 — Safe, Disciplined, and Alcohol- and 

Drug-free Schools:

• Between 1991 and 1993, only two states showed a

decrease in overall use of alcohol. 

Focusing our attention on “where we are” and how

far we need to go to reach the National Education

Goals, however, is only part of the story. To help states

and communities continue to move forward, the Goals

Panel has created a variety of tools to support Goal

achievement and education reform efforts.

Serving the States and Communities

Supporting State and Community Development of

Academic Standards and Assessments

There has been commitment among the Goals Panel

members from its inception that academic standards

backed by valid assessments are an important part of

reaching the National Education Goals. Implicit in

Goal 3, Student Achievement and Citizenship, is the

belief that its attainment is dependent on the development of rigorous academic standards. The Panel also

believes that the most important venues for the development of academic standards and assessments are states

and communities.

To assist states and communities in answering the

question, “What will educational success look like?” the

Panel will undertake the following during the coming

year:

• Develop a description of “world-class” academic standards. One of the most pressing needs as states and

school districts develop academic standards is to

know what world-class academic standards truly look

like. A resource group will be created to answer the

following questions:

— What do competitor nations expect of their students?

— What do high-performance workplaces expect of

entering employees?

— What are the admissions requirements of leading

colleges and universities?

By building on the work of organizations who have

collected information of this type, the Goals Panel

will expand the current base of knowledge on international academic standards and make it available to

state and local policymakers and parents. 

• Focus on assessment and measurement of student

achievement. The Goals Panel will create a resource

group to offer guidance to states and school districts

in examining the issues surrounding assessment and

measurement, as well as suggestions on implementation. In addition, the Goals Panel will make information available to state and local policymakers and

the public, to broaden their understanding of these

often complicated issues.

• Provide feedback to states and communities on the

creation of academic standards and assessments.

States and communities that have accepted the difficult task of developing academic standards and assessments will at some point confront the questions:

— Are these good enough?

— How do they compare to world-class benchmarks?

By offering to provide feedback through a voluntary

“peer-review” process, the Goals Panel will enhance

the efforts of states and communities.

• Compile an inventory of Academic Standards-Related Activities. The Goals Panel has created an inventory of various organizations’ activities related to the

development of academic standards. This inventory

explores the work of 26 organizations in promoting

and strengthening the movement toward the development of state academic standards and performance

assessments, and helps to answer the following questions:

— Who is conducting work concerning world-class

standards?

— Who is developing performance standards and

assessments?

— Who is giving states and local school districts

technical assistance and feedback on their standards?

— Who is developing comments on content standards?

— Who is informing educators and the public?

— Who in the business community is involved with

standards?
18

Providing Tools to Reach the Goals

The Community Action Toolkit

Created to help answer the question, “What can I do

at the local level?” the Toolkit offers an array of materials and information to help communities build broadbased support and participation in the democratic

process of setting and achieving local education goals —

tools that can add power or accelerate local education

improvement activities. 

The Toolkit follows the “Goals Process.” Simply put,

the Goals Process helps communities figure out where

they need and want to go, where they are in relation to

that destination, and what they have to do to get from

one point to the other. Through the Goals Process,

communities set ambitious but realistic targets for educational improvements, assess their current strengths

and weaknesses, chart a course of aggressive action to

reach their goals, and regularly report back to their constituents about goal achievement.

To do this, the Toolkit contains five guidebooks:

• Guide to Goals and Standards — provides an overview

on the National Education Goals and efforts to create

academic standards.

• Community Organizing Guide — details a step-by-step

process to mobilize communities to achieve the

Goals; includes suggestions such as how to create a

leadership team and implement strategies.

• Local Goals Reporting Handbook — describes how to

set up a local accountability process; offers suggestions on the kinds of questions to ask at the local

level to get started.

• Guide to Getting Out Your Message — features information to increase the impact of grassroots communication techniques; includes sample materials such as

news releases, speeches, articles, and public service

announcements.

• Resource Directory — provides a quick reference guide

to many organizations and reading materials that can

support and enrich a community campaign to reach

the National Education Goals or local goals.

Electronic Services

To reach a more extensive audience of researchers,

community leaders, and practitioners, the Goals Panel

has “teamed-up” with three partners who provide services through electronic means: the Coalition for Goals

2000, the U.S. Department of Education, and The Daily

Report Card. Users of these services can gather information on how much progress is being made toward the

Goals, promising programs being used throughout the

states and communities to reach the Goals, and Goals

Panel initiatives.

Earlier this year, the Goals Panel contracted with the

Coalition for Goals 2000 to create a customized area on

GOAL LINE, the Coalition’s education reform online

network. GOAL LINE was created to increase the scale

and pace of grassroots education reform by enabling persons interested in education to share information and

effective programs with each other. The Panel’s public

presence on GOAL LINE provides that service and

includes such information as facts and information

about the Goals Panel and its role, a publication list, an

interactive area for GOAL LINE subscribers to seek information directly from staff, and a news area to inform

users of Goals Panel activities. Many publications are

available directly online and are contained in the Goals

Panel database, allowing users to search Goals Reports

and other Panel documents easily.

In addition, the Goals Panel, in conjunction with the

U.S. Department of Education Online Library,

1 will be

creating a World Wide Web Home Page. The 1994 and

1995 Goals Reports will be available in 1995, with the

1991, 1992, and 1993 Goals Reports and the Community Action Toolkit becoming available in 1996. The

U.S. Department of Education’s Online Library also

offers selected Goals Panel publications as well as a variety of documents on family involvement and education

research and statistics. 

This year the 1994 and 1995 Goals Reports also will

be available on CD-ROM for users of both IBM and

Macintosh computers. The CD-ROM will permit users

to create customized Goals reports by enabling users to

view, search (by state, Goal, or indicator), copy, and

print any portion of the Goals Report, as well as allow

the user to edit text.

Through The Daily Report Card, an online education

newsletter, the Panel supports the distribution of information on how state and local education reforms are progressing nationwide to help communities find ways to

reach the National Education Goals. Readers include

governors, state legislators, university faculty, school

superintendents, teachers, other school officials, and the

general public.

1 To get to the Department’s Online Library and the Goals Panel’s publications, use the World Wide Web: http://www.ed.gov/ or Gopher:

gopher://gopher.ed.gov:10001/11/initiatives/goals/national. 
19

The 1995 Goals Report

The documents which comprise the 1995 Goals Report

are also tools to serve states and communities. The

National and State Data Volumes provide in-depth information on the progress we have made at the national

level and the amount of progress individual states have

made against their own baselines. The Core Report examines a set of approximately two dozen core indicators and

describes how far we are from our destination. In addition, the Core Report and the Executive Summary go one

step further and share ideas on how we can move closer to

Goal achievement. Specifically, they emphasize the

basic, yet vital, role that families play in educating their

children and in ultimately reaching all of the Goals.

They provide examples of what states and communities

are doing to strengthen the link between families and

schools, highlight school-based programs, and provide

contact information.

Beyond 1995

At the mid-point of this decade-long process, we have

seen some success toward Goal achievement, but we also

have seen some failure. In order to sustain our successes,

and to turn around our failures, we need the involvement

of everyone — families, students, educators, business

leaders, policymakers, and other community members. 

The tools listed above can assist in creating successes

at the state and community levels by defining what we

mean by “world-class” standards, helping to organize

communities to achieve the Goals, and providing examples on how to support that critical connection between

the school and the family. 

For more information on these documents or online

services, please refer to the Questionnaire at the end of

this document. 
20
21

2000

1995
22
23

2000

1995
24

avoided drugs and alcohol, and made sure that their babies started life with proper

medical care and nutrition are much more likely to have healthy infants who will

grow into young children ready to learn when they enter school. We now know that

an alarming number of infants in this country are born with one or more health risks. 

We also know that a large number of the very young do not enjoy a childhood

most adults would consider desirable. Many are not receiving the kind of support

that enriches childhood. About six in ten of three- to five-year-olds are read to every

day by their parents, and about three-fourths of two-year-olds have been fully immunized for major childhood diseases. Poor children in particular (constituting about

one-fourth of those enrolling in school each year) are less likely than others to be

enrolled in preschool. The gaps in care between poor children and those in wealthier

families, identified in earlier Reports, remain large.

Children who start school with health problems, limited ability to communicate,

or a lack of curiosity are at greater risk of subsequent school failure than other children. Helping these children after they enter school is a costly remedy for failing to

nurture them when they were very young. However, assuring that every child is ready

to learn is important beyond the money that would be saved. A commitment to meet

this Goal would bring together families, communities, businesses, schools, and other

support resources for the purpose of giving all children the opportunities to become

effective, competent learners. By sharing this common mission to nurture America’s

youngest citizens, we become a stronger society. And young children growing up in

such a society, where childhood is protected and enriched, will be ready, even eager,

to learn.
25

■ Children will receive the nutrition, physical activity experiences, and health

care needed to arrive at school with healthy minds and bodies, and to maintain 

the mental alertness necessary to be prepared to learn, and the number of lowbirthweight babies will be significantly reduced through enhanced prenatal

health systems.
26

White3,4

During 1st trimester During 2nd trimester During 3rd trimester 

or never

84912328

Source: National Center for Health Statistics, 1995

This exhibit updates information presented in the 1994 Goals Report.

1 First visit for health care services during pregnancy. 2 Excludes Blacks of Hispanic origin. 3 Data shown only for states with an Hispanic-origin item on their birth certificates. See technical notes in

Appendix A. 4 Excludes Whites of Hispanic origin. 

Change Since 1990

Point at which mothers first began prenatal care;1 number per 1,000:

During 1st During 2nd During 3rd

trimester trimester trimester or never

1990 1992 1990 1992 1990 1992

All mothers 758 777 181 171 61 52

American Indian/

Alaskan Native 579 621 292 269 129 110

Asian/Pacific Islander 751 766 191 185 58 49

Black2,3 607 640 281 262 112 98

Hispanic3 602 642 278 263 120 95

White3,4 833 849 133 123 34 28

1 First visit for health care services during pregnancy. 2 Excludes Blacks of Hispanic origin. 3 Data shown only for states with an Hispanic-origin item on their birth certificates. See technical notes in

Appendix A. 4 Excludes Whites of Hispanic origin.

The number of mothers who

began prenatal care during

their first trimester of 

pregnancy increased in all

racial/ethnic groups between

1990 and 1992.
27

Alaskan

Native

Islander

At or above 5.5 lbs. Between 5.5 and 3.3 lbs. At or below 3.3 lbs.

Source: National Center for Health Statistics, 1995

This exhibit updates information presented in the 1994 Goals Report.

1 Below 5.5 pounds is defined as Low Birthweight. 2 Below 3.3 pounds is defined as Very Low Birthweight. 3 Excludes Blacks of Hispanic origin. 4 Data shown only for states with an Hispanic-origin item on their birth certificates. See technical notes in

Appendix A. 5 Excludes Whites of Hispanic origin.

Change Since 1990

Number per 1,000 births above and below 5.51 and 3.32 pounds:

At or above Between 5.5 and At or below

5.5 pounds 3.3 pounds 3.3 pounds

1990 1992 1990 1992 1990 1992

All births 930 929 57 58 13 13

American Indian/

Alaskan Native 939 937 51 53 10 10

Asian/Pacific Islander 935 934 56 57 9 9

Black3,4 867 866 104 104 29 30

Hispanic4 940 939 50 51 10 10

White4,5 944 943 47 48 9 9

1 Below 5.5 pounds is defined as Low Birthweight. 2 Below 3.3 pounds is defined as Very Low Birthweight. 3 Excludes Blacks of Hispanic origin. 4 Data shown only for states with an Hispanic-origin item on their birth certificates. See technical notes in Appendix A. 5 Excludes Whites of Hispanic origin.

The numbers of infants 

born above and below the

standard for low birthweight

remained relatively

unchanged between 1990

and 1992.
28

White4

Hispanic

Black3

Asian/Pacific Islander

American Indian/Alaskan Native

White4

Hispanic

Black3

Asian/Pacific Islander

American Indian/Alaskan Native

White4

Hispanic

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

2%

<1%

2%

<1%

1%

5%

7%

3%

2 or more risks:

3 or more risks:

33%

34%

13%

10%

1 Percentages are based on the number of births used to calculate the health index, not the actual number of

births. See technical notes in Appendix A. 2 Risks are late (in third trimester) or no prenatal care, low maternal weight gain (less than 21 pounds), mother 

smoked during pregnancy, or mother drank alcohol during pregnancy. 3 Excludes Blacks of Hispanic origin. 4 Excludes Whites of Hispanic origin.
29

Source: National Center for Health Statistics and Westat, Inc., 1995

This exhibit modifies and updates information presented in the 1994 Goals Report.

Excludes Whites of Hispanic origin.
30

Immunized Not immunized

83%

75%

Source: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 1995

This exhibit modifies and updates information presented in the 1994 Goals Report.

1 Children 19-35 months of age. 2 One vaccination for measles or for measles/mumps/rubella. 3 Diphtheria-tetanus-pertussis/diphtheria-tetanus. Three or more doses of vaccine. 4 Three or more doses of vaccine. 5 Four doses of diphtheria-tetanus-pertussis vaccine, three doses of polio vaccine, and one dose of measles or

measles/mumps/rubella vaccine.
31

$10,000 or less

$10,001 to $20,000

$20,001 to $30,000

$30,001 to $40,000

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

86%

50%

82%

43%

87%

46%

90%

Medical care Dental care

51%

Household inc

Source: National Center for Education Statistics and Westat, Inc., 1993

This exhibit repeats information presented in the 1994 Goals Report.

1 Excluding those enrolled in kindergarten. 2 Includes visits for routine checkups and immunizations. 3 Includes visits to dentists and dental hygienists.
32

Parents had less than 

high school education

Parents were 

college graduates

Source: National Center for Education Statistics and Westat, Inc., 1991, 1992, 1993, and 1995

This exhibit updates information presented in the 1994 Goals Report.

1 Excluding those enrolled in kindergarten. 2 Parent or another family member.

Change1 Since 19912 and 19933

Percentage of 3- to 5-year-olds4 whose parents5 engaged in language and literacy activities with them

regularly:

Told a story Visited a library 

three or more one or more

Read to times in the times in the 

every day previous week previous month

1993 1995 1991 1995 1991 1995

All 53% 58% * 39% 50% * 35% 39% *

Parents had less than

high school education 35% 37% 32% 37% 18% 18%

Parents were high school 

graduates or had some college 49% 52% 38% 49% * 30% 34% *

Parents were college graduates 67% 74% * 42% 56% * 53% 55%

1 Interpret with caution. Data are from a representative national survey. The changes shown could be 

attributable to sampling error. In cases noted with an asterisk, we are confident that change has occurred. 2 Change since 1991 for told a story or visited a library. 3 Change since 1993 for read to every day. Although data on family-child reading were collected in 1991, the 

wording of the reading item changed significantly between the 1991 survey and the 1993 survey. Therefore, 1993 is

established as the baseline for read to every day. 4 Excluding those enrolled in kindergarten.

5 Parent or another family member.

Parents or other family 

members engaged in 

language and literacy 

activities with their

preschoolers more often in

1995 than in previous years.

Between 1993 and 1995, the

percentage of 3- to 5-yearolds whose parents read to

them daily increased.

Between 1991 and 1995, the

percentage of preschoolers

whose parents regularly told

them a story or took them to

a library also increased.
33

Source: National Center for Education Statistics and Westat, Inc., 1991, 1992, and 1993

This exhibit repeats information presented in the 1994 Goals Report.

1 Excluding those enrolled in kindergarten. 2 Parent or another family member. 3 Three or more times in the previous week.

Change Since 19911

Percentage of 3- to 5-year-olds2 whose parents3 engaged in arts activities with them regularly:4

Taught songs Engaged in

or music arts and crafts

1991 1993 1991 1993

All 39% 41% 35% 33%

Parents had less than high school education 38% 37% 34% 24% *

Parents were high school graduates 

or had some college 39% 42% * 31% 32%

Parents were college graduates 41% 40% 42% 41%

1 Interpret with caution. Data are from a representative national survey. The changes shown could be 

attributable to sampling error. In cases noted with an asterisk, we are confident that change has occurred. 2 Excluding those enrolled in kindergarten. 3 Parent or another family member. 4 Three or more times in the previous week.
34

Parents had less than 

high school education

Parents were 

college graduates

Source: National Center for Education Statistics and Westat, Inc., 1991, 1992, and 1993

This exhibit repeats information presented in the 1994 Goals Report.

1 Excluding those enrolled in kindergarten. 2 Parent or another family member. 3 One or more times in the previous month. 4 Three or more times in the previous week.

historical sites, zoos, or

aquariums (42%).

Change Since 19911

Percentage of 3- to 5-year-olds2 whose parents3 regularly4 engaged them in opportunities to help 

them learn:5

Went to play, concert,

live show, art gallery,

museum, historical 

site, zoo, or aquarium

1991 1993

All 48% 42% *

Parents had less than high school education 38% 30%

Parents were high school graduates or had some college 46% 40% *

Parents were college graduates 56% 53%

1 Interpret with caution. Data are from a representative national survey. The changes shown could be

attributable to sampling error. In cases noted with an asterisk, we are confident that change has occurred. 2 Excluding those enrolled in kindergarten. 3 Parent or another family member. 4 One or more times in the previous month. 5 Data on family-child learning opportunities other than parent-child outings were not collected prior to 1993.

Between 1991 and 1993,

fewer 3- to 5-year-olds were

regularly taken by their 

parents on outings to plays,

concerts, live shows, art 

galleries, museums, 

historical sites, zoos, or

aquariums.
35

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Source: National Center for Education Statistics and Westat, Inc., 1991 and 1995

This exhibit updates information presented in the 1994 Goals Report.

1 Excluding those enrolled in kindergarten. 2 Includes those enrolled in nursery schools, prekindergarten programs, preschools, daycare centers, and 

Head Start; also includes 3- to 5-year-olds with disabilities enrolled in preschool.

Change Since 19911

Percentage of 3- to 5-year-olds2 enrolled in preschool:3

1991 1995

All 3- to 5-year-olds 53% 55%

1 Interpret with caution. Data are from a representative national survey. The changes shown could be 

attributable to sampling error. In cases noted with an asterisk, we are confident that change has occurred. 2 Excluding those enrolled in kindergarten. 3 Includes those enrolled in nursery schools, prekindergarten programs, preschools, daycare centers, and 

Head Start; also includes 3- to 5-year-olds with disabilities enrolled in preschool.
36

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Ho

Source: National Center for Education Statistics and Westat, Inc., 1995

This exhibit modifies and updates information presented in the 1994 Goals Report.

1 Excluding those enrolled in kindergarten. 2 Includes those enrolled in nursery schools, prekindergarten programs, preschools, daycare centers, and 

Head Start.
37

5 years old

4 years old

3 years old

30 to 35 months

24 to 29 months

18 to 23 months

12 to 17 months

6 to 11 months

0 to 5 months

5 years old

4 years old

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

81%

72%

58%

65%

50%

41%

43%

37%

75%

68%

56%

Percentage of

centers that did

not exceed the 

maximum

acceptable

child/staff ratios2

for children:

Source: Mathematica Policy Research, Inc., 1991 and 1992

This exhibit repeats information presented in the 1994 Goals Report.

1 Complete description of preschool centers can be found in Appendix A. 2 The maximum acceptable group size recommended by the National Association for the Education of Young 

Children (NAEYC) is 8 for infants, 12 for 1- to 2-year-olds, and 20 for 3- to 5-year-olds. The maximum acceptable

child/staff ratio is 10 children per staff member for groups containing 3- to 5-year-olds only, 6 children per staff

member for groups containing 2-year-olds only, and 4 children per staff member for groups containing infants

and 1-year-olds only. NAEYC standards include an acceptable range of practice on these variables. The figures 

reported are based on the maximum acceptable numbers, rather than the optimal numbers. Some states also set

their own standards in these areas.
38

All age 2 and above 

within a group

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

73%

Source: Mathematica Policy Research, Inc., 1991 and 1992

This exhibit repeats information presented in the 1994 Goals Report.

1 Complete description of regulated home-based preschool settings can be found in Appendix A. 2 Data not available. 3 The standard for group size recommended by Health, Education, and Welfare Day Care Requirements for

regulated family daycare providers without helpers who care for children who are all under age 2 within a group

is 3. The group size standard for all children aged 2 and above within a group is 6, and the standard for a group

of children of mixed ages within a group is 5. 
39
40
41

2000

1995
42

the consequences of their decisions to drop out.

Decisions to drop out have more than economic consequences. Dropouts lose

connections to adults and influences that can create purpose in their lives, the possibilities for careers, the skills for lifelong learning, healthy choices for themselves, and

responsible choices on behalf of others. Families can dramatically influence students

staying in school by helping them develop a challenging academic plan, emphasizing

the importance of completing high school, and encouraging them to continue on to

further job training and/or higher education.

This Volume indicates little if any progress on Goal 2 in recent years. While the

high school completion rate for 18- to 24-year-olds increased markedly in the early

1980s, it has remained relatively unchanged since then, and is still short of the Goal

of 90 percent. Past reports clearly indicated that while school-related reasons dominate the explanations for dropping out of school, an alarming number of youths cite

pregnancy and conflicts with jobs as reasons for dropping out. Obviously, multiple

problems—school failure, teenage pregnancies, and disconnections between school

and work, to name a few—must be addressed if Goal 2 is to be achieved.
43
44

Source: National Center for Education Statistics and Management Planning Research Associates, Inc., 1995

This exhibit modifies and updates information presented in the 1994 Goals Report.

1 Does not include those still enrolled in high school.

Change Since 19901

Percentage of 18- to 24-year-olds2 with a high school credential:

1990 1994

All 86% 86%

Black 83% 83%

Hispanic3 59% 62%

White 90% 91% *

1 Interpret with caution. Data are from a representative national survey. The changes shown could be 

attributable to sampling error. In cases noted with an asterisk, we are confident that change has occurred. 2 Does not include those still enrolled in high school. 3 Hispanic rates may vary, over time, more than rates for other groups because of a small sample size.

Between 1990 and 1994, the

percentage of White 18- to

24-year-olds with a high

school credential increased.
45

dropoutsIndian/

Alaskan 

Native

Pacific 

Islander

Percent completed 

between 1982 and 1986

Percent completed 

between 1986 and 1992

Source: National Center for Education Statistics and Westat, Inc., 1994

This exhibit updates information presented in the 1994 Goals Report.
46

Source: National Center for Education Statistics and Management Planning Research Associates, Inc., 1995

This exhibit updates information presented in the 1994 Goals Report.

Change Since 19901

Percentage of young adults2 16 to 24 years old without a high school credential:3

1990 1994

All 12% 12%

Black 13% 13%

Hispanic4 32% 30%

White 9% 8% * 

1 Interpret with caution. Data are from a representative national survey. The changes shown could be 

attributable to sampling error. In cases noted with an asterisk, we are confident that change has occurred. 2 Does not include those still enrolled in high school. 3 Includes traditional high school diploma and alternative credential. 4 Hispanic rates may vary, over time, more than rates for other groups because of a small sample size.

Between 1990 and 1994, the

high school dropout rate

decreased among White 

students.
47
48
49

2000

1995
50

ties. In July, 1995, the Goals Panel approved a new initiative to assist states and com

munities engaged in developing world-class academic standards and systems of assessment. This initiative includes the following:

• Convening a National Education Goals Panel resource group to develop a description of “world-class” academic standards.

• Creating a National Education Goals Panel resource group focused on assessment

and measurement of student achievement.

• Developing a voluntary, nonbinding “peer review” process to give feedback to

states on the creation of academic standards and assessments.

States and communities are not alone in their struggle to help our students achieve

to high standards. Families can dramatically influence academic performance. When

families are positively involved in their children’s academic lives, children complete

more homework and achieve higher grades and test scores. Research shows that the

single most important activity for future academic success is reading aloud to young

children. Imagine the achievement levels of American students if every parent took

an active interest in their children’s academics!

Despite previous years’ modest increase in mathematics, reading achievement for

12th graders actually decreased between 1992 and 1994, while reading performance

for 4th and 8th graders remained about the same. Voter participation increased

among young adults between 1988 and 1992. The data also indicate how far we are

from achieving the Goal, especially among minority groups. We are still not expecting and supporting all of our students to attain the academic mastery of which they

are capable. Everyone involved — teachers and schools, parents, community members, businesses, and policymakers — must work together to hold our students to high

standards and achieve this core academic Goal. 
51

substantially.

■ All students will be involved in activities that promote and demonstrate good

citizenship, good health, community service, and personal responsibility.

■ All students will have access to physical education and health education to

ensure they are healthy and fit.

■ The percentage of all students who are competent in more than one language will

substantially increase.

■ All students will be knowledgeable about the diverse cultural heritage of this

Nation and about the world community.
52
53

Source: National Center for Education Statistics, 1993 and 1995

This exhibit updates information presented in the 1994 Goals Report.

pg()

These levels were established by the National Assessment Governing Board (NAGB) and reported by the

National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) in NAEP publications. A more complete description of

the performance standard can be found in Appendix A. 2 Interpret with caution. Figures are based on data previously released by NCES, and data are undergoing 

revision. See Appendix A.

Change Since 19921

Percentages of 4th, 8th, and 12th graders who met the Goals Panel’s performance standard2

in reading:3

Proficient and above

1992 1994

Grade 4 25% 25%

Grade 8 28% 28%

Grade 12 37% 34% *

1 Interpret with caution. Data are from a representative national survey. The changes shown could be 

attributable to sampling error. In cases noted with an asterisk, we are confident that change has occurred. 2 The Goals Panel’s performance standard is “mastery over challenging subject matter” as indicated by

performance at the Proficient or Advanced levels on the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP). 

These levels were established by the National Assessment Governing Board (NAGB) and reported by the National

Center for Education Statistics (NCES) in NAEP publications. A more complete description of the performance

standard can be found in Appendix A. 3 Interpret with caution. Figures are based on data previously released by NCES, and data are undergoing 

revision. See Appendix A.

Between 1992 and 1994, 

the percentage of students 

in Grade 12 who met the

Goals Panel’s performance

standard in reading

decreased.
54

Source: National Center for Education Statistics, 1993 and 1995

This exhibit updates information presented in the 1994 Goals Report.

1 The Goals Panel’s performance standard is “mastery over challenging subject matter” as indicated by

performance at the Proficient or Advanced levels on the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP). 

These levels were established by the National Assessment Governing Board (NAGB) and reported by the

National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) in NAEP publications. A more complete description of

the performance standard can be found in Appendix A. 2 Interpret with caution. Figures are based on data previously released by NCES, and data are undergoing 

revision. See Appendix A.

Change Since 19921

Percentage of 4th graders who met the Goals Panel’s performance standard2 in reading:3

Proficient and above

1992 1994

Male 22% 22%

Female 28% 29%

American Indian/Alaskan Native 15% 15%

Asian4 — 43%

Pacific Islander4 — 29%

Black 7% 7%

Hispanic 13% 11%

White 31% 32%

1 Interpret with caution. Data are from a representative national survey. The changes shown could be 

attributable to sampling error. In cases noted with an asterisk, we are confident that change has occurred. 2 The Goals Panel’s performance standard is “mastery over challenging subject matter” as indicated by

performance at the Proficient or Advanced levels on the National Assessment of Educational Progress

(NAEP). These levels were established by the National Assessment Governing Board (NAGB) and reported

by the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) in NAEP publications. A more complete description of

the performance standard can be found in Appendix A. 3 Interpret with caution. Figures are based on data previously released by NCES, and data are undergoing

revision. See Appendix A. 4 Data for Asians and Pacific Islanders were first reported separately in 1994. In prior years, data for the

groups were reported in a single category.
55

• Example of a challenging item on the 4th grade assessment:

What do Turtle’s actions at Spider’s house tell you about Turtle?

• Average percentage of challenging items answered correctly by 4th graders at three 

achievement levels in 1994:1

Basic = 50% Proficient = 72% Advanced = 2

Basic = 69% Proficient = 84% Advanced = 2

CHALLENGING

• Example of a very challenging item on the 4th grade assessment:

Think about how Turtle is in the story. Pick someone you know, have read about, or

have seen in the movies or on television and explain how that person is like either

Spider or Turtle.

• Average percentage of very challenging items answered correctly by 4th graders at three 

achievement levels in 1994:1

Basic = 22% Proficient = 41% Advanced = 2

VERY CHALLENGING

1 Note: In 1994, approximately four out of ten 4th graders (42%) were unable to reach the lowest achievement level 

in reading (Basic). Definitions of the achievement levels can be found in Appendix A. 2 Sample size is insufficient to permit a reliable estimate.
56

Source: National Center for Education Statistics, 1993 and 1995

This exhibit updates information presented in the 1994 Goals Report.

1 The Goals Panel’s performance standard is “mastery over challenging subject matter” as indicated by

performance at the Proficient or Advanced levels on the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP). 

These levels were established by the National Assessment Governing Board (NAGB) and reported by the

National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) in NAEP publications. A more complete description of

the performance standard can be found in Appendix A. 2 Interpret with caution. Figures are based on data previously released by NCES, and data are undergoing 

revision. See Appendix A.

Change Since 19921

Percentage of 8th graders who met the Goals Panel’s performance standard2 in reading:3

Proficient and above

1992 1994

Male 22% 21%

Female 33% 35%

American Indian/Alaskan Native 18% 19%

Asian4 — 42%

Pacific Islander4 — 25% 5

Black 8% 8%

Hispanic 13% 13%

White 34% 34%

1 Interpret with caution. Data are from a representative national survey. The changes shown could be 

attributable to sampling error. In cases noted with an asterisk, we are confident that change has occurred. 2 The Goals Panel’s performance standard is “mastery over challenging subject matter” as indicated by

performance at the Proficient or Advanced levels on the National Assessment of Educational Progress

(NAEP). These levels were established by the National Assessment Governing Board (NAGB) and reported

by the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) in NAEP publications. A more complete description of

the performance standard can be found in Appendix A.

3 Interpret with caution. Figures are based on data previously released by NCES, and data are undergoing 

revision. See Appendix A. 4 Data for Asians and Pacific Islanders were first reported separately in 1994. In prior years, data for the

groups were reported in a single category. 5 Should be interpreted with caution, since sample size does not allow accurate estimate of sample variability.
57

• Example of a very challenging item on the 8th grade assessment:

Some people say that Anasazi’s success as a civilization may have actually caused

their own decline. Using information in the article, explain why you agree

with this statement.

• Average percentage of very challenging items answered correctly by 8th graders at three 

achievement levels in 1994:1

Basic = 18% Proficient = 37% Advanced = 2

VERY CHALLENGING

• Example of a challenging item on the 8th grade assessment:

Imagine that you are living with the people of Mesa Verde during the 1200’s 

when they left the mesa. Some of your friends and neighbors do not want to 

leave the area. Based on information in the article, what would you tell these 

people to convince them to leave?

• Average percentage of challenging items answered correctly by 8th graders at three 

achievement levels in 1994:1

Basic = 48% Proficient = 71% Advanced = 2

CHALLENGING

• Average percentage of moderate items answered correctly by 8th graders at three 

achievement levels in 1994:1

Basic = 68% Proficient = 86% Advanced = 2

1 Note: In 1994, nearly one-third of all 8th graders (31%) were unable to reach the lowest achievement level in 

reading (Basic). Definitions of the achievement levels can be found in Appendix A. 2 Sample size is insufficient to permit a reliable estimate.
58

Source: National Center for Education Statistics, 1993 and 1995.

This exhibit updates information presented in the 1994 Goals Report.

1 The Goals Panel’s performance standard is “mastery over challenging subject matter” as indicated by

performance at the Proficient or Advanced levels on the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP). 

These levels were established by the National Assessment Governing Board (NAGB) and reported by the

National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) in NAEP publications. A more complete description of

the performance standard can be found in Appendix A. 2 Interpret with caution. Figures are based on data previously released by NCES, and data are undergoing 

revision. See Appendix A.

Change Since 19921

Percentage of 12th graders who met the Goals Panel’s performance standard2 in reading:3

Proficient and above

1992 1994

Male 31% 27% *

Female 42% 40%

American Indian/Alaskan Native — 4 18% 5

Asian6 — 30%

Pacific Islander6 — 25% 5

Black 16% 12%

Hispanic 21% 18%

White 43% 40%

1 Interpret with caution. Data are from a representative national survey. The changes shown could be 

attributable to sampling error. In cases noted with an asterisk, we are confident that change has occurred. 2 The Goals Panel’s performance standard is “mastery over challenging subject matter” as indicated by

performance at the Proficient or Advanced levels on the National Assessment of Educational Progress

(NAEP). These levels were established by the National Assessment Governing Board (NAGB) and reported

by the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) in NAEP publications. A more complete description of

the performance standard can be found in Appendix A.

3 Interpret with caution. Figures are based on data previously released by NCES, and data are undergoing 

revision. See Appendix A. 4 Sample size is insufficient to permit a reliable estimate. 5 Should be interpreted with caution, since sample size does not allow accurate estimate of sample variability. 6 Data for Asians and Pacific Islanders were first reported separately in 1994. In prior years, data for the

groups were reported in a single category.

Between 1992 and 1994, the

percentage of male 12th

graders who met the Goals

Panel’s performance 

standard in reading

decreased.
59

• Example of a challenging item on the 12th grade assessment:

Some people believe that “The only circumstance in which we are justified in 

taking the life of another person is in self-defense.” Would the Emperor agree with

this statement? Explain why or why not, using information contained in the story.

• Average percentage of challenging items answered correctly by 12th graders at three 

achievement levels in 1994:1

Basic = 42% Proficient = 62% Advanced = 2

Basic = 65% Proficient = 81% Advanced = 2

CHALLENGING

• Example of a very challenging item on the 12th grade assessment:

Think about the impact of inventions on your life and the Emperor’s decision to kill

the inventor. Do you agree or disagree with the decision? Tell why.

• Average percentage of very challenging items answered correctly by 12th graders at three 

achievement levels in 1994:1

Basic = 17% Proficient = 31% Advanced = 2

VERY CHALLENGING

1 Note: In 1994, nearly one-third of all 12th graders (30%) were unable to reach the lowest achievement level in 

reading (Basic). Definitions of the achievement levels can be found in Appendix A. 2 Sample size is insufficient to permit a reliable estimate.
60

Source: National Center for Education Statistics, 1994

This exhibit repeats information presented in the 1994 Goals Report.

1 A complete description of the scoring system can be found in Appendix A.

y

Another Planet: Write a story about an adventure as a

space traveler on another planet. 20%

School Lunchtime: Describe a typical lunchtime at your school 

in such a way that someone who has never had lunch there

can understand what it is like. 39%

Favorite Story: Tell about a favorite story you have read, 

heard, or seen on television or at the movies. Include

interesting details about characters, places, events, or ideas. 33%

Favorite Object: Describe a favorite object and explain

why it is valued. 32%

INFORMATIVE WRITING

provided more thorough

responses to informative

tasks than to persuasive or

narrative tasks.
61

ed floating. I was afraid at first, but then I started getting used to it. The magic balloon took me to another world, with colorful butterflies and hopping toads. It had a pond

with water liles. This place was beatiful. It was an adventure. Then the magical balloon

returned me home. This was a wonderful and super day.

An Informative Writing Task, “Favorite Story”

It all begain in the 1863. There were a boy named Tim how was a wood cuter he loved to

cut woods that was it’s job back in 1863. One day Tim went out to cut some woods. He

cut the frist one and went to the other one. When he was done with all the cuting, he

was very tierd so he said I’ll go home and rest and then I’ll come back. When He went back

home & he saw that his house was birnd, so he said that’s ok I’ll just get all those woods

that I cut down and make a new house for me. He was all done making the house, so he

went in and lived happly ever after.

1 A complete description of the scoring system can be found in Appendix A. 2 Student responses, including spelling and grammatical errors, are presented exactly as they were written.
Grade 8 Grade 12

Another Planet: Write a story about an adventure 

as a space traveler on another planet. 45%

Dream Car:2 Create a dream car and write about an

adventure with your imaginary car. 48%

Embarrassing Incident: Think about an embarrassing

situation you have been in and describe what happened. 30% 59%

Grandchildren: Imagine that you are a 70-year-old 

grandparent. Write a story about something from your

youth that you would tell to your grandchildren in the 

21st century. 33% 43%

NARRATIVE

62

1 A complete description of the scoring system can be found in Appendix A. 2 Students were given 50 minutes to respond to this task and 25 minutes for all others. 

qpy 

before graduation. 12%

No Pass/No Drive:

2 Should the state legislature pass a law 

that students who receive failing grades will lose their 

drivers’ licenses? Write a letter convincing your congressperson 

of your point of view. 25%
63

Source: National Center for Education Statistics, 1994

This exhibit repeats information presented in the 1994 Goals Report.

1 A complete description of the scoring system can be found in Appendix A. 2 Students were given 50 minutes to respond to this task and 25 minutes for all others. 

the United States Patent Office describing both the 

object and the need it is designed to fulfull. 26% 27%

Performance Review: Write an article for the school

newspaper that reviews a program or performance. Be

sure to describe what you liked or disliked, why other

people might or might not enjoy it, and what people 

should know before they go to see it. 34% 42%

Time Capsule: Choose an object to place in a time

capsule which will be opened in 50 years. Describe

how the object tells something especially interesting

or important about people living today. 55%

School Problem:2 Write to the director of a news program

and identify a problem that exists in school. Consider

both the causes and effects of the problem. 68% 86%
64

A Narrative Writing Task, “Embarrassing Incident”

I caught the ball and slowly started dribbling towards one basket. Each bounce of the basketball echoed in the gym, and with each bounce I gained speed. I glanced over my right

shoulder and saw that I had a clean breakaway. My teammates yelled out “Katherine!

Katherine!,” and I took their excited voices as encouragement. The sweat droplets rolled

down my face as I neared the basket. I went up into my lay-up like I had always practiced.

One step, two steps, shoot! The ball went through the hoop and I exploded with excitement.

As I turned around with a proud smile on my face, I noticed all of my teammates bent

over in anxiety. The crowd was laughing, my coach was yelling, and the other team was

cheering. I had shot at the wrong basket!

An Informative Writing Task, “Invention”

Dear United States Patent Office,

I have a perfect invention. It is a car than runs on water. All it takes is one tank. It

can keep on reusing water then once it has turned into vapor the car can create more

water. But you have to fill it up once. This would decrease pollution. It will help our environment. It would even help people save money on gas. This car will be able to go pretty

fast too. The car would look like any other car. Then you could help get food to other

places and it won’t take any money. All you have to pay for is the food. This is an idea

I had in my dream.

Your friend

1 A complete description of the scoring system can be found in Appendix A. 2 Student responses, including spelling and grammatical errors, are presented exactly as they were written.
65

Source: National Center for Education Statistics, 1993

This exhibit repeats information presented in the 1994 Goals Report.

The Goals Panels performance standard is mastery over challenging subject matter as indicated by

performance at the Proficient or Advanced levels on the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP). 

These levels were established by the National Assessment Governing Board (NAGB) and reported by the

National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) in NAEP publications. A more complete description of

the performance standard can be found in Appendix A.

Change Since 19901

Percentages of 4th, 8th, and 12th graders who met the Goals Panel’s performance standard2

in mathematics:

Proficient and above

1990 1992

Grade 4 13% 18% *

Grade 8 20% 25% *

Grade 12 13% 16%

1 Interpret with caution. Data are from a representative national survey. The changes shown could be 

attributable to sampling error. In cases noted with an asterisk, we are confident that change has occurred. 2 The Goals Panel’s performance standard is “mastery over challenging subject matter” as indicated by

performance at the Proficient or Advanced levels on the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP). 

These levels were established by the National Assessment Governing Board (NAGB) and reported by the National

Center for Education Statistics (NCES) in NAEP publications. A more complete description of the performance

standard can be found in Appendix A.

Between 1990 and 1992, the

percentages of students in

Grades 4 and 8 who met the

Goals Panel’s performance

standard in mathematics

increased.
66

Source: National Center for Education Statistics, 1993

This exhibit repeats information presented in the 1994 Goals Report.

The Goals Panels performance standard is mastery over challenging subject matter as indicated by

performance at the Proficient or Advanced levels on the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP). 

These levels were established by the National Assessment Governing Board (NAGB) and reported by the

National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) in NAEP publications. A more complete description of

the performance standard can be found in Appendix A.

Change Since 19901

Percentage of 4th graders who met the Goals Panel’s performance standard2 in mathematics:

Proficient and above

1990 1992

Male 14% 20% *

Female 13% 17%

American Indian/Alaskan Native 5% 10%

Asian/Pacific Islander 24% 30%

Black 2% 3%

Hispanic 5% 6%

White 17% 23% *

1 Interpret with caution. Data are from a representative national survey. The changes shown could be 

attributable to sampling error. In cases noted with an asterisk, we are confident that change has occurred. 2 The Goals Panel’s performance standard is “mastery over challenging subject matter” as indicated by

performance at the Proficient or Advanced levels on the National Assessment of Educational Progress

(NAEP). These levels were established by the National Assessment Governing Board (NAGB) and reported

by the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) in NAEP publications. A more complete description of

the performance standard can be found in Appendix A.

Between 1990 and 1992, the

percentage of White and the

percentage of male 4th

graders who met the Goals

Panel’s performance 

standard in mathematics

increased.
67

• Example of a challenging item on the 4th grade assessment:

How much would 217 be increased if the digit 1 were replaced with the digit 5?

A 4 C 44

B 40 D 400

• Average percentage of challenging items answered correctly by 4th graders at three 

achievement levels in 1992:1

Basic = 30% Proficient = 56% Advanced = 79%

Average percentage of moderate items answered correctly by 4th graders at three 

achievement levels in 1992:1

Basic = 45% Proficient = 72% Advanced = 88%

CHALLENGING

• Example of a very challenging item on the 4th grade assessment:

Think carefully about the following question. Write a complete answer. You may use 

drawings, words, and numbers to explain your answer. Be sure to show all of your work.

José ate 1⁄2 of a pizza.

Ella ate 1⁄2 of another pizza.

José said that he ate more pizza than Ella, but Ella said they both ate the same amount.

Use words and pictures to show that José could be right.

• Average percentage of very challenging items answered correctly by 4th graders at three 

achievement levels in 1992:1

Basic = 13% Proficient = 31% Advanced = 60%

VERY CHALLENGING

1 Note: In 1992, nearly four out of ten 4th graders (39%) were unable to reach the lowest achievement level in

mathematics (Basic). Definitions of the achievement levels can be found in Appendix A. 
68

Source: National Center for Education Statistics, 1993

This exhibit repeats information presented in the 1994 Goals Report.

1 The Goals Panel’s performance standard is “mastery over challenging subject matter” as indicated by

performance at the Proficient or Advanced levels on the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP). 

These levels were established by the National Assessment Governing Board (NAGB) and reported by the

National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) in NAEP publications. A more complete description of

the performance standard can be found in Appendix A.

Change Since 19901

Percentage of 8th graders who met the Goals Panel’s performance standard2 in mathematics:

Proficient and above

1990 1992

Male 21% 25%

Female 18% 24% *

American Indian/ Alaskan Native3 9% 9%

Asian/Pacific Islander3 38% 44%

Black 6% 3%

Hispanic 6% 8%

White 24% 32% *

1 Interpret with caution. Data are from a representative national survey. The changes shown could be 

attributable to sampling error. In cases noted with an asterisk, we are confident that change has occurred. 2 The Goals Panel’s performance standard is “mastery over challenging subject matter” as indicated by

performance at the Proficient or Advanced levels on the National Assessment of Educational Progress

(NAEP). These levels were established by the National Assessment Governing Board (NAGB) and reported

by the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) in NAEP publications. A more complete description of

the performance standard can be found in Appendix A. 3 Should be interpreted with caution, since 1990 sample size does not allow accurate estimate of sample

variability.

Between 1990 and 1992, the

percentage of White and the

percentage of female 8th

graders who met the Goals

Panel’s performance 

standard in mathematics

increased.
69

• Example of a very challenging item on the 8th grade assessment:

This question requires you to show your work and explain your reasoning. You may use

drawings, words, and numbers in your explanation.

Treena won a 7-day scholarship worth $1,000 to the Pro Shot Basketball Camp. 

Round-trip travel expenses to the camp are $335 by air or $125 by train. At the camp she 

must choose between a week of individual instruction at $60 per day or a week of group 

instruction at $40 per day. Treena’s food and other expenses are fixed at $45 per day. If 

she does not plan to spend any money other than the scholarship, what are all choices of 

travel and instruction plans that she could afford to make? Explain your reasoning.

• Average percentage of very challenging items answered correctly by 8th graders at three 

achievement levels in 1992:1

Basic = 15% Proficient = 29% Advanced = 56%

VERY CHALLENGING

• Example of a challenging item on the 8th grade assessment:

Ken bought a used car for $5,375. He had to pay an additional 15 percent of the purchase

price to cover both sales tax and extra fees. Of the following, which is closest to the 

total amount Ken paid?

A $806 C $5,760 E $6,180

B $5,510 D $5,940

• Average percentage of challenging items answered correctly by 8th graders at three 

achievement levels in 1992:1

Basic = 36% Proficient = 64% Advanced = 85%

CHALLENGING

1 Note: In 1992, over one-third of all 8th graders (37%) were unable to reach the lowest achievement level in 

mathematics (Basic). Definitions of the achievement levels can be found in Appendix A. 
70

Source: National Center for Education Statistics, 1993

This exhibit repeats information presented in the 1994 Goals Report.

1 The Goals Panel’s performance standard is “mastery over challenging subject matter” as indicated by

performance at the Proficient or Advanced levels on the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP). 

These levels were established by the National Assessment Governing Board (NAGB) and reported by the

National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) in NAEP publications. A more complete description of

the performance standard can be found in Appendix A.

Change Since 19901

Percentage of 12th graders who met the Goals Panel’s performance standard2 in mathematics:

Proficient and above

1990 1992

Male 16% 18%

Female 10% 14%

American Indian/ Alaskan Native3 4% 4%

Asian/Pacific Islander 25% 31%

Black 2% 3%

Hispanic 4% 6%

White 16% 19%

1 Interpret with caution. Data are from a representative national survey. The changes shown could be 

attributable to sampling error. In cases noted with an asterisk, we are confident that change has occurred. 2 The Goals Panel’s performance standard is “mastery over challenging subject matter” as indicated by

performance at the Proficient or Advanced levels on the National Assessment of Educational Progress

(NAEP). These levels were established by the National Assessment Governing Board (NAGB) and reported

by the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) in NAEP publications. A more complete description of

the performance standard can be found in Appendix A.

3 Should be interpreted with caution, since 1990 sample size does not allow accurate estimate of sample

variability.
71

• Example of a very challenging item on the 12th grade assessment:

This question requires you to show your work and explain your reasoning. You may use

drawings, words, and numbers in your explanation.

One plan for state income tax requires those persons with income of $10,000 or less to

pay no tax and those persons with income greater than $10,000 to pay a tax of 6 percent

only on the part of their income that exceeds $10,000. A person’s effective tax rate is

defined as the percent of total income that is paid in tax. Based on this definition, could

any person‘s effective tax rate be 5 percent? Could it be 6 percent? Explain your answer.

Include examples if necessary to justify your conclusions.

• Average percentage of very challenging items answered correctly by 12th graders at three 

achievement levels in 1992:1

Basic = 9% Proficient = 31% Advanced = 62%

VERY CHALLENGING

• Example of a challenging item on the 12th grade assessment:

If f (x) = 4x 2 – 7x + 5.7, what is the value of f (3.5)?

Answer: _________________

• Average percentage of challenging items answered correctly by 12th graders at three 

achievement levels in 1992:1

Basic = 30% Proficient = 62% Advanced = 83%

CHALLENGING

achievement levels in 1992:

Basic = 56% Proficient = 84% Advanced = 93%

30.2

1 Note: In 1992, over one-third of all 12th graders (36%) were unable to reach the lowest achievement level in 

mathematics (Basic). Definitions of the achievement levels can be found in Appendix A. 
72

Source: National Center for Education Statistics, 1995

the performance standard can be found in Appendix A.

100%

Male Female American

Indian/

Alaskan

Native

Asian Black Hispanic White

Proficient and above Below Goals Panel’s performance standard

Goals Panel’s

performance

standard

18% 16%

82% 84%

9%

91%

22%

78%

4%

96%

6%

94%

22%

84% 78%

Pacific

Islander

16%

Source: National Center for Education Statistics, 1995

Exhibit 27

History Achievement – Grade 4

Percentage of 4th graders who met the Goals Panel’s 

performance standard1 in history, 1994

1 The Goals Panel’s performance standard is “mastery over challenging subject matter” as indicated by

performance at the Proficient or Advanced levels on the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP). 

These levels were established by the National Assessment Governing Board (NAGB) and reported by the

National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) in NAEP publications. A more complete description of

the performance standard can be found in Appendix A.

In 1994, the percentage of

4th graders who met the

Goals Panel’s performance

standard in history ranged

from 4% for Blacks to 22%

for Asians and Whites.
73

• Example of a challenging item on the 4th grade assessment:

Which war did the United States enter to prevent the spread of communism?

A The Mexican-American War

B The First World War

C The Second World War

D The Vietnam War

• Average percentage of challenging items answered correctly by 4th graders at three 

achievement levels in 1994:1

Basic = 32% Proficient = 52% Advanced = 2

• Average percentage of moderate items answered correctly by 4th graders at three 

achievement levels in 1994:1

Basic = 47% Proficient = 70% Advanced = 2

CHALLENGING

• Example of a very challenging item on the 4th grade assessment:

Imagine you could use a time machine to visit the past. You have landed in

Philadelphia in the summer of 1776. Describe an important event that is happening.

• Average percentage of very challenging items answered correctly by 4th graders at three 

achievement levels in 1994:1

Basic = 13% Proficient = 28% Advanced = 2

VERY CHALLENGING

1 Note: In 1994, over one-third of all 4th graders (36%) were unable to reach the lowest achievement level 

in history (Basic). Definitions of the achievement levels can be found in Appendix A. 2 Sample size is insufficient to permit a reliable estimate.
74

Proficient and above Below Goals Panels performance standard

Source: National Center for Education Statistics, 1995

1 The Goals Panel’s performance standard is “mastery over challenging subject matter” as indicated by

performance at the Proficient or Advanced levels on the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP). 

These levels were established by the National Assessment Governing Board (NAGB) and reported by the

National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) in NAEP publications. A more complete description of

the performance standard can be found in Appendix A. 2 Should be interpreted with caution, since sample size does not allow accurate estimate of sample variability.
75

• Example of a challenging item on the 8th grade assessment:

The Monroe Doctrine was intended to:

A promote United States trade with China

B help keep peace in Europe

C discourage European involvement in the Americas

D protect United States business in Japan and Korea

• Average percentage of challenging items answered correctly by 8th graders at three 

achievement levels in 1994:1

Basic = 37% Proficient = 62% Advanced = 2

gpgy y g

achievement levels in 1994:1

Basic = 60% Proficient = 81% Advanced = 2

CHALLENGING

• Example of a very challenging item on the 8th grade assessment:

What was one consequence of Nat Turner’s rebellion?

A Large numbers of slaves fled to the North

B Slave revolts broke out throughout the South

C Conditions for slaves on many southern plantations improved

D Southern states passed laws designed to tightly control slaves

• Average percentage of very challenging items answered correctly by 8th graders at three 

achievement levels in 1994:1

Basic = 13% Proficient = 33% Advanced = 2

VERY CHALLENGING

1 Note: In 1994, approximately four out of every ten 8th graders (39%) were unable to reach the lowest achievement level 

in history (Basic). Definitions of the achievement levels can be found in Appendix A. 2 Sample size is insufficient to permit a reliable estimate.
76

Proficient and above Below Goals Panel’s performance standard

Source: National Center for Education Statistics, 1995

1 The Goals Panel’s performance standard is “mastery over challenging subject matter” as indicated by

performance at the Proficient or Advanced levels on the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP). 

These levels were established by the National Assessment Governing Board (NAGB) and reported by the

National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) in NAEP publications. A more complete description of

the performance standard can be found in Appendix A. 2 Should be interpreted with caution, since sample size does not allow accurate estimate of sample variability.
77

• Example of a challenging item on the 12th grade assessment:

President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s goal in supporting the Lend-Lease Act of 1941 was to:

A encourage Japanese-Americans to relocate voluntarily

B use foreign investment as a way of stimulating the American economy

C maintain an isolationist stance by providing only limited aid to both sides in the

European conflict

D assist Britain’s war effort without violating United States neutrality laws

• Average percentage of challenging items answered correctly by 12th graders at three 

achievement levels in 1994:1

Basic = 43% Proficient = 66% Advanced = 2

• Average percentage of moderate items answered correctly by 12th graders at three 

achievement levels in 1994:1

Basic = 62% Proficient = 81% Advanced = 2

CHALLENGING

• Example of a very challenging item on the 12th grade assessment:

Religious groups played a major role in many of the reform movements of the 1800’s and

early 1900’s. Select one reform movement (such as the abolition movement, temperance

movement, or the settlement house movement) and identify two reasons that religious

groups were important to this movement.

• Average percentage of very challenging items answered correctly by 12th graders at three 

achievement levels in 1994:1

Basic = 20% Proficient = 40% Advanced = 2

VERY CHALLENGING

1 Note: In 1994, over one-half of all 12th graders (57%) were unable to reach the lowest achievement level 

in history (Basic). Definitions of the achievement levels can be found in Appendix A. 2 Sample size is insufficient to permit a reliable estimate.
Source: National Center for Education Statistics, 1995

78

100%

Male Female American

Indian/

Alaskan

Native

Asian Black Hispanic White

Proficient and above Below Goals Panel’s performance standard

Goals Panel’s

performance

standard

26% 19%

74% 81%

9%

91%

32%

68%

3%

97%

10%

90%

29%

83% 71%

Pacific

Islander

17%

Source: National Center for Education Statistics, 1995

Exhibit 31

Geography Achievement – Grade 4

Percentage of 4th graders who met the Goals Panel’s 

performance standard1 in geography, 1994

1 The Goals Panel’s performance standard is “mastery over challenging subject matter” as indicated by

performance at the Proficient or Advanced levels on the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP). 

These levels were established by the National Assessment Governing Board (NAGB) and reported by the

National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) in NAEP publications. A more complete description of

the performance standard can be found in Appendix A.

In 1994, the percentage of

4th graders who met the

Goals Panel’s performance

standard in geography

ranged from 3% for Blacks to

32% for Asians.

the performance standard can be found in Appendix A.
79

• Example of a challenging item on the 4th grade assessment:

Look first at the political map of Africa on page 61, and then look at the population map

on page 63. Which country in West Africa is the most densely populated?

A Liberia C Mali

B Mauritania D Nigeria

• Average percentage of challenging items answered correctly by 4th graders at three 

achievement levels in 1994:1

Basic = 35% Proficient = 59% Advanced = 2

Basic  57% Proficient  81% Advanced  

CHALLENGING

• Example of a very challenging item on the 4th grade assessment:

(Student is allowed to consult a world map in an atlas to answer the following question.)

Which of these four countries is crossed by the equator?

A Bolivia C India

B Australia D Indonesia

• Average percentage of very challenging items answered correctly by 4th graders at three 

achievement levels in 1994:1

Basic = 16% Proficient = 36% Advanced = 2

VERY CHALLENGING

1 Note: In 1994, approximately three out of ten 4th graders (30%) were unable to reach the lowest achievement level 

in geography (Basic). Definitions of the achievement levels can be found in Appendix A. 2 Sample size is insufficient to permit a reliable estimate.
80

Proficient and above Below Goals Panel’s performance standard

Source: National Center for Education Statistics, 1995

1 The Goals Panel’s performance standard is “mastery over challenging subject matter” as indicated by

performance at the Proficient or Advanced levels on the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP). 

These levels were established by the National Assessment Governing Board (NAGB) and reported by the

National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) in NAEP publications. A more complete description of

the performance standard can be found in Appendix A. 2 Should be interpreted with caution, since sample size does not allow accurate estimate of sample variability.
81

• Example of a challenging item on the 8th grade assessment:

What would a scientist probably study to predict where acid rain would fall?

A The atomic structures of sulfur, nitrogen, and oxygen

B Mass-transit systems that serve major cities

C Wind patterns that prevail over major manufacturing areas

D The location of sewage treatment plants

• Average percentage of challenging items answered correctly by 8th graders at three 

achievement levels in 1994:1

Basic = 43% Proficient = 67% Advanced = 2

• Average percentage of moderate items answered correctly by 8th graders at three 

achievement levels in 1994:1

Basic = 60% Proficient = 82% Advanced = 2

CHALLENGING

• Example of a very challenging item on the 8th grade assessment:

In the United States, most of the fertile soils of the Midwest were derived from:

A glaciers C decaying organic matter

B volcanic activity D eroded sandstone

• Average percentage of very challenging items answered correctly by 8th graders at three 

achievement levels in 1994:1

Basic = 14% Proficient = 30% Advanced = 2

VERY CHALLENGING

1 Note: In 1994, approximately three out of ten 8th graders (29%) were unable to reach the lowest achievement level 

in geography (Basic). Definitions of the achievement levels can be found in Appendix A. 2 Sample size is insufficient to permit a reliable estimate.
82

Proficient and above Below Goals Panel’s performance standard

Source: National Center for Education Statistics, 1995

1 The Goals Panel’s performance standard is “mastery over challenging subject matter” as indicated by

performance at the Proficient or Advanced levels on the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP). 

These levels were established by the National Assessment Governing Board (NAGB) and reported by the

National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) in NAEP publications. A more complete description of

the performance standard can be found in Appendix A. 2 Sample size is insufficient to permit a reliable estimate. 3 Should be interpreted with caution, since sample size does not allow accurate estimate of sample variability.
83

• Example of a challenging item on the 12th grade assessment:

Many people in the Caribbean are of West African descent. Which of the following is

the best explanation for this?

A Rapid urbanization

B The use of slaves in plantation agriculture

C Religious persecution in the countries of origin

D Economic opportunity

• Average percentage of challenging items answered correctly by 12th graders at three 

achievement levels in 1994:1

Basic = 45% Proficient = 70% Advanced = 2

• Average percentage of moderate items answered correctly by 12th graders at three 

achievement levels in 1994:1

Basic = 66% Proficient = 86% Advanced = 2

CHALLENGING

• Example of a very challenging item on the 12th grade assessment:

Which of the following countries has the largest volume and value of trade with

the United States?

A Japan C Canada

B Great Britain D Germany

• Average percentage of very challenging items answered correctly by 12th graders at three 

achievement levels in 1994:1

Basic = 14% Proficient = 33% Advanced = 2

VERY CHALLENGING

1 Note: In 1994, approximately three out of ten 12th graders (30%) were unable to reach the lowest achievement level 

in geography (Basic). Definitions of the achievement levels can be found in Appendix A. 2 Sample size is insufficient to permit a reliable estimate.
84

Source: National Center for Education Statistics, 1994

This exhibit updates information presented in the 1994 Goals Report.

1 Complete descriptions of each level can be found in Appendix A.
85

Number of examinations taken Number receiving grades of 3 or higher

History9

Fine Arts8

2

2

25

13

0 20 40 60 80 100

Source: The College Board, 1991 and 1995

This exhibit updates information presented in the 1994 Goals Report.

1 A grade of 3 or higher is generally high enough to make students eligible for college credit. 2 Includes Language & Composition and Literature & Composition. 3 Includes Calculus AB and Calculus BC. 4 Includes Biology, Chemistry, Physics B, Physics C (Mechanics), and Physics C (Electricity and Magnetism). 5 Includes French Language, French Literature, Spanish Language, Spanish Literature, and German. 6 Includes Government & Politics—U.S., and Government & Politics—Comparative. 7 Includes Microeconomics and Macroeconomics. 8 Includes Art History, Studio Art (Drawing and General), and Music Theory. 9 Includes U.S. History and European History.

Change Since 1991

Number of Advanced Placement examinations taken (per 1,000 11th and 12th graders), and 

number receiving grades of 3 or higher (per 1,000 11th and 12th graders):

Total number Number with 

taken grades of 3 or higher

1991 1995 1991 1995

English 23 32 16 20

Mathematics 15 20 10 12

Science 13 20 9 12

Foreign Languages 7 9 5 6

Civics and Government 4 7 3 4

Economics 2 4 1 2

Fine Arts 2 2 1 2

History 20 25 11 13

Between 1991 and 1995, the

number of Advanced

Placement examinations

taken (per 1,000 11th and

12th graders) increased in all

subject areas except fine

arts. The number of 

examinations receiving

grades of 3 or higher (per

1,000 11th and 12th graders)

increased in all subject

areas.
86

Other private

Catholic

Public

White

Hispanic

Black

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

36%

39%

46%

42%

67%

57%

Race/ethn

Type of school
87

Rural

Suburban

Urban

Lowest

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

37%

29%

49%

44%

40%

Socioecon

Urbanicity of school

Source: National Center for Education Statistics, 1993

This exhibit repeats information presented in the 1994 Goals Report.
88

White

Hispanic

origin

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

59%

27%

50%

44%

68%

18- to 20-year-olds 21 years and older

Voted

Source: Bureau of the Census, 1989 and 1993

This exhibit repeats information presented in the 1994 Goals Report.

Change Since 19881

Percentage of all U.S. citizens 18 to 20 years old and 21 years and older who reported that they

registered to vote and who reported that they voted:

18- to 20-year-olds 21 years and older

Registered Registered

to vote Voted to vote Voted

1988 1992 1988 1992 1988 1992 1988 1992

All 48% 53% * 35% 42% * 72% 74% * 62% 67% *

Black 45% 46% 29% 34% 69% 69% 56% 59% *

Hispanic 36% 39% 23% 27% 59% 60% 48% 50%

White 48% 55% * 36% 44% * 73% 75% * 63% 68% *

1 Interpret with caution. Data are from a representative national survey. The changes shown could be 

attributable to sampling error. In cases noted with an asterisk, we are confident that change has occurred.

Between 1988 and 1992,

reported rates of voter 

registration and voting

increased among 18- to 20-

year-olds as well as among

adults aged 21 and older.
89
90
91

2000

1995
92

new teachers enter American classrooms every year, joining a profession of about

three million, which absorbs a larger proportion of college-educated adults than any

other occupation. Projected increases in school enrollment over the next ten years

will further increase the demand for highly qualified teachers and school administrators who are capable of providing high quality learning experiences for all students.

In 1994, the percentage of secondary school teachers in mathematics, science, and

English who held an undergraduate or graduate degree in their main teaching assignment was about 60%. Over the last four years those percentages have significantly

decreased in science and English, and have remained about the same in most other

subject areas. In almost all subjects, however, more than 90% of teachers have a

teaching certificate in their main teaching assignment.

Teachers are integral to the process of setting new standards, implementing new

and valid teaching strategies, and developing a variety of assessment methods. However, in 1994, only about half of all teachers participated in any sort of professional

development on the uses of educational technology or student assessment. And we

know relatively little about the quality of their professional development experiences

in any area. Teachers also need public support and assistance as they engage in these

new challenges. Thus, new partnerships that include teacher education institutions,

schools, parents, and the communities they serve are essential if teacher education

and professional development are to receive appropriate attention, and classroom

instruction is to reach the desired level of excellence.
93

methods, forms of assessment, and technologies.

■ States and school districts will create integrated strategies to attract, recruit, 

prepare, retrain, and support the continued professional development of teachers,

administrators, and other educators, so that there is a highly talented work force 

of professional educators to teach challenging subject matter.

■ Partnerships will be established, whenever possible, among local educational 

agencies, institutions of higher education, parents, and local labor, business, and 

professional associations to provide and support programs for the professional 

development of educators.
94

Special 

education

gg

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

52%

Source: National Center for Education Statistics and Westat, Inc., 1995

1 Academic or education majors. Does not include minors or second majors. 2 Total includes only teachers whose main teaching assignment was in mathematics, science, English, social

studies, fine arts, foreign language, or special education.

Change Since 19911

Percentage of secondary school teachers who held an undergraduate or graduate degree2 in their 

main teaching assignment:

1991 1994

Total3 66% 63% *

Mathematics 58% 56%

Science 67% 63% *

English 65% 62% *

Social studies 72% 67% *

Fine arts 88% 88%

Foreign language 72% 67%

Special education 51% 52% 

1 Interpret with caution. Data are from a representative national survey. The changes shown could be 

attributable to sampling error. In cases noted with an asterisk, we are confident that change has occurred. 2 Academic or education majors. Does not include minors or second majors. 3 Total includes only teachers whose main teaching assignment was in mathematics, science, English, social

studies, fine arts, foreign language, or special education.

Between 1991 and 1994, the

percentage of secondary

school teachers who 

held an undergraduate or 

graduate degree in their

main teaching assignment

decreased.
95

Special 

education

Bilingual 

education/ESL1

language

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

78%

96%

Source: National Center for Education Statistics and Westat, Inc., 1995

Change Since 19911

Percentage of secondary school teachers who held a teaching certificate in their main teaching 

assignment:

1991 1994

All teachers 94% 93% *

Mathematics 93% 92%

Science 93% 91%

English 94% 92% *

Social studies 95% 94%

Fine arts 94% 95%

Foreign language 91% 90%

Bilingual education/ESL2 85% 78%

Special education 95% 96%

1 Interpret with caution. Data are from a representative national survey. The changes shown could be 

attributable to sampling error. In cases noted with an asterisk, we are confident that change has occurred. 2 English as a Second Language.

Between 1991 and 1994,

there was a decrease in the

percentage of all secondary

school teachers who held a

teaching certificate in their

main teaching assignment.

1 English as a Second Language.
96

Special 

education

Bilingual 

education/ESL2

Science

Mathematics

Teachers with 

more than 10 

years of 

experience

experience

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

1%

2%

1%

4%

5%

Source: National Center for Education Statistics and Westat, Inc., 1995

1 Teachers with fewer than 4 years of experience. 2 English as a Second Language.
Student 

assessment

study in 

subject field

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

30%

27%

51%

51%

49%

All teachers Urban Suburban Rural

52%

Source: National Center for Education Statistics and Westat, Inc., 1995

97

py, 

assessment.
98

Professional

growth credits

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

All teachers Urban Suburban Rural

32%

32%

31%

32%

Source: National Center for Education Statistics and Westat, Inc., 1995

professional credits.
99

Teachers with 

more than 10 

years of 

experience

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

33%

Workshops or in-service programs2

College courses3

Activities sponsored by professional associations

93%

52%

Source: National Center for Education Statistics and Westat, Inc., 1995

1 Teachers with fewer than 4 years of experience. 2 Includes school district-sponsored and school-sponsored workshops and in-service programs.

3 Includes university extension courses, adult education courses, and college courses in teacher’s subject 

field.
100

Teachers with more than 

10 years of experience

Teachers with 4–10 

years of experience

Beginning teachers1

Teachers with LEP students in their class

Teachers with LEP students in their class 

who have received training to teach LEP students

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

37%

30%

40%

33%

40%

27%

1 Teachers with fewer than 4 years of experience.
Source: National Center for Education Statistics and Westat, Inc., 1995

101

Teachers with more than 

10 years of experience

Teachers with 4–10 

years of experience

Beginning teachers1

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

16%

18%

15%

1 Teachers with fewer than 4 years of experience.
102

Rural

Suburban

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

45%

17%

49%

40%

14%

Beginning teachers1

Teachers with 4–10 years of experience

Teachers with more than 10 years of experience

Source: National Center for Education Statistics and Westat, Inc., 1995

Change Since 19911

Percentage of teachers who reported that during their first year of teaching, they had participated in a 

formal teacher induction program to help beginning teachers by assigning them to master or 

mentor teachers:

1991 1994

All teachers 22% 27% *

Beginning teachers:2

Elementary 53% 53%

Secondary 52% 54%

Urban 55% 55%

Suburban 53% 57%

Rural 53% 49%

1 Interpret with caution. Data are from a representative national survey. The changes shown could be 

attributable to sampling error. In cases noted with an asterisk, we are confident that change has occurred. 2 Teachers with fewer than 4 years of experience.

Between 1991 and 1994, 

the percentage of all 

teachers who reported that

they participated in a formal

induction program 

increased.

1 Teachers with fewer than 4 years of experience.
103

Rural

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

30%

40%

38%

Determining the content of in-service programs

Establishing curriculum

Setting discipline policy

Source: National Center for Education Statistics and Westat, Inc., 1995

1 Defined as a response of “4” or “5” on a 6-point scale, where “0” means “no influence” and “5” means

“a great deal of influence.”

Change Since 19911

Percentage of teachers who reported that teachers in their school have influence2 over school policy

in selected areas:

In-Service Programs Curriculum Discipline Policy

1991 1994 1991 1994 1991 1994

All teachers 33% 31% * 37% 36% 39% 37% *

Elementary 35% 33% * 34% 34% 47% 45% *

Secondary 31% 29% * 40% 38% 30% 29%

Urban 32% 31% 31% 32% 38% 36% *

Suburban 34% 32% * 38% 36% 40% 37% *

Rural 32% 30% * 40% 40% 38% 38%

1 Interpret with caution. Data are from a representative national survey. The changes shown could be 

attributable to sampling error. In cases noted with an asterisk, we are confident that change has occurred. 2 In 1994, defined as a response of “4” or “5” on a 6-point scale, where “0” means “no influence” and “5” means

“a great deal of influence.” In 1991, defined as a response of “5” or “6” on a 6-point scale, where “1” means “no

influence” and “6” means “a great deal of influence.”

Between 1991 and 1994, 

the percentage of teachers

who reported that teachers

in their school have influence

over determining the content

of in-service programs and

setting discipline policy

decreased.
104
105

2000

1995
106

grades. Only 15 percent of all 4th graders, for example, receive instruction from a

teacher who has been specially trained to teach mathematics. Less than one-fourth

of elementary teachers feel qualified to teach specific sciences. Even at the secondary

school level, about 37% of science teachers and 44% of mathematics teachers have

degrees outside the fields in which they are teaching.

Outmoded instruction may also play a part in why students gradually lose interest

in science and mathematics. Five years ago, the National Council of Teachers of

Mathematics recommended that all students should use computers and calculators in

classes. According to data in this Volume, computers are becoming more available in

the early grades and calculator use has become more widespread in the middle grades.

Even so, only 56% of 8th graders regularly use calculators and only 20% have computers in their classrooms. And despite the fact that Algebra is the gateway subject to

more advanced mathematics, less than half of all 8th graders (48%) currently attend

classes that heavily emphasize this topic.

Data in this Report do provide some encouraging news. More mathematics and

science degrees are now being earned, and the number of mathematics and science

degrees awarded to both women and minorities has been increasing since 1979.

For our students to be well-informed and competent, science and mathematics

knowledge must become “basic” in this country. It is as important for individuals as it

is for the nation as a whole if we are to prosper. This is why so much effort is going

into developing higher curriculum standards for all students in science and mathematics, ones that foster critical thinking, application of knowledge, and integration

of technology. The goal is to be more than just adequate. It is to be excellent, to be

the best.
107

women and minorities, who complete degrees in mathematics, science, and 

engineering will increase significantly.
108

France Hungary Korea Switzerland Taiwan

Countries in which

students’ scores were

similar to those

of the U.S.

Countries which

scored higher

than U.S.

Countries which

scored lower

Areas than U.S.

Life science

Physical science

Earth science

Nature of science

Science Achievement

Source: Educational Testing Service, 1992

This exhibit repeats information presented in the 1994 Goals Report.

1 Students from Brazil, Canada, China, England, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Jordan, Mozambique, Portugal, Scotland,

Slovenia, the former Soviet Union, and Spain also participated in this assessment. 

assessment in 1991. 
109

Students use calculators in 

mathematics class at 

least once a week

Students have computers

in their classrooms

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

44%

17%

p

Source: National Center for Education Statistics, 1993

This exhibit repeats information presented in the 1994 Goals Report.

1 Informal introduction of concepts at Grade 4.

Change Since 19901

Percentage of 4th graders whose teachers reported that:

1990 1992

Students work in small groups at least once a week 62% 63%

Students work with rulers, blocks, or geometric shapes

at least once a week 51% 44%

They heavily emphasize Algebra and functions2 2% 4%

They heavily emphasize developing reasoning ability to 

solve unique problems 44% 48%

They heavily emphasize communicating mathematics ideas 40% 38%

Students have computers in their classroom 31% 44% *

Students use calculators in mathematics class at least once a week 18% 17%

1 Interpret with caution. Data are from a representative national survey. The changes shown could be 

attributable to sampling error. In cases noted with an asterisk, we are confident that change has occurred. 2 Informal introduction of concepts at Grade 4.

The percentage of 4th

graders whose teachers

reported that they have 

computers in their classroom

increased between 1990 

and 1992.
Students use calculators in 

mathematics class at 

least once a week

Students have computers

in their classrooms

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

20%

56%

Source: National Center for Education Statistics, 1993

This exhibit repeats information presented in the 1994 Goals Report.

Change Since 19901

Percentage of 8th graders whose teachers reported that:2

1990 1992

Students work in small groups at least once a week 50% 51%

They heavily emphasize Algebra and functions 48% 48%

They heavily emphasize developing reasoning ability to 

solve unique problems 46% 49%

They heavily emphasize communicating mathematics ideas 38% 40%

Students have computers in their classroom 22% 20%

Students use calculators in mathematics class at least once a week 42% 56% *

1 Interpret with caution. Data are from a representative national survey. The changes shown could be 

attributable to sampling error. In cases noted with an asterisk, we are confident that change has occurred. 2 Data on working with measuring instruments or geometric solids were not collected for 8th graders prior 

to 1992.

measuring instruments or

geometric solids.

The percentage of 8th

graders whose teachers

reported that they used 

calculators in mathematics

class at least once a week

increased 14 percentage

points between 1990 and

1992.

110
111

Developing skills in 

laboratory techniques

Communicating ideas 

in science effectively

Developing problemsolving skills

They do not rely 

primarily on textbooks

to determine what 

they teach

They are well-supplied 

with instructional 

materials and resources

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

56%

46%

54%

38%

38%

8th grade student reports 8th grade teacher reports

Whose teachers

reported that

they heavily

emphasize:1

Source: National Center for Education Statistics and Westat, Inc., 1992

This exhibit repeats information presented in the 1994 Goals Report.

1 This information was not collected from 8th grade students.
112

1979 1981 19832 1985 1987 1989 1991 1993

Number of degrees

190,993

545,149

269,509

275,640

Total Male Female

453,612

262,619

Source: National Center for Education Statistics, National Science Foundation, and Westat, Inc., 1995

This exhibit modifies and updates information presented in the 1994 Goals Report.

Source: National Center for Education Statistics, National Science Foundation, and Westat, Inc., 1995

This exhibit modifies and updates information presented in the 1994 Goals Report.

Exhibit 52

Trends in Science Degrees Earned, by Sex

Number1 earned by U.S. citizens, 1979 to 1993

1 Includes bachelor’s, master’s, and doctoral degrees in engineering, physical science, computer science,

biological science, agricultural science, social science, psychology, and health fields. 2 No data available.

American students earned

over half a million science

degrees in 1993. The combined number of undergraduate and graduate degrees

earned by females increased

41% in science (versus a 5%

increase for males) between

1979 and 1993.

No data available.

1979 1993 % Change

Undergraduate

Total 375,421 443,897 18%

Male 212,782 223,425 5%

Female 162,639 220,472 36%

Graduate

Total 78,191 101,252 29%

Male 49,837 52,215 5%

Female 28,354 49,037 73%

Undergraduate and Graduate Combined

Total 453,612 545,149 20%

Male 262,619 275,640 5%

Female 190,993 269,509 41%
113

American Indian/

Alaskan Native

Asian/Pacific

Islander

Black

Hispanic White

0

200

400

600

457

330

49

556

63

1979 1981 19832 1985 1987 1989 1991 1993

Source: National Center for Education Statistics, National Science Foundation, and Westat, Inc., 1995

This exhibit modifies and updates information presented in the 1994 Goals Report.

1 Includes bachelor’s, master’s, and doctoral degrees. 2 No data available.

Islander 133 251 89%

Black 84 106 26%

Hispanic 42 86 105%

White 2,872 2,818 -2%

Race Unknown 3 234 7,700%

Undergraduate and Graduate Combined

Total 14,678 17,821 21%

American Indian/

Alaskan Native 49 63 29%

Asian/Pacific

Islander 457 1,166 155%

Black 736 1,071 46%

Hispanic 330 556 68%

White 13,101 14,487 11%

Race Unknown 5 478 9,460%
114

0

5,000

10,000

15,000

American Indian/

Alaskan Native

Asian/Pacific

Islander

Black

Hispanic White

10,709

1,620

1979 1981 19832 1985 1987 1989 1991 1993

13,351

2,630

Source: National Center for Education Statistics, National Science Foundation, and Westat, Inc., 1995

This exhibit modifies and updates information presented in the 1994 Goals Report.

1 Includes bachelor’s, master’s, and doctoral degrees in engineering, physical science, computer 

science, biological science, agricultural science, social science, psychology, and health fields. 2 No data available.

Islander 2,775 6,660 140%

Black 3,146 4,218 34%

Hispanic 1,508 3,256 116%

White 70,194 81,668 16%

Race Unknown 307 5,036 1,540%

Undergraduate and Graduate Combined

Total 453,612 545,149 20%

American Indian/

Alaskan Native 1,620 2,630 62%

Asian/Pacific

Islander 10,709 33,492 213%

Black 24,701 33,477 36%

Hispanic 13,351 24,847 86%

White 402,842 435,978 8%

Race Unknown 389 14,725 3,685%
115

g

Female students

Mathematics

or science

degrees

Other degrees

36%

64%

Source: National Center for Education Statistics, National Science Foundation, and Westat, Inc., 1995

1 Bachelor’s degrees. 2 Includes Blacks, Hispanics, and American Indians/Alaskan Natives.

Change Since 1991

Mathematics and science degrees as a percentage of all degrees1 awarded to the following groups: 

1991 1993

All students 39% 40%

Minority students2 39% 39%

Female students 35% 36%

1 Bachelor’s degrees. 2 Includes Blacks, Hispanics, and American Indians/Alaskan Natives.

Between 1991 and 1993, the

percentage of degrees

awarded in mathematics and

science to all students

and to female students 

increased slightly.
116
117

2000

1995
118

about the economy and our competitiveness, but often they fail to see the link

between further adult learning and either their own security or that of the country.

Information contained in previous reports showed how direct those links are. In

1992, adults scoring at the highest levels of literacy were much more likely to have

been employed than those scoring at the lowest levels; their weekly wages were double those of adults at the lowest literacy levels.

Some positive responses toward the need for continued learning can be seen.

Encouraging news can be found in increases in participation in adult education courses.

In 1994, 42% of adults 17 years and older reported taking an adult education course

during the previous 12 months, up from 34% in 1991. As young people’s interest in

careers demanding high skills has increased over the last two decades, so have college

enrollment rates. However, college enrollment rates have levelled off in the past few

years, and only about one-third of young adult high school graduates possessed a two- or

four-year postsecondary degree in 1994.

Furthermore, just as we are not sure of what K-12 students are learning because of

inadequate standards and measurements, we also are not sure of the standards underpinning higher education. We need to know more than just how many students complete college. We need a clearer understanding of the knowledge and skills these graduates attain and how they relate to the demands of a world marketplace and the rights

and responsibilities of citizenship. The Goals Panel supports the development of a

national sample-based collegiate assessment system to provide such understandings. 

To believe in the value of lifelong learning is to believe in being a literate adult,

possessing internationally competitive knowledge and skills in the workplace, and

being an informed and engaged citizen. That is a choice with excellent consequences

for all.
119

■ The number of quality programs, including those at libraries, that are designed to

serve more effectively the needs of the growing number of part-time and 

midcareer students will increase substantially.

■ The proportion of the qualified students, especially minorities, who enter college,

who complete at least two years, and who complete their degree programs will

increase substantially.

■ The proportion of college graduates who demonstrate an advanced ability to

think critically, communicate effectively, and solve problems will increase 

substantially.

■ Schools, in implementing comprehensive parent involvement programs, will 

offer more adult literacy, parent training and lifelong learning opportunities to

improve the ties between home and school, and enhance parents’ work and 

home lives.
120

25%

31%

4 =

3 =

2 =

1 =

326 to 375 points

276 to 325 points

226 to 275 points

000 to 225 points (lowest)

Source: National Center for Education Statistics, 1993

This exhibit repeats information presented in the 1994 Goals Report.

1 Test results are reported on scales of 0 to 500 points. Scores are grouped into five levels, with Level 5 being

most proficient and Level 1 being least proficient. Complete descriptions of each level can be found in

Appendix A. 2 Prose literacy tasks require readers to understand and use information contained in texts such as newspapers

and pamphlets. 3 Document literacy tasks require readers to locate and use information contained in materials such as tables,

charts, and maps. 4 Quantitative literacy tasks require readers to perform arithmetic computations using numbers found in printed

materials.

and responsibilities of 

citizenship.
121

• Read a page of information about jury selection and service, then identify and

summarize two kinds of challenges attorneys use when selecting potential jurors.

• Use information in a table to analyze the results of a parent-teacher survey and 

write a paragraph summarizing the results.

• Read an advertisement for home equity loans and explain how to calculate total

interest charges for the loan.

• Read a newspaper article about technologies used to produce more fuel-efficient

cars and then contrast the two opposing views presented.

• Use a bus schedule to determine how long a passenger who misses a bus would 

have to wait for another bus if traveling between two given locations on

a weekend.

• Estimate the cost per ounce of peanut butter, using information from two different

types of price labels.

• Write a letter about an error that appears on a credit card bill.

• Interpret a graph which estimates power consumption for four different years by

energy source.

• Calculate the difference in population growth between two groups from

information presented in a graph.

LEVEL 5 (most difficult)

LEVEL 4
122

1

2

3

4

5

1

2

3

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

97%

97%

94%

75%

70%

100%

100%

100%

99%

99%

97%

97%

93%

74%

70%

Believes reads English well Believes writes English well

Quantitative5 

Literacy 

Literacy Levels

Source: National Center for Education Statistics, 1993

This exhibit repeats information presented in the 1994 Goals Report.

1 Responses of “well” and “very well” combined. 2 Test results are reported on scales of 0 to 500 points. Scores are grouped into five levels, with Level 5 being

most proficient and Level 1 being least proficient. Complete descriptions of each level can be found in

Appendix A. 3 Prose literacy tasks require readers to understand and use information contained in texts such as newspapers

and pamphlets. 4 Document literacy tasks require readers to locate and use information contained in materials such as tables,

charts, and maps. 5 Quantitative literacy tasks require readers to perform arithmetic computations using numbers found in printed

materials.

g

Level 5 = 376 to 500 points

Level 4 = 326 to 375 points

Level 3 = 276 to 325 points

Level 2 = 226 to 275 points

Level 1 = 0 to 225 points
123

Blue collar6

White collar5

Professional4

Lowest 25%

Middle 50%

Highest 25%

Early career3

Mid-career2

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

63%

43%

71%

55%

44%

74%

50%

48%

Age Income Occupation

Source: Cornell University, 1992

This exhibit repeats information presented in the 1994 Goals Report.

1 Includes 51+-year-olds. 2 Includes 26- to 50-year-olds. 3 Includes 25-year-olds and younger. 4 Includes owner-manager, professional, and managerial occupational categories. 5 Includes supervisor-white collar, and white collar occupational categories. 6 Includes supervisor-blue collar, and blue collar occupational categories.
124

Blue collar6

White collar5

Professional4

Lowest 25%

Middle 50%

Highest 25%

Early career3

Mid-career2

Late career1

Age Income Occupation

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

24%

24%

21%

27%

25%

20%

24%

21%

27%

Source: Cornell University, 1992

This exhibit repeats information presented in the 1994 Goals Report.

1 Includes 51+-year-olds. 2 Includes 26- to 50-year-olds. 3 Includes 25-year-olds and younger. 4 Includes owner-manager, professional, and managerial occupational categories. 5 Includes supervisor-white collar, and white collar occupational categories. 6 Includes supervisor-blue collar, and blue collar occupational categories.

pp 

ways to do their jobs.
125

Source: National Center for Education Statistics and Westat, Inc., 1991 and 1995

This exhibit updates information presented in the 1994 Goals Report.

1 Excluding those participating in full-time educational programs exclusively. 2 Includes 17- to 34-year-olds. 3 Includes 35- to 54-year-olds. 4 Includes 55+-year-olds.

Change Since 19911

Percentage of adults2 17 years and older who took adult education courses during the previous 

12 months:

1991 1995

All adults 34% 42% *

By age:

Early career3 43% 53% *

Mid-career4 40% 48% *

Late career5 15% 21% *

By highest level of education:

Bachelor’s degree 55% 61% *

Associate’s degree 50% 55%

High school diploma 31% 31%

Less than high school 13% 15%

1 Interpret with caution. Data are from a representative national survey. The changes shown could be 

attributable to sampling error. In cases noted with an asterisk, we are confident that change has occurred. 2 Excluding those participating in full-time educational programs exclusively. 3 Includes 17- to 34-year-olds. 4 Includes 35- to 54-year-olds. 5 Includes 55+-year-olds.

More adults reported taking

adult education courses in

1995 than in 1991. Increases

were found across all career

age groupings.
126

Handlers, equipment 

cleaners, helpers, 

and laborers

Transportation and 

materials moving

Machine operators, 

assemblers, and inspectors

Precision production, 

craft, and repair

Agriculture, forestry,

and fishing

Service

Administrative support,

including clerical

Sales workers

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

55%

27%

44%

29%

Wh

Blue collar occupations

48%

50%

30%

27%

1 Excluding unemployed persons and persons not in the labor force, such as retirees, homemakers, etc. Excluding

those participating in full-time educational programs exclusively.
127

Source: National Center for Education Statistics and Westat, Inc., 1991, 1993, and 1995

This exhibit updates information presented in the 1994 Goals Report.

g 

Handlers, equipment cleaning, helpers, and laborers 23% 27%

1 Interpret with caution. Data are from a representative national survey. The changes shown could be 

attributable to sampling error. In cases noted with an asterisk, we are confident that change has occurred. 2 Excluding unemployed persons and persons not in the labor force, such as retirees, homemakers, etc. Excluding

those participating in full-time educational programs exclusively.
128

Blue collar

White collar

High school 

or less

Some college

College graduate

Early career3

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

25%

27%

54%

61%

41%

46%

26%

29%

43%

49%

24%

28%

1983 1991

Highest level of

education

Occupation

Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1992

This exhibit repeats information presented in the 1994 Goals Report.

1 Includes 55+-year-olds. 2 Includes 25- to 54-year-olds. 3 Includes 24-year-olds and younger.
129

Source: Bureau of the Census, National Center for Education Statistics, and Pinkerton Computer Consultants, 1995

This exhibit updates information presented in the 1994 Goals Report.

Threeyear averages (19921994). 2 Includes junior colleges, community colleges, and universities.

Change Since 19901

Percentage of high school graduates who enrolled in two- or four-year colleges2 immediately

after graduation:

19903 19934

All high school graduates 61% 62%

Black 49% 51%

Hispanic 52% 56%

White 63% 64%

1 Interpret with caution. Data are from a representative national survey. The changes shown could be

attributable to sampling error. In cases noted with an asterisk, we are confident that change has occurred. 2 Includes junior colleges, community colleges, and universities. 3 Three-year averages (1989-1991). 4 Three-year averages (1992-1994).
130

Graduate/

professional degree3

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

5%

2%

2%

5%

All high school graduates Black Hispanic White

Source: Bureau of the Census, National Center for Education Statistics, and Pinkerton Computer Consultants, 1995

This exhibit modifies and updates information presented in the 1994 Goals Report.

1 Percentages represent highest level of education completed. 2 Combines occupational/vocational and academic degrees. 3 Combines master's, doctoral, and professional degrees.

Change Since 19921

Percentage of high school graduates aged 25-29 who have completed the following levels of education:2

Graduate/

Some Associate‘s Bachelor‘s professional

college degree3 degree degree4

1992 1994 1992 1994 1992 1994 1992 1994

All high school graduates 22% 24% * 8% 10% * 22% 22% 5% 5%

Black 23% 26% 8% 8% 11% 14% 3% 2%

Hispanic 24% 29% 7% 9% 13% 11% 3% 2%

White 21% 23% * 8% 10% * 25% 25% 5% 5%

1 Interpret with caution. Data are from a representative national survey. The changes shown could be 

attributable to sampling error. In cases noted with an asterisk, we are confident that change has occurred. 2 Percentages represent highest level of education completed. 3 Combines occupational/vocational and academic degrees. 4 Combines master's, doctoral, and professional degrees.

Between 1992 and 1994, the

percentage of high school

graduates aged 25-29 who

completed some college or

an associate’s degree

increased.
131

All Black Hispanic White

All U.S. citizens who reported that 

they registered to vote

All U.S. citizens who reported that they voted

Source: Bureau of the Census, 1989 and 1993

This exhibit repeats information presented in the 1994 Goals Report.

Change Since 19881

Percentage of all U.S. citizens who reported that they registered to vote and who reported that 

they voted:

Registered to vote Voted 

1988 1992 1988 1992

All 70% 73% * 61% 66% *

Black 67% 67% 53% 57% *

Hispanic 57% 59% 46% 48%

White 71% 74% * 62% 67% * 

1 Interpret with caution. Data are from a representative national survey. The changes shown could be 

attributable to sampling error. In cases noted with an asterisk, we are confident that change has occurred.

Between 1988 and 1992, the

percentage of U.S. citizens

who reported registering to

vote and who reported 

voting increased.
132
133

2000

1995
134

then any percentage of students who report that they bring weapons to school is

intolerable (the percentages reporting carrying a weapon to school at least once during the previous four weeks were 10% of 8th graders, 9% of 10th graders, and 6% of

12th graders). The data also tell us that students are aware of considerable gang

activity among their peers and that an alarming percentage in secondary schools feel

unsafe at school or getting to or coming from school. Many students also report that

their teachers have to interrupt class to deal with problems of student misbehavior.

And the use of marijuana by 8th, 10th, and 12th graders is steadily increasing.

Young people have an obligation to be serious about school. But schools, helped

by their surrounding communities, also have an obligation to create the conditions

necessary for teaching and learning to take place. Only then can students be expected to take responsibility for learning.
135

■ Every local educational agency will develop and implement a policy to ensure 

that all schools are free of violence and the unauthorized presence of weapons.

■ Every local educational agency will develop a sequential, comprehensive 

kindergarten through twelfth grade drug and alcohol prevention education

program.

■ Drug and alcohol curriculum should be taught as an integral part of sequential, 

comprehensive health education.

■ Community-based teams should be organized to provide students and teachers

with needed support.

■ Every school should work to eliminate sexual harassment.
136

73%

Yes

No

Source: University of Michigan, 1995

This exhibit updates information presented in the 1994 Goals Report.

1 Or someone had actually sold or given them an illegal drug at school.

Change Since 19921

Percentage of students who reported that someone had offered to sell or give them an illegal

drug at school2 during the previous year:

1992 1994

8th graders 10% 16% * 10th graders 18% 24% * 12th graders 23% 27% *

1 Interpret with caution. Data are from a representative national survey. The changes shown could be

attributable to sampling error. In cases noted with an asterisk, we are confident that change has occurred. 2 Or someone had actually sold or given them an illegal drug at school.

Between 1992 and 1994, the

percentages of 8th, 10th, and

12th graders who reported

that someone had offered to

sell or give them an illegal

drug at school increased.
137

Rural

Urban, outside4

Urban, inside4

1,000 or more

600 -999

300 - 599

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

25%

22%

24%

30%

26%

29%

37%

33%

40%

29%

26%

32%

31%

27%

27%

28%

24%

23%

Beer/wine Liquor Marijuana

School si

Student’s residence

Source: National Center for Education Statistics and Westat, Inc., 1993

This exhibit repeats information presented in the 1994 Goals Report.

1 Includes 6th through 12th graders.

2 Responses of "easy " and "fairly easy" combined. 3 Students were assigned to a school category on the basis of their grade level. School categories were as

follows: Schools in which the lowest grade was 3 or less and the highest grade was 8 or less were classified as

elementary. Schools in which the lowest grade was 4 through 9 and the highest grade was 4 through 9 were

classified as middle/junior high. Schools in which the lowest grade was 7 through 12 and the highest grade was

10 through 12 were classified as senior high. Schools that did not meet these qualifications were classified as

“combination schools.” 4 See Appendix A for a complete description.
138

Marijuana or any other illicit drug Alcohol

Source: University of Michigan, 1995

This exhibit updates information presented in the 1994 Goals Report.

Change Since 19911

Percentage of students who reported that they used alcohol or other drugs at or near school

during the previous year:

8th graders 10th graders

1991 1994 1991 1994

At school during the day

Marijuana or any other illicit drug 2% 4% * 5% 8% *

Alcohol 4% 5% * 7% 8%

Near school

Marijuana or any other illicit drug 3% 7% * 7% 11% *

Alcohol 6% 8% * 12% 12%

At a school dance, game, 

or other event

Marijuana or any other illicit drug 4% 7% * 6% 10% *

Alcohol 11% 12% 19% 16% *

1 Interpret with caution. Data are from a representative national survey. The changes shown could be

attributable to sampling error. In cases noted with an asterisk, we are confident that change has occurred.

Between 1991 and 1994, the

percentages of 8th and 10th

graders who reported using

marijuana or other illicit

drugs at or near school or at

a school event increased.

Also increasing was the 

percentage of 8th graders

who reported using alcohol

at or near school. The 

percentage of 10th graders

who reported using alcohol

at a school dance, game, or

other event decreased.
139

Source: University of Michigan, 1995

This exhibit updates information presented in the 1994 Goals Report.

1 Three-year averages (1992-1994) reported for racial/ethnic groups.

Change Since 19901

Percentage2 of 12th graders who reported that they used the following substances at school 

during the previous year:

Alcohol Marijuana Cocaine

1990 1994 1990 1994 1990 1994

All3 7% 8% 6% 8% * 1% 1% *

Black 8% 9% 4% 5% <1% 1%

Hispanic 8% 8% 6% 6% 1% 1%

White 8% 7% 8% 6% * 1% 1%

1 Interpret with caution. Data are from a representative national survey. The changes shown could be 

attributable to sampling error. In cases noted with an asterisk, we are confident that change has occurred. 2 Three-year averages (1988-1990, 1992-1994) reported for racial/ethnic groups. 3 The nonrounded values for 12th graders in 1990 and 1994 for cocaine were 1.4 and 0.5, respectively.

Between 1990 and 1994, 

the percentage of 12th grade

students who reported using

marijuana at school

increased, while the 

percentage who reported

using cocaine at school

decreased.
140

White

Hispanic

Black

All

White

Hispanic

Grade 8 Grade 10 Grade 12

Cocaine:

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

21%

18%

25%

26%

10%

23%

30%

2%

3%

4%

1%

1%

1%

5%

5%

5%

2%

2%

4%

1 Two-year averages (1993-1994) reported for racial/ethnic groups.

p

of use at all grade levels.
141

Source: University of Michigan, 1995

This exhibit updates information presented in the 1994 Goals Report.

Percentages3 of 8th and 10th graders who reported that they used the following substances during the 

previous year:

Marijuana Cocaine

1992 1994 1992 1994

8th graders:

Black 4% 9% * 1% 1%

Hispanic 12% 18% * 3% 5% *

White 6% 10% * 1% 2%

10th graders:

Black 8% 15% * 1% 1%

Hispanic 19% 25% * 4% 5%

White 17% 23% * 2% 2%

Change Since 19931

Percentage of students4 who reported that they used alcohol during the previous year:

1993 1994

All 8th graders 45% 47%

All 10th graders 63% 64%

All 12th graders 73% 73%

1 Interpret with caution. Data are from a representative national survey. The changes shown could be attributable

to sampling error. In cases noted with an asterisk, we are confident that change has occurred. 2 Two-year averages (1989-1990, 1993-1994) reported for racial/ethnic groups. 3 Two-year averages (1991-1992, 1993-1994) reported for racial/ethnic groups. 4 Although data on overall alcohol use were collected prior to 1993, the wording of the question on use of alcohol

changed between the 1992 and the 1993 survey. Therefore, 1993 is established as the baseline for overall alcohol

use. Respondent size is insufficient to provide information for racial/ethnic groups.
142

Grade 8 Grade 10 Grade 12

Three or more days

One or two days

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

4%

5%

5%

2%

4%

6%

at school:

Source: University of Michigan, 1995

This exhibit updates information presented in the 1994 Goals Report.

1 Percentages may not add to 100% because of rounding.

Change Since 19921

Percentage2 of students who reported being under the influence of alcohol or other drugs

while at school during the previous four weeks:

8th graders 10th graders 12th graders

1992 1994 1992 1994 1992 1994

Under the influence of alcohol

while at school

Never 96% 95% * 95% 94% 92% 93%

One or two days 4% 4% 4% 5% 6% 5%

Three or more days 1% 1% 1% 2% 2% 2%

Under the influence of marijuana

or some other illegal drug

while at school

Never 97% 94% * 95% 91% * 93% 90% *

One or two days 2% 4% * 3% 5% * 4% 5%

Three or more days 1% 2% * 2% 4% * 3% 6% *

1 Interpret with caution. Data are from a representative national survey. The changes shown could be

attributable to sampling error. In cases noted with an asterisk, we are confident that change has occurred. 2 Percentages may not add to 100% because of rounding.

Between 1992 and 1994, the

percentage of 8th graders

who reported never being

under the influence of 

alcohol while at school

decreased. Similarly, the

percentages of 8th, 10th, and

12th graders who reported

never being under the 

influence of marijuana or

some other illegal drug while

at school decreased.
143

Grade 12

Grade 10

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

2%

3%

2%

At least once 10 or more days

Source: University of Michigan, 1995

This exhibit updates information presented in the 1994 Goals Report.

1 Includes a gun, knife, or club.

Change Since 19921

Percentage of students who reported carrying any weapon2 to school during the previous four weeks:

8th graders 10th graders 12th graders

1992 1994 1992 1994 1992 1994

At least once 9% 10% 10% 9% 6% 6%

10 or more days 2% 3% 4% 4% 3% 3%

1 Interpret with caution. Data are from a representative national survey. The changes shown could be

attributable to sampling error. In cases noted with an asterisk, we are confident that change has occurred. 2 Includes a gun, knife, or club. 1994 was the first year in which “carrying a gun only” was asked.
144

Grade 8 Grade 10 Grade 12

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Source: University of Michigan, 1995

This exhibit updates information presented in the 1994 Goals Report.

Change Since 19901

Percentage of 12th graders who reported that they were victimized in the following ways at school

during the previous year:

1990 1994

Threatened:

With a weapon 13% 15%

Without a weapon 25% 24%

Injured:

With a weapon 6% 5%

Without a weapon 14% 12%

Theft of student’s property 42% 40%

Vandalism of student’s property 29% 27%

Change Since 19911

Percentage of 8th and 10th graders who reported that they were victimized in the following ways 

at school during the previous year:

8th graders 10th graders

1991 1994 1991 1994

Threatened:

With a weapon 19% 19% 17% 15%

Without a weapon 31% 30% 30% 28% *

Injured:

With a weapon 9% 9% 8% 6% *

Without a weapon 25% 22% * 20% 16% *

Theft of student’s property 42% 40% 44% 39% *

Vandalism of student’s property 34% 32% 28% 25% *

1 Interpret with caution. Data are from a representative national survey. The changes shown could be

attributable to sampling error. In cases noted with an asterisk, we are confident that change has occurred.

Between 1991 and 1994,

fewer 8th and 10th graders

reported being injured 

without a weapon. In 

addition, fewer 10th graders

reported being threatened

without a weapon, injured

with a weapon, or having

their property stolen or 

vandalized.
145

Rural

Urban, outside3

Urban, inside3

1,000 or more

600 - 999

300 - 599

Fewer than 300

students

Other

White

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

31%

39%

19%

29%

36%

47%

43%

32%

20%

Student

School size Student’s residence

Source: National Center for Education Statistics and Westat, Inc., 1993

This exhibit repeats information presented in the 1994 Goals Report.

1 Includes 6th through 12th graders. 2 Students were assigned to a school category on the basis of their grade level. School categories were as

follows: Schools in which the lowest grade was 3 or less and the highest grade was 8 or less were classified as

elementary. Schools in which the lowest grade was between 4 and 9 and the highest grade was between 4 

and 9 were classified as middle/junior high. Schools in which the lowest grade was between 7 and 12 and the 

highest grade was between 10 and 12 were classified as senior high. Schools that did not meet these

qualifications were classified as “combination schools.” 3 See Appendix A for a complete description.
146

At

least

once

Never

Most of

the time2

Grade 8 Grade 10 Grade 12

Student did not 

go to school 

during the past 

month because 

he/she felt unsafe

at school or on

the way to or 

from school:

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

4%

4%

3%

94%

96%

98%

7%

4%

3%

1 Percentages may not add to 100% because of rounding. 2 Responses of "most days" and "every day" combined.
147

Source: University of Michigan, 1995

This exhibit updates information presented in the 1994 Goals Report.

gy g

3 Responses of "most days" and "every day" combined.
148

Source: National Center for Education Statistics, 1991

This exhibit repeats information presented in the 1994 Goals Report.

1 Responses of "unsafe" and "moderately unsafe" combined.
149

Source: National Center for Education Statistics and Westat, Inc., 1991 and 1995

This exhibit updates information presented in the 1994 Goals Report.

Change Since 19911

Percentage of public school teachers who reported that they were victimized by a student from their

school in the following ways:

Threatened Physically

with injury in the attacked in the

last 12 months last 12 months

1991 1994 1991 1994

All schools 8% 13% * 2% 5% *

City 15% 18% 3% 6% *

Suburban/urban fringe 6% 12% * 3% 4%

Town 7% 11% * 3% 4%

Rural 4% 10% * <1% 3% *

1 Interpret with caution. Data are from a representative national survey. The changes shown could be 

attributable to sampling error. In cases noted with an asterisk, we are confident that change has occurred.

Teacher reports of threats of

injury or physical attacks by

a student from their school

increased between 1991

and 1994.
150

Never

Grade 8 Grade 10

Regularly4

Often3

Regularly4

Often3

Occasionally2

Student comes to 

class late without an

approved excuse:

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

13%

11%

8%

7%

5%

3%

55%

48%

41%

41%

48%

54%

2%

3%

4%

1%

1%

2%

Grade 12

1 Percentages may not add to 100% because of rounding. 2 Occasionally=5 times a week or less; does not include never. 3 Often= 6-19 times a week. 4 Regularly=20 times a week or more.

10th graders reported that

teachers interrupted class

twenty times a week or more

to deal with student 

misbehavior.
151

Source: University of Michigan, 1995

This exhibit updates information presented in the 1994 Goals Report.

Change Since 19931

Percentage2 of 12th graders who reported that during an average week disruptions

occurred in their classes:

12th graders

1993 1994

Teachers interrupt class to deal with

student misbehavior

Never 13% 12%

Occasionally3 68% 68%

Often4 14% 16%

Regularly5 5% 5%

Misbehavior by other students interferes

with student’s own learning

Never 36% 36%

Occasionally3 54% 54%

Often4 7% 8%

Regularly5 3% 3%

Student comes to class late without an

approved excuse

Never 41% 41%

Occasionally3 53% 54%

Often4 4% 4%

Regularly5 1% 2%

1 Interpret with caution. Data are from a representative national survey. The changes shown could be

attributable to sampling error. In cases noted with an asterisk, we are confident that change has occurred. 2 Percentages may not add to 100% because of rounding. 3 Occasionally=5 times a week or less; does not include never. 4 Often= 6-19 times a week. 5 Regularly=20 times a week or more.
152

Grade 8 Grade 10 Grade 12

White

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

43%

23%

34%

12%

1 Two-year averages (1993-1994) reported for racial/ethnic groups.
153

Source: University of Michigan, 1995

This exhibit updates information presented in the 1994 Goals Report.

Change Since 1992

Percentage3 of 8th graders who reported that they did the following during the last four weeks:

Skipped school Skipped class

1992 1994 1992 1994

All 10% 11% 13% 14%

Black 9% 9% 17% 17%

Hispanic 18% 18% 23% 24%

White 9% 10% 11% 12%

1 Interpret with caution. Data are from a representative national survey. The changes shown could be

attributable to sampling error. In cases noted with an asterisk, we are confident that change has occurred. 2 Two-year averages (1989-1990, 1993-1994) reported for racial/ethnic groups. 3 Two-year averages (1991-1992, 1993-1994) reported for racial/ethnic groups.
154

Source: National Center for Education Statistics and Westat, Inc., 1995

This exhibit modifies and updates information presented in the 1994 Goals Report.

Percentage of all secondary school teachers who reported:2

1991 1994

Student misbehavior 37% 46% * interferes with my teaching

Principal enforces school rules 86% 79% * and backs me up when I need it

Rules are consistently enforced by 62% 50% * teachers in this school, even for 

students who are not in their classes

1 Interpret with caution. Data are from a representative national survey. The changes shown could be 

attributable to sampling error. In cases noted with an asterisk, we are confident that change has occurred. 2 Responses of “agree” and “strongly agree” combined.

,

more secondary school

teachers felt that student

misbehavior interfered with

their teaching, and fewer felt

that principals and other

teachers consistently

enforced school rules.
155

cocaine in the

previous year

Grade 8 Grade 10 Grade 12

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

3%

4%

Source: University of Michigan, 1995

This exhibit updates information presented in the 1994 Goals Report.

Change Since 19911

Percentage of students who reported the following:

8th graders 10th graders 12th graders

1991 1994 1991 1994 1991 1994

They disapprove of adults having 5

or more drinks in a row once

or twice each weekend 85% 81% * 77% 72% * 67% 65%

They had 5 or more drinks in a row

during the previous two weeks 13% 15% * 23% 24% 30% 28%

They disapprove of adults trying

marijuana once or twice 85% 73% * 75% 62% * 69% 58% *

They used marijuana in the

previous year 6% 13% * 17% 25% * 24% 31% *

They disapprove of adults trying

cocaine powder once or twice 91% 86% * 91% 88% * 88% 87%

They used cocaine in the

previous year 1% 2% * 2% 3% 4% 4%

1 Interpret with caution. Data are from a representative national survey. The changes shown could be 

attributable to sampling error. In cases noted with an asterisk, we are confident that change has occurred.

Between 1991 and 1994, the

percentages of 8th, 10th, and

12th graders who reported

that they disapproved of

adults trying marijuana once

or twice decreased. In 

addition, decreases

occurred in the percentages

of 8th and 10th graders 

who reported that they 

disapproved of adults having

five or more drinks in a row

once or twice each 

weekend, and adults trying

cocaine powder once

or twice.
156
157

2000

1995
158

consistently outperformed students who rarely or never did so.

Higher standards for student performance mean that teachers will require the support of parents more than ever to reinforce learning. Data in this Report show that

teachers reported that 95% of parents of 1st graders and 96% of parents of 4th graders

attended parent-teacher conferences, but only 77% of parents of 8th graders did so.

There is a tendency for family involvement to decrease as children get older, but this

does not have to happen if families realize that the type of involvement they have in

a child’s education can take on many different forms. Family involvement in education does not only take place in the school. No matter what the age of the child, a

parent can ask if the student has finished his or her homework. But this practice too

declines in upper grades: of parents of 1st graders, 83% checked to see if their child’s

homework was finished, but only 49% of parents of 8th graders asked. Parents also

need to feel that their students are learning in a safe environment, and only 33% of

parents of 1st graders, 31% of parents of 4th graders, and 17% of parents of 8th

graders felt that their children’s school is a safe place. 

Schools should be places that reinforce parents’ role as their children’s first teacher

and that work with parents to create successful, supportive learning environments.

In order to foster exceptional learning by students, schools must see their role as serving the education needs of today’s families, not just students. Only by recognizing

that family involvement in education goes beyond organizing bake sales will schools

tap the valuable resources of our nation’s families. When families, schools, communities, and businesses work together, students can achieve high standards and the

National Education Goals can be realized.
159

decisionmaking at school.

■ Parents and families will help to ensure that schools are adequately supported 

and will hold schools and teachers to high standards of accountability.
160

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

73%

Grade 1 Grade 4 Grade 8

Source: U.S. Department of Education, Planning and Evaluation Service; and Abt Associates, Inc., 1995
Serving as 

volunteers 

outside the 

classroom

volunteers in 

the classroom

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

91%

72%

78%

80%

67%

Grade 1 Grade 4 Grade 8

161

Source: U.S. Department of Education, Planning and Evaluation Service; and Abt Associates, Inc., 1995

1 Responses of “somewhat involved” and “very involved” combined.
162

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Grade 1 Grade 4 Grade 8

Volunteered in 

classroom or 

school office

31%

25%

6%

Served on 

parent advisory 

committee

Participated in 

parent-teacher 

organization

39%

40%

27%

8%

8%

8%

Attended 

school event 

in which child 

participated2

Observed 

classroom 

activities

49%

40%

13%

72%

77%

68%

Decision-making:

Attending school

programs and

events:

Source: U.S. Department of Education, Planning and Evaluation Service; and Abt Associates, Inc., 1995

1 Parent or another adult in household. 2 Such as a play, sporting event, or concert.
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

163

Source: National Center for Education Statistics, 1995

1 Activities include attending a general school meeting, attending a school or class event, and acting as 

a volunteer at the school or serving on a school committee.
164

Talked with 

child about 

future plans

and goals

Talked with 

child about 

school 

expectations

Talked with 

child about 

studies

Talked with 

child about 

school activities

or events

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

82%

78%

69%

70%

57%

40%

29%

26%

25%

12%

12%

13%

Grade 1 Grade 4 Grade 8

Parent-child

communication:

Source: U.S. Department of Education, Planning and Evaluation Service; and Abt Associates, Inc., 1995

1 Parent or another adult in household.
The school 

maintains 

adequate 

discipline 

and order

The school is 

a safe place

My child gets 

any additional 

help in school 

he/she needs

My child is 

challenged 

at school

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

27%

23%

15%

29%

24%

17%

33%

31%

17%

31%

26%

16%

Grade 1 Grade 4 Grade 8

Safe and

disciplined

environment

for learning:

165

1 Parent or another adult in household. 2 Responses of “agree” and “strongly agree” combined.
166

Parents work 

together in 

supporting 

school policy

Parents have 

a say in setting 

school policy

The school feels

it is important 

for parents to 

participate in the 

life of the school

pp

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

23%

42%

38%

20%

17%

15%

8%

20%

17%

10%

Grade 1 Grade 4 Grade 8

Parent 

involvement in

decisionmaking:

Source: U.S. Department of Education, Planning and Evaluation Service; and Abt Associates, Inc., 1995

1 Parent or another adult in household. 2 Responses of “agree” and “strongly agree” combined.
of the regular 

instructional

program

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

79%

Grade 1 Grade 4 Grade 8

167

Source: U.S. Department of Education, Planning and Evaluation Service; and Abt Associates, Inc., 1995
168

g

program

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Source: National Center for Education Statistics, 1995
169
170
171

2000

1995
172
173

ets, stuctos, ad pocedues. addtoto suc

sampling errors, all surveys, both universe and sample,

are subject to design, reporting, and processing errors

and errors due to nonresponse. To the extent possible,

these nonsampling errors are kept to a minimum by

methods built into the survey procedures. In general,

however, the effects of nonsampling errors are more difficult to gauge than those produced by sampling variability.

Sampling Errors

The samples used in surveys are selected from a large

number of possible samples of the same size that could

have been selected using the same sample design. Estimates derived from the different samples would differ

from each other. The difference between a sample estimate and the average of all possible samples is called the

sampling deviation. The standard or sampling error of a

survey estimate is a measure of the variation among the

estimates from all possible samples and, thus, is a measure of the precision with which an estimate from a particular sample approximates the average result of all possible samples.

The sample estimate and an estimate of its standard

error permit us to construct interval estimates with prescribed confidence that the interval includes the average result of all possible samples. If all possible samples

were selected under essentially the same conditions and

errors below the estimate to two standard errors above

the estimate a 95 percent confidence interval.

Analysis of standard errors can help assess how valid a

comparison between two estimates might be. The standard error of a difference between two independent sample estimates is equal to the square root of the sum of the

squared standard errors of the estimates. The standard

error (se) of the difference between independent sample

estimates “a” and “b” is:

Nonsampling Errors

Universe and sample surveys are subject to nonsampling

errors. Nonsampling errors may arise when respondents

or interviewers interpret questions differently; when

respondents must estimate values; when coders, keyers,

and other processors handle answers differently; when

persons who should be included in the universe are not

or when persons fail to respond (completely or partially).

Nonsampling errors usually, but not always, result in an

understatement of total survey error and thus an overstatement of the precision of survey estimates. Since estimating the magnitude of nonsampling errors often would

require special experiments or access to independent

data, these magnitudes are seldom available.

sea,b= se2

a + se2b
174

Race/ethnicity refers to the race of the mother. The

data on Hispanic births were reported separately. 

Source: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Health, United States, 1994 (Hyattsville, MD:

National Center for Health Statistics, 1995), 73.

Exhibit 2: Birthweight

Race/ethnicity refers to the race of the mother. The

data on Hispanic births were reported separately.

Source: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Health, United States, 1994 (Hyattsville, MD:

National Center for Health Statistics, 1995), 71.

Exhibit 3: Children’s Health Index

The percentages of infants at risk are based on the number of births used to calculate the health index, not the

actual number of births. The percentage of complete

and usable birth records used to calculate the 1992

health index varied from a high of 99.78 to a low of

74.28. Four states (California, Indiana, New York, and

South Dakota) did not collect information on all four

risks in 1992; five states (California, Indiana, New York,

Oklahoma, and South Dakota) did not collect information on all four risks in 1990. These states and the Terri

See general technical note regarding NHES.

Source: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, National Household Education Survey: 1993 School Readiness Interview, unpublished tabulations prepared by Westat, Inc., August

1993.

Exhibit 6: Family-Child Language and 

Literacy Activities

See general technical note regarding NHES. 

Sources: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, National Household Education Survey: 1991 Early Childhood Component, unpublished tabulations prepared by Westat, Inc., August

1991, August 1992, and August 1993.

U.S. Department of Education, National Center for

Education Statistics, National Household Education

Survey: 1993 School Readiness Interview, unpublished

tabulations prepared by Westat, Inc., August 1993.

U.S. Department of Education, National Center for

Education Statistics, National Household Education

Survey: 1995 Program Participation Interview, unpublished tabulations prepared by Westat, Inc., August

1995.
175

Preschool participation includes children enrolled in

any center-based program.

Sources: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, National Household Education Survey: 1991 Early Childhood Component, unpublished tabulations prepared by Westat, Inc., August

1991. 

U.S. Department of Education, National Center for

Education Statistics, National Household Education

Survey: 1995 Program Participation Interview, unpublished tabulations prepared by Westat, Inc., August

1995.

Exhibit 10: Preschool Programs for Children 

with Disabilities

See general technical note regarding NHES. Preschool

participation includes children enrolled in any centerbased program. Includes 3- to 5-year-olds with any disability enrolled in preschool, regardless of whether disability affects the ability to learn.

Source: U.S.Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, National Household Education Survey: 1995 Program Participation Interview,

unpublished tabulations prepared by Westat, Inc.,

August 1995.

Early Education and Care in 1990, submitted to the U.S.

Department of Education, Office of Planning, Budget

and Evaluation (Princeton, NJ: Mathematica Policy

Research, Inc., 1991), and unpublished tabulations,

1992.

Exhibit 12: Quality of Home-Based 

Preschool Settings

Regulated home-based programs include all family day

care programs that are registered, certified, or licensed

by state or county government agencies.

See technical note regarding the Child Development

Associate (CDA) credential under Exhibit 11.

Source: Ibid.

Goal 2: School Completion

Exhibit 13: High School Completion Rates 

The high school completion rates for 18- to 24-year-olds

are computed as a percentage of the non-high school

enrolled population at these ages who hold a high

school credential (either a high school diploma or an

alternative credential, such as a General Educational

Development (GED) certificate, Individual Education

Plan (IEP) credential, or certificate of attendance).
176

drop out in a single year without completing high

school. Event rates are important because they reveal

how many students are leaving high school each year

and how each year’s rates compare with previous ones. 

• Status rates measure the proportion of the population

who have not completed high school and are not

enrolled at one point in time, regardless of when they

dropped out. Status dropout rates are important

because they reveal the extent of the dropout problem in the population and suggest the need for further training and education that will permit these

individuals to participate more fully in the economy

and the life of the nation. Status dropout rates are

much higher than event dropout rates because they

represent the cumulative impact of annual event

dropout rates over a number of years. The status

dropout rate for 16- to 24-year-olds in 1994 is presented in Exhibit 15.

• Cohort rates measure what happens to a single group

(or cohort) of students over a period of time. Cohort

rates are important because they reveal how many students in a single age group or grade drop out over time.

Cohort rates also allow the calculation of how many

dropouts from the cohort eventually complete high

school with a diploma or an alternative credential. 

Source: Data from the 1990 and 1994 October Current

Population Surveys, unpublished tabulations prepared

by the National Center for Education Statistics and

information from students, teachers, and school admin

istrators.

In 1988, Congress added a new dimension to NAEP by

authorizing, on a trial basis, voluntary participation of

public schools in state-level assessments. Forty jurisdictions (states and territories) participated in the 1990

trial mathematics assessment. In 1992, 44 jurisdictions

participated in the state mathematics assessments of 4th

and 8th graders, and 43 participated in the 4th grade

reading assessments. Forty-four jurisdictions participated in the 1994 trial reading assessment of 4th graders.

National Assessment Governing Board (NAGB)

Achievement Levels

The NAEP data shown under Goal 3 should be interpreted with caution. The line signifying the Goals

Panel’s performance standard classifies student performance according to achievement levels devised by the

National Assessment Governing Board. These achievement level data have been previously reported by the

National Center for Education Statistics (NCES). Students with NAEP scores falling below the Goals Panel’s

performance standard have been classified as “Basic” or

below; those above have been classified as “Proficient”

or “Advanced.”

The NAGB achievement levels represent a useful way

of categorizing overall performance on the NAEP. They

are also consistent with the Panel’s efforts to report such
177

used with caution, these levels convey important infor

mation about how American students are faring in

reaching Goal 3.

Basic: This level, below proficient, denotes partial mastery

of knowledge and skills that are fundamental for proficient

work at each grade — 4, 8, and 12. For twelfth grade,

this is higher than minimum competency skills (which

are normally taught in elementary and junior high

school) and covers significant elements of standard

high-school-level work.

Proficient: This central level represents solid academic performance for each grade tested — 4, 8, and 12. It reflects a

consensus that students reaching this level have demonstrated competency over challenging subject matter and

are well prepared for the next level of schooling. At

grade 12, the proficient level encompasses a body of subject-matter knowledge and analytical skills, of cultural

literacy and insight, that all high school graduates

should have for democratic citizenship, responsible

adulthood, and productive work.

Advanced: This higher level signifies superior performance

beyond proficient grade-level mastery at grades 4, 8, and 12.

For twelfth grade, the advanced level shows readiness for

rigorous college courses, advanced training, or employment requiring advanced academic achievement.

revision. The revised data are being reported by NCES

in the revised 1994 NAEP Reading: A First Look and will

be reported in the 1996 National Education Goals Report.

Sources: Ina V.S. Mullis, Jay Campbell, and Alan

Farstrup, NAEP 1992 Reading Report Card for the Nation

and the States: Data from the National and Trial State

Assessments (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of

Education, National Center for Education Statistics

1993).

Paul Williams, Clyde Reese, Jay Campbell, John

Mazzeo, and Gary Phillips, 1994 NAEP Reading: A First

Look (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1995).

Exhibit 17: Reading Achievement – Grade 4

See general technical notes regarding NAEP and the

NAGB achievement levels.

Reading achievement results for 1992 and 1994 should

be interpreted with caution. Figures are based on data

previously released by NCES, and data are undergoing

revision. The revised data are being reported by NCES

in the revised 1994 NAEP Reading: A First Look and will

be reported in the 1996 National Education Goals Report.
178

Source: Ibid.

Exhibit 19: Reading Achievement – Grade 12

See general technical notes regarding NAEP and the

NAGB achievement levels.

Reading achievement results for 1992 and 1994 should

be interpreted with caution. Figures are based on data

previously released by NCES, and data are undergoing

revision. The revised data are being reported by NCES

in the revised 1994 NAEP Reading: A First Look and will

be reported in the 1996 National Education Goals Report.

Due to significant changes in the wording of the

race/ethnicity question between 1992 and 1994, the

results for Asians and Pacific Islanders are not comparable between the two years. Therefore, 1992 results for

these two subgroups are not presented.

Source: Ibid.

Exhibit 20: Writing Achievement – Grade 4

The 1992 NAEP Writing Framework identifies three

primary purposes for writing — informative, persuasive,

and narrative. A six-point scoring rubric was used to

rate students’ responses:

to some aspect of the topic but do not appear to have

fully understood the task. Or, they recopy text from

the prompt.

Not Rated. Blank, totally off task, indecipherable,

illegible, and “I don’t know.”

Source: Arthur N. Applebee, Judith A. Langer, Ina V.S.

Mullis, Andrew S. Latham, and Claudia A. Gentile,

NAEP 1992 Writing Report Card (Washington, D.C.:

U.S. Department of Education, National Center for

Education Statistics, 1994), 26, 29, 33, 46, 49, 53, 68,

71, and 75.

Exhibit 21: Writing Achievement – Grades 8 and 12

See technical notes regarding the NAEP Writing

Framework under Exhibit 20.

Source: Ibid, 26, 29, 39, 46, 49, 59-60, 68, 71, and 82.

Exhibit 22: Mathematics Achievement

See general technical notes regarding NAEP and the

NAGB achievement levels.

Source: Ina V.S. Mullis, John A. Dossey, Eugene H.

Owen, and Gary W. Phillips, NAEP 1992 Mathematics

Report Card for the Nation and the States: Data from the

National and Trial State Assessments (Washington, D.C.:
179

See general technical notes regarding NAEP and the

NAGB achievement levels.

In addition to the way the data are presented here,

NCES also presents the data using a proficiency scale of

0 to 500 points.

According to NCES, the U.S. history results presented

here for Grades 4, 8, and 12 illustrate one of the difficulties in setting achievement levels. NAGB is concerned

about the discrepancy between actual student performance and the expectations for performance that are

contained in the achievement levels. Simply stated,

students are not performing as well on the NAEP U.S.

history assessment, particularly at Grade 12, as NAGB

and the many panelists and reviewers think these students should perform. For example, most students take

at least one high school course in U.S. history by the

end of the 11th grade. Yet the achievement levels indicate that more than half (57%) of 12th graders are performing below the basic level, with 1% scoring at the

advanced level. In contrast, data from The College

Board show that about 2.4% of all graduating seniors

score well enough on the Advanced Placement exam in

U.S. history to be considered qualified for college credit.

Since NAEP is a cross-sectional survey of student

achievement, it cannot readily identify cause and effect

account for some of this discrepancy. The judges for the

12th grade levels may have had relatively higher expectations than judges for the other grades. Finally, the difference between more conventional testing practices in

some classrooms and the NAEP assessment questions

may be another factor. NAEP includes a variety of questions, from multiple choice items to open-ended tasks

that require students to apply knowledge and demonstrate skills by writing their answers.

Many of these factors, or a combination of all of them,

could explain the gap between standards for student performance contained in the NAGB achievement levels

and the actual performance on the 1994 NAEP history

assessment.

Source: Paul L. Williams, Steven Lazer, Clyde M.

Reese, and Peggy Carr, 1994 NAEP U.S. History: A

First Look (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1995). 

Exhibit 27: History Achievement — Grade 4

See general technical notes regarding NAEP and the

NAGB achievement levels, and the technical note

under Exhibit 26.

Source: Ibid.
180

1995).

Exhibit 31: Geography Achievement — Grade 4

See general technical notes regarding NAEP and the

NAGB achievement levels.

Source: Ibid.

Exhibit 32: Geography Achievement — Grade 8

See general technical notes regarding NAEP and the

NAGB achievement levels.

Source: Ibid.

Exhibit 33: Geography Achievement — Grade 12

See general technical notes regarding NAEP and the

NAGB achievement levels.

Source: Ibid.

Exhibit 34: Trends in Science Proficiency

Levels of Science Proficiency

• Level 150—Knows Everyday Science Facts —Students at this level know some general scientific facts

of the type that could be learned from everyday expe

more detailed scientific knowledge, and the skill to

apply their knowledge in interpreting information

from text and graphs. These students also exhibit a

growing understanding of principles from the Physical Sciences.

• Level 350—Integrates Specialized Scientific Information — Students at this level can infer relationships and draw conclusions using detailed scientific

knowledge from the Physical Sciences, particularly

Chemistry. They also can apply basic principles of

genetics and interpret the societal implications of

research in this field.

Source: Ina V.S. Mullis, John A. Dossey, Jay R. Campbell, Claudia Gentile, Christine O’Sullivan, and

Andrew S. Latham, NAEP 1992 Trends in Academic

Progress: Achievement of U.S. Students in Science, 1969 to

1992, Mathematics, 1973 to 1992, Reading, 1971 to

1992, and Writing, 1984 to 1992 (Washington, D.C.:

U.S. Department of Education, National Center for

Education Statistics, 1994), 32 and 37.

Exhibit 35: Advanced Placement Results

The Advanced Placement program, sponsored by The

College Board, provides a way for high schools to offer

college-level coursework to students. At present, one or

more course descriptions, examinations, and sets of curricular materials are available in art, biology, chemistry,
181

Source: Mary J. Frase, High School Seniors Performing

Community Service (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1993).

Exhibit 37: Young Adult Voter Registration 

and Voting

Sources: U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the

Census, Voting and Registration in the Election of November 1988, Current Population Reports, Series P-20, no.

440 (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing

Office, 1989).

U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census,

Voting and Registration in the Election of November 1992,

Current Population Reports, Series P-20, no. 466

(Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office,

1993).

Goal 4: Teacher Education and 

Professional Development

General

Main Teaching Assignment, Schools and Staffing 

Survey (SASS)

The subject areas used for teacher’s main assignment

were defined using the following assignment categories:

• 6th grade or lower and 7th grade or higher, and

reported a primary assignment other than prekindergarten, kindergarten, or general elementary; or

• 9th grade or higher, or 9th grade or higher and

“ungraded”; or

• 7th and 8th grades only, and reported a primary

assignment other than kindergarten, general elementary, or special education; or

• 7th and 8th grades only, and reported a primary

assignment of special education and was designated

as a secondary teacher on the list of teachers provided

by the school; or

• 6th grade or lower and 7th grade or higher, or 7th and

8th grades only, and was not categorized above as

either elementary or secondary.

Exhibit 38: Teacher Preparation

See general technical notes regarding main teaching

assignment and secondary teacher. Note that, for this

exhibit, information is not reported for bilingual education or ESL degrees since so few higher education institutions grant degrees in those fields.

The subject areas used for teacher’s degree were defined

using the following training categories:
182

unpublished tabulations prepared by Westat Inc.,

August 1995.

Exhibit 39: Teacher Certification in Main Teaching

Assignment

See general technical notes regarding main teaching

assignment and secondary teacher.

Certificate refers to any certificate including advanced

professional, regular or standard, provisional, probationary, temporary, and emergency certificates. Few states

require certification of private school teachers.

Source: Ibid.

Exhibit 40: Temporary or Emergency Teacher 

Certification

See general technical note regarding main teaching

assignment.

A temporary certificate requires some additional college

coursework and/or student teaching before regular certification can be obtained. An emergency certificate or

waiver is issued to persons with insufficient teacher

preparation who must complete a regular certification

program in order to continue teaching.

Source: Ibid.

Source: Ibid.

Goal 5: Mathematics and Science

Exhibit 47: International Mathematics and Science

Achievement Comparisons

International Assessment of Educational 

Progress (IAEP)

Twenty countries assessed the mathematics and science

achievement of 13-year-old students and 14 assessed 9-

year-old students in these same subjects. In some cases,

participants assessed virtually all age-eligible children in

their countries, and in other cases they confined samples to certain geographic regions, language groups, or

grade levels. In some countries, significant proportions

of age-eligible children were not represented because

they did not attend school. Also, in some countries, low

rates of school or student participation mean that results

may be biased. The countries participating in the IAEP

were: Brazil, Canada, China, England, France, Hungary,

Ireland, Israel, Italy, Jordan, Korea, Mozambique (mathematics only), Portugal, Scotland, Slovenia, the former

Soviet Union, Spain, Switzerland, Taiwan, and the

United States. For this Report, the five countries chosen to be compared with the United States had comprehensive populations (France, Hungary, Korea, Switzerland, and Taiwan).
183

See general technical note under Goal 3 regarding

NAEP.

Source: Ibid.

Exhibit 50: Science Instructional Practices

See general technical note under Goal 3 regarding

NAEP.

Source: Lee R. Jones, Ina V.S. Mullis, Senta A. Raizen,

Iris R. Weiss, and Elizabeth A. Weston, The 1990 Science Report Card: NAEP’s Assessment of Fourth, Eighth,

and Twelfth Graders (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1992), and unpublished tabulations prepared by

Westat, Inc., August 1992.

Exhibit 51: Trends in Mathematics Degrees Earned, 

by Sex

Data include only U.S. citizens and resident aliens on

permanent visas, and include institutions in U.S. Territories.

Mathematical sciences is the only field of study included

in the mathematics category for this Report.

Source: Higher Education General Information Survey

(HEGIS, 1977, 1979, 1981, and 1985) and the Integrat

Source: Ibid.

Exhibit 54: Trends in Science Degrees Earned, 

by Race/Ethnicity

See technical notes under Exhibit 52.

Source: Ibid.

Exhibit 55: Mathematics and Science Degrees

See technical notes under Exhibits 51 and 52. 

Source: Ibid.

Goal 6: Adult Literacy and Lifelong Learning

Exhibit 56: Adult Literacy

Adult Literacy Scales

The Department of Education and the Educational

Testing Service (ETS) characterized the literacy of

America’s adults in terms of three “literacy scales” representing distinct and important aspects of literacy: prose,

document, and quantitative literacy. Each of the literacy

scales, which range from 0 to 500, is as follows: 
184

Level 3 – Tasks in this level tend to require readers

to make literal or synonymous matches between

the text and information given in the task, or to

make matches that require low-level inferences.

Other tasks ask readers to integrate information

from dense or lengthy text that contains no organizational aids such as headings. Readers may also be

asked to generate a response based on information

that can be easily identified in the text. Distracting information is present, but is not located near

the correct information.

Level 4 – These tasks require readers to perform

multiple-feature matches and to integrate or synthesize information from complex or lengthy passages. More complex inferences are needed to perform successfully. Conditional information is

frequently present in tasks at this level and must be

taken into consideration by the reader.

Level 5 – Some tasks in this level require the reader

to search for information in dense text which contains a number of plausible distractors. Others ask

readers to make high-level inferences or use specialized background knowledge. Some tasks ask

readers to contrast complex information.

Document literacy – the knowledge and skills

required to locate and use information contained in

materials that include job applications, payroll forms,

which contain information that is irrelevant or

inappropriate to the task.

Level 4 – Tasks in this level, like those at the previous levels, ask readers to perform multiple-feature

matches, cycle through documents, and integrate

information; however, they require a greater degree

of inferencing. Many of these tasks require readers

to provide numerous responses but do not designate how many responses are needed. Conditional

information is also present in the document tasks at

this level and must be taken into account by the

reader.

Level 5 – Tasks in this level require the reader to

search through complex displays that contain multiple distractors, to make high-level text-based

inferences, and to use specialized knowledge.

Quantitative literacy – the knowledge and skills

required to apply arithmetic operations, either alone

or sequentially, using numbers embedded in printed

materials; for example, balancing a checkbook, figuring out a tip, completing an order form, or determining the amount of interest from a loan advertisement.

Level 1 – Tasks in this level require readers to perform single, relatively simple arithmetic operations, such as addition. The numbers to be used are

provided and the arithmetic operation to be performed is specified.
185

Source: Irwin S. Kirsch, Ann Jungeblut, Lynn Jenkins,

and Andrew Kolstad, Adult Literacy in America: A First

Look at the Results of the National Adult Literacy Survey

(Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Education,

National Center for Education Statistics, September

1993), 17.

Exhibit 57: Adults’ Perceptions of Own Literacy

Abilities, by Literacy Level

See technical note regarding the literacy scales under

Exhibit 56.

Source: Ibid, 138-140.

Exhibit 58: Perceived Usefulness of Skills in 

the Future

The Meaning of Work research project interviewed a

random sample of the labor force in Flanders (Belgium)

during October-December 1990, in the Federal Republic of Germany during November-December 1989

(before reunification), in Japan during August-November 1991, and in the United States during January-July

1989.

Source: S.A. Ruiz Quintanilla, Work-Related Attitudes

Among Workers in Flanders (Belgium), F.R. Germany,

Japan, and the U.S.A., Report prepared for the National

Education Statistics, National Household Education

Survey: 1995 Adult Education Interview, unpublished

tabulations prepared by Westat, Inc., August 1995.

Exhibit 61: Participation in Adult Education, 

by Occupation

See technical note under Exhibit 60.

Sources: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, National Household Education Survey: 1991 Adult Education Component, unpublished tabulations prepared by Westat, Inc., August

1991 and August 1993.

U.S. Department of Education, National Center for

Education Statistics, National Household Education

Survey: 1995 Adult Education Interview, unpublished

tabulations prepared by Westat, Inc., August 1995.

Exhibit 62: Worker Training

Source: Tom Amirault, Job Qualifying and Skill Improvement Training: 1991 (Washington D.C.: U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1992).

Exhibit 63: College Enrollment

Source: U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the

Census, October Current Population Surveys, 1989-94,
186

Goal 7: Safe, Disciplined, and Alcoholand Drug-free Schools

Exhibit 66: Sale of Drugs at School

Source: Lloyd D. Johnston, Patrick M. O’Malley, and

Jerald G. Bachman, Selected Outcome Measures from the

Monitoring the Future Study for Goal 7 of the National

Education Goals: A Special Report for the National Education Goals Panel (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan’s

Institute for Social Research, June 1995).

Exhibit 67: Obtaining Illegal Drugs at School

Student’s residence (the variable ZIPURBAN) was created by matching the National Household Education

Survey (NHES): 1993 School Safety and Discipline

Component 5-digit codes to the 1990 Census Bureau

file. ZIPURBAN defines a ZIP code (or part of a ZIP

code) as urban or rural. Urban is further broken down

into the inside urbanized areas (UAs) and outside UAs.

The three categories of ZIPURBAN are 1) urban, inside

UA; 2) urban, outside UA; and 3) rural. The definitions for these categories are taken directly from the

1990 Census of Population.

A UA comprises a place and the adjacent densely settled surrounding territory that together have a minimum population of 50,000 people. The term “place” in

Source: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, National Household Education Survey: 1993 School Safety and Discipline Component, unpublished tabulations prepared by Westat, Inc.,

August 1993.

Exhibit 68: Use of Drugs at School by 8th and 

10th Graders

Source: Lloyd D. Johnston, Patrick M. O’Malley, and

Jerald G. Bachman, Selected Outcome Measures from the

Monitoring the Future Study for Goal 7 of the National

Education Goals: A Special Report for the National Education Goals Panel (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan’s

Institute for Social Research, June 1995).

Exhibit 69: Use of Drugs at School by 12th Graders 

The data for the 12th grade racial and ethnic subgroups

are three-year averages to increase the sample size and

produce more reliable estimates. The racial and ethnic

subgroup numbers are 1988-1990 averages for 1990 and

1992-1994 averages for 1994.

Source: Ibid.

Exhibit 70: Overall Student Drug Use

The data for the racial and ethnic subgroups are twoyear averages to increase the sample size and produce
187

Source: U.S. Department of Education, National Cen

ter for Education Statistics, National Household Education Survey: 1993 School Safety and Discipline Component, unpublished tabulations prepared by Westat, Inc.,

August 1993.

Exhibit 75: Student Safety

Source: Lloyd D. Johnston, Patrick M. O’Malley, and Jerald G. Bachman, Selected Outcome Measures from the

Monitoring the Future Study for Goal 7 of the National Education Goals: A Special Report for the National Education

Goals Panel (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan’s Institute for Social Research, June 1995).

Exhibit 76: Teacher Safety

Definitions of school locations are as follows:

City – A central city of a Standard Metropolitan

Statistical Area (SMSA).

Suburb/Urban Fringe – A place within an SMSA

of a large or mid-size central city and defined as

urban by the U. S. Bureau of the Census.

Town – A place not within an SMSA, but with a

population greater than or equal to 2,500, and

defined as urban by the U. S. Bureau of the

Census.

Source: Lloyd D. Johnston, Patrick M. OMalley, and

Jerald G. Bachman, Selected Outcome Measures from the

Monitoring the Future Study for Goal 7 of the National

Education Goals: A Special Report for the National Education Goals Panel (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan’s

Institute for Social Research, June 1995).

Exhibit 79: Skipping School and Classes

See technical note for racial and ethnic subgroup data

under Exhibit 70.

Source: Ibid.

Exhibit 80: Teacher Beliefs About the School 

Environment 

See general technical note in Goal 4 regarding the definition of a secondary teacher.

Source: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Teacher Surveys of the

Schools and Staffing Survey, 1990-91 and 1993-94,

unpublished tabulations prepared by Westat, Inc.,

August 1995.

Exhibit 81: Student Attitudes Toward Drug Use

Source: Lloyd D. Johnston, Patrick M. O’Malley, and

Jerald G. Bachman, Selected Outcome Measures from the
188

Source: Ibid.

Exhibit 85: Parents’ Reports of Their Involvement in

School Activities

Source: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, National Household Educa

ter for Education Statistics, National Education Longi

tudinal Study of 1988, unpublished tabulations prepared

by the National Education Goals Panel, June 1995.
189

Meaning of Work Study Cornell University Antonio Ruiz Quintanilla

(607) 255-2742

Monitoring the Future University of Michigan, Lloyd Johnston

Institute for Social Research (313) 763-5043

National Adult Literacy Survey (NALS) NCES Andrew Kolstad

(202) 219-1773

National Assessment of NCES Gary Phillips

Educational Progress (NAEP) (202) 219-1761

National Education Longitudinal NCES Jeff Owings

Study of 1988 (NELS: 88) (202) 219-1777

National Health Interview Survey Centers for Disease Control Elizabeth Zell

Immunization Section and Prevention (404) 639-3311

National Household Education NCES Kathryn Chandler

Survey (NHES) (202) 219-1767

NHES Adult Education Component NCES Peter Stowe

(202) 219-1363

National Longitudinal Study of the NCES Aurora D’Amico

High School Class of 1972 (NLS:72) (202) 219-1365
The Data Center has files available from the:

Common Core of Data (CCD),

Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS), 

National Education Longitudinal Study (NELS:88), 

National Household Education Survey (NHES), 

National Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS),

National Study of Postsecondary Faculty, and 

Schools and Staffing Survey (SASS). 

In the future, the Data Center plans to add additional databases to its inventory.

To contact the National Data Resource Center, write or call:

Carl Schmitt

Elementary and Secondary Education Statistics Division

National Center for Education Statistics

555 New Jersey Ave, NW

Washington, DC 20208-5651

(202) 219-1642

190
191
192
193

acquisition and analysis or report production. We

extend a special thanks to William Christopher, representative of the 1994-95 Chair of the Panel, Governor

Evan Bayh of Indiana, for his contributions. We remain

appreciative of the good counsel and support we

received from all.

REPORT PRODUCTION

Justin Boesel, Westat, Inc.

Beth Glaspie, Editorial Experts, Inc.

Babette Gutmann, Westat, Inc.

Allison Henderson, Westat, Inc.

Kelli Hill, ImpactDesign, Inc.

Scott Miller, Editorial Experts, Inc.

Jim Page, ImpactDesign, Inc.

Ann Webber, Westat, Inc.

REPORTING COMMITTEE

Patricia Brown, National Governors’ Association

Kim Burdick, Delaware State Legislature, 

Office of State Senator Connor

William Christopher, Office of the Governor of Indiana

Lori Gremel, Office of the Governor of Michigan

Mary Rollefson, U.S. Department of Education, 

National Center for Education Statistics

Emily Wurtz, U.S. Senate, Office of Senator Bingaman 

Jeae oeste, Oce ote GoveooMsssspp

Lori Gremel, Office of the Governor of Michigan

Thomas Houlihan, Office of the Governor of 

North Carolina

Leo Klagholz, New Jersey State Department of 

Education

Kelly Lineweaver, Office of the Governor of 

South Carolina

Thomas Phillips, Office of the Governor of Mississippi

William Porter, Office of the Governor of Colorado

Ruth Ravitz, Office of the Governor of Connecticut

Linda Wilson, Office of the Governor of New Jersey

Administration Representatives

Mary Cassell, Office of Management and Budget

John Christensen, U.S. Department of Education,

Office of Educational Research and Improvement

Jennifer Davis, U.S. Department of Education, 

Office of the Secretary

Catherine Jovicich, U.S. Department of Education, 

Office of the Secretary

Gaynor McCown, The White House, Office of 

Domestic Policy

Maggie McNeely, U.S. Department of Education, 

Office of Educational Research and Improvement

Mary Rollefson, U.S. Department of Education, 

National Center for Education Statistics

Kimberly Ross, The White House, Office of 

Domestic Policy
194

Aaron Bell, National Conference of State Legislatures

Patricia Brown, National Governors’ Association

Paul Goren, National Governors’ Association

Elizabeth McLaughlin-Krile, National Conference of

State Legislatures

Patty Sullivan, National Governors’ Association

DATA ACQUISITION

Susan Ahmed, U.S. Department of Education

Nabeel Alsalam, U.S. Department of Education

Samuel Barbett, U.S. Department of Education

Stephen Berglie, Westat, Inc.

Sharon Bobbitt, U.S. Department of Education

Justin Boesel, Westat, Inc.

Michael Brick, Westat, Inc.

Susan Broyles, U.S. Department of Education

Joyce Buchanon, University of Michigan

Peggy Carr, U.S. Department of Education

Dennis Carroll, U.S. Department of Education

Kathryn Chandler, U.S. Department of Education

Jen-Chin Chen, Abt Associates, Inc.

Sally Clarke, U.S. Department of Health and 

Human Services

Mary Collins, Westat, Inc.

Wade Curry, The College Board

Alan Moorhead, U.S. Department of Education

Frank Morgan, U.S. Department of Education

Mary Naiefeh, U.S. Department of Education

Christine Winquist Nord, Westat, Inc.

Laurence Ogle, U.S. Department of Education

Patrick O’Malley, University of Michigan

Gary Phillips, U.S. Department of Education

Douglas Rhodes, Educational Testing Service

Paul Planchon, U.S. Department of Education

Anne Ricciuti, Abt Associates, Inc.

Mary Rollefson, U.S. Department of Education

Elois Scott, U.S. Department of Education

Thomas M. Smith, U.S. Department of Education

Peter Stowe, U.S. Department of Education

William Thompson, Abt Associates, Inc.

Maureen Treacy, U.S. Department of Education

Stephanie Ventura, U.S. Department of Health

and Human Services

Ann Webber, Westat, Inc.

Walter G. West, U.S. Department of Education

Sheida White, U.S. Department of Education

Sharon Xu, Pinkerton Computer Consultants, Inc.

Jeffrey Yeamans, Westat, Inc.

Elizabeth Zell, Centers for Disease Control and 

Prevention

Feng Zhou, Westat, Inc.

Nicholas Zill, Westat, Inc.
195

Barbara Bowman, Erikson Institute

Cynthia Brown, Council of Chief State School Officers

Fred Brown, Boyertown Elementary School

Linda Espinosa, University of Missouri

Donna Foglia, Norwood Creek School

Peter Gerber, MacArthur Foundation

Sarah Greene, National Head Start Association

Judith Heumann, U.S. Department of Education

Mogens Jensen, National Center for Mediated Learning

Lilian Katz, ERIC Clearinghouse for Elementary and 

Early Childhood Education 

Michael Levine, Carnegie Corporation of New York

Evelyn Moore, National Black Child Development

Institute

Tom Schultz, National Association of State Boards of 

Education

Barbara Sizemore, DePaul University

Robert Slavin, Johns Hopkins University

Goal 1 Assessments Resource Group

Leaders: Sharon Lynn Kagan, Yale University

Lorrie Shepard, University of Colorado

Members:

Edward Chittenden, Educational Testing Service

M. Elizabeth Graue, University of Wisconsin

Kenji Hakuta, Stanford University

Luis Laosa, Educational Testing Service

Academy for Educational Development, Inc.

Members:

Janet Baldwin, General Education Development 

Testing Service

Jose Cardenas, The Intercultural Development

Research Association

Barbara Clements, Council of Chief State School 

Officers

Edmond Gordon, City College of New York

Noreen Lopez, Illinois State Board of Education

Pamela Keating, University of Washington

Steven Neilson, Milliman and Robertson, Inc.

Bill Padia, California Department of Education

Aaron Pallas, Michigan State University

Richard Wallace, University of Pittsburgh

Technical Planning Subgroup on Core Data Elements

Leader: Barbara Clements, Council of Chief State

School Officers

Members:

Linda Baker, Maryland State Department of Education

Paul Barton, Educational Testing Service

Matthew Cohen, Ohio Department of Education

Dennis Jones, National Center for Higher Education

Management Systems

Glynn Ligon, Evaluation Software Publication
196

Members:

Eva Baker, University of California, Los Angeles

Dorothy Gilford, National Academy of Sciences

Robert Glaser, University of Pittsburgh

Steven Leinwand, Connecticut State Department of 

Education

Robert Linn, University of Colorado

Michael Nettles, University of Michigan

Senta Raizen, National Center for Improving Science 

Education

William Schmidt, Michigan State University

Elizabeth Stage, National Research Council

Uri Treisman, University of Texas, Austin

James Wilsford, Jim Wilsford Associates, Inc.

GOAL 4: TEACHER EDUCATION AND 

PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT

Resource Group Convener: David Imig, American

Association of Colleges for Teacher Education

Members:

Marsha Berger, American Federation of Teachers

Gene Carter, Association for Supervision and 

Curriculum Development

Linda Darling-Hammond, Teachers College, 

Columbia University

Launa Ellison, Clara Barton School, Minneapolis, 

Minnesota

Terry Dozier, U.S. Department of Education

Jean Miller, Council of Chief State School Officers

Mary Rollefson, U.S. Department of Education

Joe Vaughan, U.S. Department of Education

GOAL 5: MATHEMATICS AND SCIENCE

Resource Group Convener: Alvin Trivelpiece, 

Oak Ridge National Laboratory

Members:

Iris Carl, National Council of Teachers of Mathematics

Steven Leinwand, Connecticut State Department of 

Education

Michael Nettles, University of Michigan

Alba Ortiz, University of Texas, Austin

Senta Raizen, National Center for Improving Science

Education

Ramsay Selden, Council of Chief State School Officers

Goals 3/5 Standards Review Technical Planning 

Subgroup

Leader: Shirley Malcom, American Association for

the Advancement of Science

Members:

Iris Carl, National Council of Teachers of Mathematics

Thomas Crawford, U.S. Olympic Committee
197

Colleges and Universities

Claire Gaudiani, Connecticut College

Terry Hartle, American Council of Education

Doris Helms, Clemson University

Bob McCabe, Miami-Dade Community College

Arturo Pacheco, University of Texas-El Paso

Paul Ruiz, American Association of Higher Education

Donald Stewart, The College Board

Arthur Wise, National Council for the Accreditation of

Teacher Education

GOAL 6: ADULT LITERACY AND LIFELONG

LEARNING

Resource Group Convener: Mark Musick, 

Southern Regional Education Board

Members:

Paul Barton, Educational Testing Service

Forest Chisman, Southport Institute for Policy Analysis

Peter Ewell, National Center for Higher Education

Management Systems

Joy McLarty, American College Testing

William Spring, Federal Reserve Bank of Boston

Thomas Sticht, Applied, Behavioral, and Cognitive

Sciences, Inc.

Marc Tucker, National Center on Education and the

Economy

Task Force on Disciplined Environments Conducive 

to Learning

Leader: Ronda Talley, American Psychological 

Association

Members:

C. Leonard Anderson, Portland Public Schools

Michael Guerra, National Catholic Education 

Association

J. David Hawkins, Social Development Research Group

Fred Hechinger, Carnegie Corporation of New York

Barbara Huff, Federation of Families for Children’s

Mental Health

Advisors for Task Force on Disciplined Environments

Conducive to Learning:

Oliver Moles, U.S. Department of Education

Ed Zubrow, Independent Consultant

GOAL 8: PARENTAL PARTICIPATION

Resource Group Convener: Joyce Epstein, 

Johns Hopkins University

Members:

Marilyn Aklin, National Coalition of 

Title 1/Chapter 1 Parents

Ja Net ́ Crouse, National PTA
198

Leader: Rolf Blank, Council of Chief State 

School Officers

Members:

Paul Barton, Educational Testing Service

Matthew Cohen, Ohio Department of Education

Mark Musick, Southern Regional Education Board

Cecilia Ottinger, Council of Great City Schools

Bill Padia, California Department of Education

Nora Sabelli, National Science Foundation

Rafael Valdivieso, Academy for Educational 

Development, Inc.

Task Force Advisors:

Steven Gould, Congressional Research Service

Gerald Malitz, U.S. Department of Education

Linda Roberts, U.S. Department of Education
199

Associate Director for Analysis and Reporting

Santee C. Ruffin, Jr.

Senior Education Associate

ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF

Tia M. Cosey

Receptionist and Office Automation Assistant

Cynthia M. Dixon

Program Assistant

Susan M. Steeger

Management Analyst

Charles J. Walter

Executive Officer

with assistance from

Ann Lasken

Hyong Yi
2. How well has the report served that purpose?

____ Very Well ____ Well ____ Poorly ____ Very Poorly

3. How do you rate the usefulness of the following parts of each of the documents? 

(1 = not very useful and 5 = very useful)

1995 Core Report

• Introduction

1 2 3 4 5 N/A

• National exhibits

1 2 3 4 5 N/A

• State data tables

1 2 3 4 5 N/A

• Information and examples on how family-school partnerships can accelerate progress 

toward the Goals

1 2 3 4 5 N/A

• Contact list

1 2 3 4 5 N/A

1995 National Data Volume

• Introduction

1 2 3 4 5 N/A

• National exhibits

1 2 3 4 5 N/A
The National Education Goals Panel thanks you for your interest.

Place 

First Class 

Postage Her

or Fax to: 

(202) 632-095

National Education Goals Panel

1255 22nd Street, NW, Suite 502

Washington, DC 20037

Tape here