Findings from the

National Assessment of Educational Progress

The Nation’s Report Card

National Center for Education Statistics

State Science 2000

Report for Oklahoma

U.S. Department of Education

Office of Educational Research and Improvement NCES 2002–453 OK
U.S. Department of Education

Rod Paige

Secretary

Office of Educational Research and Improvement

Grover J. Whitehurst

Assistant Secretary

National Center for Education Statistics

Gary W. Phillips

Acting Commissioner

November 2001

FOR MORE INFORMATION

Content contact:

Holly Spurlock

202–502–7458

For ordering information on this report call toll free 1–877–4ED–PUBS (877–433–7827), or write:

Education Publications Center (ED Pubs)

U.S. Department of Education

P.O. Box 1398

Jessup, MD 20794–1398

TTY/TDD 1–877–576–7734

FAX 301–470–1244

Online ordering via the Internet: http://www.ed.gov/pubs/edpubs.html

This report also is available on the World Wide Web: http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard

SUGGESTED CITATION

U.S. Department of Education. Office of Educational Research and Improvement. National Center for Education

Statistics. The Nation’s Report Card: State Science 2000, Report for Oklahoma, NCES 2002–453 OK, by C. Solomon,

L. Jerry, and A. Lutkus. Washington, DC: 2001.
National Center for Education Statistics

Oklahoma

For grade 4:

• The average scale score for students in Oklahoma

was 152. This was higher than the average score

across the nation (148).

• Students’ scale scores in Oklahoma were higher

than those in 16 jurisdictions, not significantly

different from those in 16 jurisdictions, and lower

than those in 11 jurisdictions.

• The percentage of students who performed at or

above the Proficient level was 26 percent. This

did not differ significantly from the national

percentage (28 percent).

For grade 8:

• The average scale score for students in Oklahoma

was 149. This did not differ significantly from the

average score for the nation (149).

• Students’ scale scores in Oklahoma were higher

than those in 13 jurisdictions, not significantly

different from those in 10 jurisdictions, and lower

than those in 18 jurisdictions.

• The percentage of students who performed at or

above the Proficient level was 26 percent. This

was smaller than the percentage of students

nationwide performing at this level (30 percent).

This report provides selected results

from the National Assessment of

Educational Progress (NAEP) for

Oklahoma’s public school students at

grades 4 and 8. The science

assessment was administered at the

state level at grade 8 in 1996 and at

grades 4 and 8 in 2000. Oklahoma

met the criteria for reporting public

school results for both grades in 2000,

but did not participate in the 1996

assessment. The Nation’s Report

Card: Science Highlights 2000

provides additional results from the

assessment and is available on the

NAEP web site listed in the box

below. NAEP is a project of the

National Center for Education

Statistics (NCES).

Contents

Introduction .......................................2

Overall Results .................................5 

Comparisons Between States..........9 

Science Performance by

Demographic Characteristics.........18

Toward a More Inclusive NAEP.....27 

Where to Find More Information ....30 

The full set of results is available in an interactive database on

the NAEP web site, http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard.

Released test questions and question-level performance data are

also available on the web site.

 NAEP STATE SCIENCE 2000 REPORT 1
Oklahoma

Introduction

The content for each NAEP assessment is developed

through a national consensus process directed by the

National Assessment Governing Board (NAGB). The

consensus process implemented for science required

the active participation of teachers, curriculum

specialists, subject matter specialists, local school

administrators, parents, and members of the general

public. The objectives for each NAEP assessment are

described in a “framework,” a document that delineates

the important content and process areas to be measured,

as well as the types of questions to be included on the

assessment. The science framework is available on the

NAGB web site at

http://www.nagb.org/pubs/96-2000science/toc.html.

What Was Assessed?

The Science Framework for the 1996 and 2000

National Assessment of Educational Progress guided

the 2000 science assessment. A description of the

assessment and released test questions are available on

the NAEP web site,

http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard. In addition, more

information about NAEP is available at “Frequently

Asked Questions” on the web site at

http://nces.ed.gov/naep3/faq.asp.

The science framework is organized along two

major dimensions, (1) the three fields of science: earth,

physical, and life sciences, and (2) the three elements

of knowing and doing science: conceptual

understanding, scientific investigation, and practical

reasoning. Each question is categorized as measuring

one of the elements of knowing and doing within one

of the fields of science.

The assessment includes multiple-choice items

that assess students’ knowledge of important facts and

concepts and that probe their analytical reasoning

skills. The assessment also includes constructedresponse items that ask students to explain, apply,

design, and communicate scientific information. In

addition, about half of the students assessed were asked

to perform a hands-on task that probes students’

abilities to use materials to perform investigations,

evaluate experimental results, and apply

problem-solving skills. The same series of test

booklets is used in both the national and state

assessments.

Who Was Assessed?

For the NAEP state assessments, a target for each

jursidiction is a sample of 100 schools and 2500

students, except in small or sparsely populated

jurisdictions. The sample of schools and students is

chosen in a two-stage sampling process. First, the

sample of schools is selected by probability sampling

methods. Then, within the participating schools,

random samples of students are chosen. These

methods are described in the Technical Information

section of the web site at

http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard. Sample sizes for

all participating jurisdictions are shown in table 7. The

state results and the regional and national results are

based on different and separate samples. That is, the

regional and national results are not based on

aggregated state assessment data and do not include

any students from the U.S. territories.

The overall participation rate for schools and

students in each state or jurisdiction must meet

guidelines established by NCES and NAGB in order

for assessment results to be reported publicly. A state

or jurisdiction that participates but does not meet

minimum participation rate guidelines does not have its

data reported to the public. Jurisdictions that meet

minimum participation guidelines, but whose sample

participation rates were low enough to raise concern

about their representativeness, receive notations in state

data tables in this report. For more information about

participation guidelines, see the Technical Information

section of the web site at

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

The NAEP state assessment in science was first

administered to public school students at grade 8 in

1996 and was expanded to include students at grade 4

as well as grade 8 in 2000.

How Is Student Performance Reported?

The results of student performance on the NAEP

assessments are reported for various groups of students

(for example, fourth-grade female students or students

who took the assessment in different years). No

individual student scores are reported by NAEP. The

differences in performance between groups of students

that are discussed in this report are based on statistical

tests that consider both the magnitude of the

differences between averages or percentages and the

standard error of those statistics. The reader is

cautioned to rely on the reported differences, which are

statistically significant, in the text rather than on the

apparent magnitude of any difference.

2 NAEP STATE SCIENCE 2000 REPORT 
Oklahoma

Differences among groups within a year are discussed

in the text, but not marked within the tables. Student

science performance is described in two ways:

1) average scale scores; and 2) achievement levels.

Scale Scores: Student performance is reported as

an average score based on the NAEP science scale,

which ranges from 0 to 300 and is linked to its

corresponding scale in 1996. The average scale

score reflects the overall science performance of a

particular group of students. While the numeric

scale-score ranges are identical, the scales were

derived independently for each grade. Therefore,

scale scores across grades cannot be compared.

More information on the NAEP science scale

scores is available in the Technical Information

section of the web site at

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

Achievement Levels: Student science performance

is also reported in terms of three achievement

levels: Basic, Proficient, and Advanced. Results

based on achievement levels are expressed in terms

of the percentage of students who attained each

level. The three achievement levels are defined as

follows:

• Basic: This level denotes partial mastery of

prerequisite knowledge and skills that are

fundamental for proficient work at each grade.

• Proficient: This level represents solid academic

performance for each grade assessed. Students

reaching this level have demonstrated

competency over challenging subject matter,

including subject-matter knowledge,

application of such knowledge to real-world

situations, and analytical skills appropriate to

the subject matter.

• Advanced: This level signifies superior

performance.

The achievement levels are performance

standards adopted by NAGB as part of its statutory

responsibilities. The levels represent collective

judgments of what students should know and be able

to do for each grade tested. They are based on

recommendations by broadly representative panels of

classroom teachers, education specialists, and members

of the general public. As provided by law, the Acting

Commissioner of Education Statistics, upon review of

congressionally mandated evaluations of NAEP, has

determined that the achievement levels are to be

considered developmental and should be interpreted

and used with caution. However, both the Acting

Commissioner and NAGB believe these performance

standards are useful for understanding trends in student

achievement. They have been widely used by national

and state officials, including those comprising the

National Education Goals Panel, as a common

yardstick of academic performance. The science

achievement level descriptions are summarized for

grades 4 and 8 in figure 1 on page 4.

The results displayed in the The Nation’s Report

Card: Science Highlights 2000 are based on

representative national and state samples that include

students with disabilities and limited English proficient

students. In past assessments, however, no testing

accommodations or adaptations were made available to

the special-needs students in these samples. To

preserve comparability with the sample from 1996, the

assessment results for 2000 are based on a sample of

students for whom testing accommodations were not

permitted. This sample allowed the maintenance of

NAEP trend data. In the future, accommodations will

be permitted in all NAEP assessments.

In this report, overall scale score and

achievement level results are presented first for the

sample of students in which testing accommodations

were not permitted. This sample permits comparisons

with past testing years. The “Key Findings” on

page 1 of this report are based on this sample. These

results are followed by results for a sample of students

in which testing accommodations were permitted. The

same is true of the comparisons between states: first

are the comparisons based on the sample in which

accommodations were not permitted, then results based

on the sample in which accommodations were

permitted are presented. Science performance

disaggregated by demographic characteristics is

presented only for the sample in which

accommodations were not permitted. Results for the

sample in which accommodations were permitted are

available on the NAEP web site. For more

information, see Toward a More Inclusive NAEP

beginning on page 27 of this report.

 NAEP STATE SCIENCE 2000 REPORT 3
Oklahoma

1996 and 2000 Science Achievement Level Descriptions

Grade 4

FIGURE

1

BASIC

LEVEL

(138)

Students performing at the Basic level demonstrate some of the knowledge and reasoning required for

understanding of the earth, physical, and life sciences at a level appropriate to Grade 4. For example, they can

carry out simple investigations and read uncomplicated graphs and diagrams. Students at this level also show a

beginning understanding of classification, simple relationships and energy.

PROFICIENT

LEVEL

(170)

Students performing at the Proficient level demonstrate the knowledge and reasoning required for understanding

of the earth, physical, and life sciences at a level appropriate to Grade 4. For example, they understand concepts

relating to the Earth’s features, physical properties, and structure and function. In addition, students can formulate

solutions to familiar problems as well as show a beginning awareness of issues associated with technology.

ADVANCED

LEVEL

(205)

Students performing at the Advanced level demonstrate a solid understanding of the earth, physical, and life

sciences as well as the ability to apply their understanding to practical situations at a level appropriate to

Grade 4. For example, they can perform and critique simple investigations, make connections from one or more

of the sciences to predict or conclude, and apply fundamental concepts to practical applications.

Grade 8

BASIC

LEVEL

(143)

Students performing at the Basic level demonstrate some of the knowledge and reasoning required for

understanding of the earth, physical, and life sciences at a level appropriate to Grade 8. For example, they can

carry out investigations and obtain information from graphs, diagrams, and tables. In addition, they demonstrate

some understanding of concepts relating to the solar system and relative motion. Students at this level also have

a beginning understanding of cause-and-effect relationships.

PROFICIENT

LEVEL

(170)

Students performing at the Proficient level demonstrate much of the knowledge and many of the reasoning abilities

essential for understanding of the earth, physical, and life sciences at a level appropriate to Grade 8. For example,

students can interpret graphic information, design simple investigations, and explain such scientific concepts as

energy transfer. Students at this level also show an awareness of environmental issues, especially those

addressing energy and pollution.

ADVANCED

LEVEL

(208)

Students performing at the Advanced level demonstrate a solid understanding of the earth, physical, and life

sciences as well as the abilities required to apply their understanding in practical situations at a level appropriate

to Grade 8. For example, students perform and critique the design of investigations, relate scientific concepts to

each other, explain their reasoning, and discuss the impact of human activities on the environment.

NOTE: Source: Bourque, M.L., Champagne, A.B. & Crissman, S. (1997) National Assessment of Educational Progress 1996 Science Performance

Standards: Achievement Results for the Nation and the States, Washington, DC: National Assessment Governing Board, U.S. Department of Education.

4 NAEP STATE SCIENCE 2000 REPORT 
Oklahoma

NAEP 2000 Science Overall Scale

Score and Achievement Level

Results for Public School Students

Overall Scale Score Results

Tables 1A and 1B show the overall performance of

public school students in Oklahoma, the West region,

and the nation. Table 1A displays overall performance

for 2000 for the sample of students in which

accommodations were not permitted, whereas table 1B

shows overall performance for 2000 for the sample in

which accommodations were permitted. To determine

whether Oklahoma has a significant difference between

the two samples, see table 7.

In each table, the first column of results presents

the average score on the NAEP science scale. The

subsequent columns show the average score at selected

percentiles. For example, at the 10th percentile for

grade 4 students in the nation, 10 percent of public

school students had a score that was lower than 103

while 90 percent had a score that was higher.

Grade 4 Scale Score Results:

Sample in Which Accommodations Were

Not Permitted

• In 2000, the average scale score for students in

Oklahoma was 152. This was higher than that of

students across the nation (148).

Grade 8 Scale Score Results:

Sample in Which Accommodations Were

Not Permitted

• In 2000, the average scale score for students in

Oklahoma was 149. This did not differ

significantly from that of students across the nation

(149).

Average science scale scores and selected percentiles for public school students

at grades 4 and 8 for the sample in which accommodations were not permitted:

2000

TABLE

1A

Average scale

score

Scale score distribution

10th percentile 25th percentile 50th percentile 75th percentile 90th percentile

Grade 4

2000 Oklahoma 152 ( 1.4) 115 ( 2.5) 134 ( 1.2) 153 ( 2.0) 171 ( 1.1) 187 ( 1.6)

West 147 ( 1.7) 101 ( 4.9) 125 ( 1.5) 150 ( 1.8) 171 ( 2.3) 189 ( 1.4)

Nation 148 ( 0.8) 103 ( 1.4) 127 ( 1.0) 151 ( 1.0) 173 ( 1.0) 190 ( 0.9)

Grade 8

2000 Oklahoma 149 ( 1.2) 108 ( 1.4) 130 ( 2.3) 152 ( 1.2) 171 ( 1.5) 187 ( 1.0)

West 146 ( 1.4) 97 ( 2.8) 122 ( 1.7) 148 ( 2.1) 172 ( 1.6) 192 ( 1.4)

Nation 149 ( 0.7) 101 ( 2.2) 125 ( 0.8) 152 ( 1.0) 175 ( 0.7) 194 ( 1.3)

NOTE: The NAEP science scale ranges from 0 to 300. The standard errors of the statistics in the table appear in parentheses.

*** Sample size is insufficient to permit a reliable estimate.

SOURCE: National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2000 Science Assessment.

 NAEP STATE SCIENCE 2000 REPORT 5
Oklahoma

Grade 4 Scale Score Results:

Sample in Which Accommodations Were Permitted

• In 2000, the average scale score for students in

Oklahoma was 151. This was higher than that of

students across the nation (147).

Grade 8 Scale Score Results:

Sample in Which Accommodations Were Permitted

• In 2000, the average scale score for students in

Oklahoma was 149. This did not differ

significantly from that of students across the nation

(149).

Average science scale scores and selected percentiles for public school students

at grades 4 and 8 for the sample in which accommodations were permitted:

2000

TABLE 1B

Average scale

score

Scale score distribution

10th percentile 25th percentile 50th percentile 75th percentile 90th percentile

Grade 4

2000 Oklahoma 151 ( 1.3) 113 ( 2.1) 134 ( 2.0) 153 ( 1.3) 171 ( 1.6) 185 ( 2.0)

West 142 ( 2.1) 91 ( 3.3) 118 ( 3.6) 145 ( 2.5) 169 ( 2.6) 188 ( 2.9)

Nation 147 ( 0.7) 99 ( 1.5) 124 ( 1.0) 149 ( 0.7) 172 ( 0.8) 189 ( 1.2)

Grade 8

2000 Oklahoma 149 ( 1.1) 108 ( 2.5) 129 ( 1.4) 151 ( 1.3) 171 ( 1.0) 187 ( 1.6)

West 146 ( 1.3) 99 ( 1.2) 122 ( 1.4) 147 ( 1.7) 172 ( 1.6) 192 ( 1.5)

Nation 149 ( 0.8) 101 ( 1.0) 125 ( 1.5) 151 ( 1.0) 175 ( 1.0) 194 ( 1.2)

NOTE: The NAEP science scale ranges from 0 to 300. The standard errors of the statistics in the table appear in parentheses.

SOURCE: National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2000 Science Assessment.

6 NAEP STATE SCIENCE 2000 REPORT 
Oklahoma

Overall Achievement Levels Results

Tables 1C and 1D present the percentages of students

who performed below Basic, at or above Basic, at or

above Proficient, and at the Advanced level. Table 1C

is based on the sample in which accommodations were

not permitted whereas table 1D presents results for the

sample in which accommodations were permitted. In

each table, because the percentages are cumulative

from Basic to Proficient to Advanced, they may sum

to more than 100 percent. Only the percentage of

students at or above Basic (which includes the students

at Proficient and Advanced) plus the students below

Basic will always sum to 100 percent.

Grade 4 Achievement Level Results:

Sample in Which Accommodations Were

Not Permitted

• In 2000, the percentage of Oklahoma’s students

who performed at or above the Proficient level was

26 percent. This did not differ significantly from

the percentage of the nation’s public school

students who performed at the same level (28

percent).

Grade 8 Achievement Level Results:

Sample in Which Accommodations Were

Not Permitted

• In 2000, the percentage of Oklahoma’s students

who performed at or above the Proficient level was

26 percent. This was smaller than the percentage

of the nation’s public school students who

performed at or above Proficient (30 percent).

Percentages of public school students attaining achievement levels at grades 4

and 8 for the sample in which accommodations were not permitted: 2000

TABLE

1C

Grade 4

2000 Oklahoma 29 ( 2.1) 71 ( 2.1) 26 ( 1.9) 2 ( 0.4)

West 37 ( 1.9) 63 ( 1.9) 27 ( 1.9) 3 ( 0.6)

Nation 36 ( 0.9) 64 ( 0.9) 28 ( 0.9) 3 ( 0.3)

Grade 8

2000 Oklahoma 38 ( 1.5) 62 ( 1.5) 26 ( 1.4) 2 ( 0.4)

West 45 ( 1.7) 55 ( 1.7) 27 ( 1.5) 3 ( 0.6)

Nation 41 ( 0.9) 59 ( 0.9) 30 ( 0.9) 4 ( 0.4)

NOTE: The NAEP science scale ranges from 0 to 300. The achievement levels correspond to the following points on the NAEP science scale at

grade 4 (and 8): Basic, 138–169 (143–169); Proficient, 170–204 (170–207); and Advanced, 205 (208) and above. The standard errors of the statistics

in the table appear in parentheses.

*** Sample size is insufficient to permit a reliable estimate.

SOURCE: National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2000 Science Assessment.

 NAEP STATE SCIENCE 2000 REPORT 7
Oklahoma

Grade 4 Achievement Level Results:

Sample in Which Accommodations Were Permitted

• In 2000, the percentage of Oklahoma’s students

who performed at or above the Proficient level was

26 percent. This did not differ significantly from

the percentage of the nation’s public school

students who performed at the same level (27

percent).

Grade 8 Achievement Level Results:

Sample in Which Accommodations Were Permitted

• In 2000, the percentage of Oklahoma’s students

who performed at or above the Proficient level was

25 percent. This was smaller than the percentage

of the nation’s public school students who

performed at the same level (30 percent).

Percentages of public school students attaining achievement levels at grades 4

and 8 for the sample in which accommodations were permitted: 2000

TABLE 1D

Grade 4

2000 Oklahoma 30 ( 1.7) 70 ( 1.7) 26 ( 1.4) 2 ( 0.4)

West 43 ( 2.5) 57 ( 2.5) 24 ( 2.1) 3 ( 0.7)

Nation 38 ( 0.9) 62 ( 0.9) 27 ( 0.9) 3 ( 0.4)

Grade 8

2000 Oklahoma 40 ( 1.6) 60 ( 1.6) 25 ( 1.2) 2 ( 0.3)

West 45 ( 1.7) 55 ( 1.7) 27 ( 1.5) 3 ( 0.7)

Nation 41 ( 1.0) 59 ( 1.0) 30 ( 0.9) 4 ( 0.4)

NOTE: The NAEP science scale ranges from 0 to 300. The achievement levels correspond to the following points on the NAEP science scale at

grade 4 (and 8): Basic, 138–169 (143–169); Proficient, 170–204 (170–207); and Advanced, 205 (208) and above. The standard errors of the statistics

in the table appear in parentheses.

SOURCE: National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2000 Science Assessment.

8 NAEP STATE SCIENCE 2000 REPORT 
Oklahoma

Comparisons Between Oklahoma

and Other Participating States and

Jurisdictions

In 2000, 45 states and other jurisdictions participated

in the science assessment. The maps in

figures 2A–2D show the participating states and

jurisdictions and indicate their membership in four

U.S. geographic regions. Note that the U.S. territories

and the domestic and overseas Department of Defense

Education Activity schools (DoDEA/DDESS and

DoDEA/DoDDS) were not placed into any of these

regions.

Comparisons by Average Scale Scores

Figures 2A–2D compare Oklahoma’s overall 2000

grade 4 and grade 8 science scale scores with those of

all other states and participating jurisdictions. Figures

2A and 2B are based on the sample in which

accommodations were not permitted. Figures 2C and

2D are based on the sample in which accommodations

were permitted. The different shadings are determined

by whether or not Oklahoma’s average scale score is

significantly different from that of each of the other

participants in the 2000 NAEP science assessment.

Note that states that did not participate in 2000, or that

did not meet reporting guidelines, are also represented

in the maps.

Comparisons by Achievement Levels

Figures 3A–3D permit comparisons of all participants

in the NAEP 2000 science assessment in terms of

percentages of students performing at or above the

Proficient level (including Advanced). The

participating states and jurisdictions are grouped into

categories reflecting student performance compared to

that in Oklahoma. The jurisdictions are grouped by

whether the percentage of their students with scores at

or above the Proficient level was higher than, not

significantly different from, or lower than the

percentage in Oklahoma. Each population of students

is aligned at the point where the Proficient category

begins, so that they can be easily compared at

Proficient and above. Note that the arrangement of the

states and the other jurisdictions within each category

is alphabetical; statistical comparisons among

jurisdictions in each of the three categories are not

included in this report. Figures 3A and 3B are based

on the sample in which accommodations were not

permitted. Figures 3C and 3D are based on the sample

in which accommodations were permitted.

 NAEP STATE SCIENCE 2000 REPORT 9
Oklahoma

Oklahoma’s 2000 average science scale score compared to those for other

participating jurisdictions for public school students at grade 4 in the sample

in which accommodations were not permitted

FIGURE

2A

SOURCE: National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2000 Science Assessment.

AL

AK

AZ

AR

CA CO

CT

DE

DC

FL

GA

Guam

HI

ID

IL IN

IA

KS

KY

LA

ME

MD

MA

MI

MN

MS

MO

MT

NE

NV

NH

NJ

NM

NY

NC

ND

OH

OK

OR

PA

RI

SC

SD

TN

TX

UT

VT

VA

VI

WA

WV

WI

WY

DDESS

DoDDS

Samoa

Target state

State has higher average scale score than target state

State is not significantly different from target state in average scale score

State has lower average scale score than target state

State did not meet minimum participation rate guidelines

State did not participate in the NAEP 2000 Science State Assessment

10 NAEP STATE SCIENCE 2000 REPORT 
Oklahoma

Oklahoma’s 2000 average science scale score compared to those for other

participating jurisdictions for public school students at grade 8 in the sample

in which accommodations were not permitted

FIGURE 2B

SOURCE: National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2000 Science Assessment.

AL

AK

AZ

AR

CA CO

CT

DE

DC

FL

GA

Guam

HI

ID

IL IN

IA

KS

KY

LA

ME

MD

MA

MI

MN

MS

MO

MT

NE

NV

NH

NJ

NM

NY

NC

ND

OH

OK

OR

PA

RI

SC

SD

TN

TX

UT

VT

VA

VI

WA

WV

WI

WY

DDESS

DoDDS

Samoa

Target state

State has higher average scale score than target state

State is not significantly different from target state in average scale score

State has lower average scale score than target state

State did not meet minimum participation rate guidelines

State did not participate in the NAEP 2000 Science State Assessment

 NAEP STATE SCIENCE 2000 REPORT 11
Oklahoma

Oklahoma’s 2000 average science scale score compared to those for other

participating jurisdictions for public school students at grade 4 in the sample

in which accommodations were permitted

FIGURE

2C

SOURCE: National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2000 Science Assessment.

AL

AK

AZ

AR

CA CO

CT

DE

DC

FL

GA

Guam

HI

ID

IL IN

IA

KS

KY

LA

ME

MD

MA

MI

MN

MS

MO

MT

NE

NV

NH

NJ

NM

NY

NC

ND

OH

OK

OR

PA

RI

SC

SD

TN

TX

UT

VT

VA

VI

WA

WV

WI

WY

DDESS

DoDDS

Samoa

Target state

State has higher average scale score than target state

State is not significantly different from target state in average scale score

State has lower average scale score than target state

State did not meet minimum participation rate guidelines

State did not participate in the NAEP 2000 Science State Assessment

12 NAEP STATE SCIENCE 2000 REPORT 
Oklahoma

Oklahoma’s 2000 average science scale score compared to those for other

participating jurisdictions for public school students at grade 8 in the sample

in which accommodations were permitted

FIGURE 2D

SOURCE: National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2000 Science Assessment.

AL

AK

AZ

AR

CA CO

CT

DE

DC

FL

GA

Guam

HI

ID

IL IN

IA

KS

KY

LA

ME

MD

MA

MI

MN

MS

MO

MT

NE

NV

NH

NJ

NM

NY

NC

ND

OH

OK

OR

PA

RI

SC

SD

TN

TX

UT

VT

VA

VI

WA

WV

WI

WY

DDESS

DoDDS

Samoa

Target state

State has higher average scale score than target state

State is not significantly different from target state in average scale score

State has lower average scale score than target state

State did not meet minimum participation rate guidelines

State did not participate in the NAEP 2000 Science State Assessment

 NAEP STATE SCIENCE 2000 REPORT 13
Oklahoma

The percentage of public school students at or above the Proficient level in Oklahoma compared

with those in other participating jurisdictions at grade 4 in 2000, based on the sample in which

accommodations were not permitted

FIGURE

3A

SOURCE: National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2000 Science Assessment.

Numbers may not add to 100, or to the exact percentage at or above achievement levels, due to rounding.

Each population of students is aligned at the point where the Proficient category begins, so that they may be compared at Proficient and above.

NOTE: The bars above contain estimated percentages of students in each NAEP science achievement category.

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

41 37 20 2

98 200

43 35 20 2

38 38 22 2

53 33 13 1

25 40 32 3

42 34 21 3

76 20 4 0

49 35 15 1

28 42 28 3

32 37 27 4

25 42 29 3

19 44 34 4

30 42 26 3

47 35 17 2

18 43 34 4

39 36 23 3

19 38 37 6

29 38 30 3

22 42 32 3

53 33 13 1

25 40 31 4

19 44 34 4

32 41 24 2

42 39 18 2

46 36 16 2

33 41 24 2

36 40 22 2

20 43 34 3

28 40 28 4

29 45 24 2

33 40 25 3

34 40 24 2

44 35 18 2

37 38 23 3

35 40 22 2

25 43 29 3

22 40 34 4

26 41 29 4

74 22 4 0

31 45 23 2

20 47 30 3

22 48 27 2

25 45 27 3

Alabama Alabama

American Samoa American Samoa

Arizona Arizona

Arkansas Arkansas

California California

Connecticut Connecticut

Georgia Georgia

Guam Guam

Hawaii Hawaii

Idaho Idaho

Illinois Illinois

Indiana Indiana

Iowa Iowa

Kentucky Kentucky

Louisiana Louisiana

Maine Maine

Maryland Maryland

Massachusetts Massachusetts

Michigan Michigan

Minnesota Minnesota

Mississippi Mississippi

Missouri Missouri

Montana Montana

Nebraska Nebraska

Nevada Nevada

New Mexico New Mexico

New York New York

North Carolina North Carolina

North Dakota North Dakota

Ohio Ohio

OKLAHOMA OKLAHOMA

Oregon Oregon

Rhode Island Rhode Island

South Carolina South Carolina

Tennessee Tennessee

Texas Texas

Utah Utah

Vermont Vermont

Virginia Virginia

Virgin Islands Virgin Islands

West Virginia West Virginia

Wyoming Wyoming

DoDEA/DDESS DoDEA/DDESS

DoDEA/DoDDS DoDEA/DoDDS

Higher than Oklahoma

Not different from Oklahoma

Lower than Oklahoma

Percent Basic and below Basic Percent Proficient and Advanced

Indicates that the jurisdiction did not meet one or more of the guidelines for school participation.

below Basic Basic Proficient Advanced

14 NAEP STATE SCIENCE 2000 REPORT 
Oklahoma

The percentage of public school students at or above the Proficient level in Oklahoma compared

with those in other participating jurisdictions at grade 8 in 2000, based on the sample in which

accommodations were not permitted

FIGURE 3B

SOURCE: National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2000 Science Assessment.

Numbers may not add to 100, or to the exact percentage at or above achievement levels, due to rounding.

Each population of students is aligned at the point where the Proficient category begins, so that they may be compared at Proficient and above.

NOTE: The bars above contain estimated percentages of students in each NAEP science achievement category.

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

49 29 20 2

95 320

43 33 22 2

46 31 21 2

60 25 14 1

35 30 31 4

48 29 21 2

78 16 6 0

60 25 14 1

27 35 35 4

38 31 27 3

32 34 31 3

38 33 26 3

55 27 16 2

25 38 33 3

41 31 26 3

26 32 37 5

31 32 33 4

27 32 37 5

58 27 14 1

32 32 32 4

20 34 41 5

30 34 33 4

46 31 21 2

52 28 19 1

39 32 27 2

44 30 23 3

26 34 36 4

27 32 35 6

38 35 25 2

33 34 30 3

39 32 26 3

50 29 18 2

43 32 23 2

47 30 21 2

32 34 31 3

26 34 35 4

37 32 28 3

39 34 24 2

29 35 32 3

30 35 31 4

28 34 34 4

Alabama Alabama

American Samoa American Samoa

Arizona Arizona

Arkansas Arkansas

California California

Connecticut Connecticut

Georgia Georgia

Guam Guam

Hawaii Hawaii

Idaho Idaho

Illinois Illinois

Indiana Indiana

Kentucky Kentucky

Louisiana Louisiana

Maine Maine

Maryland Maryland

Massachusetts Massachusetts

Michigan Michigan

Minnesota Minnesota

Mississippi Mississippi

Missouri Missouri

Montana Montana

Nebraska Nebraska

Nevada Nevada

New Mexico New Mexico

New York New York

North Carolina North Carolina

North Dakota North Dakota

Ohio Ohio

OKLAHOMA OKLAHOMA

Oregon Oregon

Rhode Island Rhode Island

South Carolina South Carolina

Tennessee Tennessee

Texas Texas

Utah Utah

Vermont Vermont

Virginia Virginia

West Virginia West Virginia

Wyoming Wyoming

DoDEA/DDESS DoDEA/DDESS

DoDEA/DoDDS DoDEA/DoDDS

Higher than Oklahoma

Not different from Oklahoma

Lower than Oklahoma

Percent Basic and below Basic Percent Proficient and Advanced

Indicates that the jurisdiction did not meet one or more of the guidelines for school participation.

below Basic Basic Proficient Advanced

 NAEP STATE SCIENCE 2000 REPORT 15
Oklahoma

The percentage of public school students at or above the Proficient level in Oklahoma compared

with those in other participating jurisdictions at grade 4 in 2000, based on the sample in which

accommodations were permitted

FIGURE

3C

SOURCE: National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2000 Science Assessment.

Numbers may not add to 100, or to the exact percentage at or above achievement levels, due to rounding.

Each population of students is aligned at the point where the Proficient category begins, so that they may be compared at Proficient and above.

NOTE: The bars above contain estimated percentages of students in each NAEP science achievement category.

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

42 37 20 2

98 200

45 33 20 2

38 39 22 2

55 32 13 1

25 40 31 3

43 35 20 3

75 21 4 0

49 36 15 1

26 44 27 2

32 37 27 3

26 42 29 3

21 44 33 3

31 41 26 2

46 36 17 2

18 45 33 4

39 36 22 3

19 39 37 5

30 37 30 3

22 44 32 3

54 33 12 1

24 41 31 3

20 44 33 3

32 42 24 2

42 39 18 1

46 36 16 1

34 41 23 2

37 40 21 2

19 45 33 3

27 42 28 3

30 45 24 2

34 40 24 3

35 40 23 2

46 34 19 2

39 37 22 2

38 39 21 2

27 42 28 3

21 41 34 4

28 41 28 3

74 22 4 0

32 44 22 2

23 45 29 2

22 48 28 2

25 45 27 3

Alabama Alabama

American Samoa American Samoa

Arizona Arizona

Arkansas Arkansas

California California

Connecticut Connecticut

Georgia Georgia

Guam Guam

Hawaii Hawaii

Idaho Idaho

Illinois Illinois

Indiana Indiana

Iowa Iowa

Kentucky Kentucky

Louisiana Louisiana

Maine Maine

Maryland Maryland

Massachusetts Massachusetts

Michigan Michigan

Minnesota Minnesota

Mississippi Mississippi

Missouri Missouri

Montana Montana

Nebraska Nebraska

Nevada Nevada

New Mexico New Mexico

New York New York

North Carolina North Carolina

North Dakota North Dakota

Ohio Ohio

OKLAHOMA OKLAHOMA

Oregon Oregon

Rhode Island Rhode Island

South Carolina South Carolina

Tennessee Tennessee

Texas Texas

Utah Utah

Vermont Vermont

Virginia Virginia

Virgin Islands Virgin Islands

West Virginia West Virginia

Wyoming Wyoming

DoDEA/DDESS DoDEA/DDESS

DoDEA/DoDDS DoDEA/DoDDS

Higher than Oklahoma

Not different from Oklahoma

Lower than Oklahoma

Percent Basic and below Basic Percent Proficient and Advanced

Indicates that the jurisdiction did not meet one or more of the guidelines for school participation.

below Basic Basic Proficient Advanced

16 NAEP STATE SCIENCE 2000 REPORT 
Oklahoma

The percentage of public school students at or above the Proficient level in Oklahoma compared

with those in other participating jurisdictions at grade 8 in 2000, based on the sample in which

accommodations were permitted

FIGURE 3D

SOURCE: National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2000 Science Assessment.

Numbers may not add to 100, or to the exact percentage at or above achievement levels, due to rounding.

Each population of students is aligned at the point where the Proficient category begins, so that they may be compared at Proficient and above.

NOTE: The bars above contain estimated percentages of students in each NAEP science achievement category.

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

47 29 21 2

94 420

45 32 21 2

47 31 21 1

62 24 13 1

36 30 30 4

48 29 21 2

79 15 5 0

60 26 13 1

29 34 33 4

41 30 26 3

34 33 31 3

40 32 25 3

56 27 16 1

28 37 32 3

43 30 24 3

30 31 34 5

32 33 31 4

28 31 36 4

59 26 14 1

34 32 30 3

21 35 39 5

29 33 33 4

48 30 20 2

52 28 19 1

42 30 26 2

46 29 22 3

28 34 34 4

28 33 34 5

40 35 24 2

32 34 30 3

42 31 25 2

52 29 18 2

45 31 22 2

48 28 21 2

33 34 31 3

29 33 35 4

39 32 26 3

43 33 22 2

31 36 31 3

34 33 29 4

28 34 34 4

Alabama Alabama

American Samoa American Samoa

Arizona Arizona

Arkansas Arkansas

California California

Connecticut Connecticut

Georgia Georgia

Guam Guam

Hawaii Hawaii

Idaho Idaho

Illinois Illinois

Indiana Indiana

Kentucky Kentucky

Louisiana Louisiana

Maine Maine

Maryland Maryland

Massachusetts Massachusetts

Michigan Michigan

Minnesota Minnesota

Mississippi Mississippi

Missouri Missouri

Montana Montana

Nebraska Nebraska

Nevada Nevada

New Mexico New Mexico

New York New York

North Carolina North Carolina

North Dakota North Dakota

Ohio Ohio

OKLAHOMA OKLAHOMA

Oregon Oregon

Rhode Island Rhode Island

South Carolina South Carolina

Tennessee Tennessee

Texas Texas

Utah Utah

Vermont Vermont

Virginia Virginia

West Virginia West Virginia

Wyoming Wyoming

DoDEA/DDESS DoDEA/DDESS

DoDEA/DoDDS DoDEA/DoDDS

Higher than Oklahoma

Not different from Oklahoma

Lower than Oklahoma

Percent Basic and below Basic Percent Proficient and Advanced

Indicates that the jurisdiction did not meet one or more of the guidelines for school participation.

below Basic Basic Proficient Advanced

 NAEP STATE SCIENCE 2000 REPORT 17
Oklahoma

Science Performance by

Demographic Characteristics

This section of the report presents results by major

demographic variables for fourth- and eighth-grade

students in Oklahoma and the nation for the sample in

which accommodations were not permitted. In these

tables, scale score results and achievement level

performance are presented in the same table.

Student performance data for the following

demographic variables are reported:

• Gender

• Race/ethnicity

• Eligibility for the free/reduced-price school lunch

program

• Type of community in which school is located

Each of the variables is reported in tables that

present the percentage of students who belong to each

subgroup in the first column and the average scale

score in the second column. The columns to the right

show the percentage of students at or above each

achievement level.

The reader is cautioned against making causal

inferences about the performance of these groups

relative to these variables. Many factors other than

those discussed here may affect student performance.

NAEP collects information on many additional

variables including school and home factors related to

achievement. All of this information is available in an

interactive database on the NAEP web site and can be

used to create additional reports of interest to a

particular state.

18 NAEP STATE SCIENCE 2000 REPORT 
Oklahoma

Gender

Tables 2A and 2B show scale score and achievement

level data for public school students at grades 4 and 8

in Oklahoma and across the nation by gender in the

sample in which accommodations were not permitted.

Differences in performance between males and females

are indicated in the comparisons highlighted below, but

are not indicated by notations of significance in the

tables.

Grade 4 Scale Score Results by Gender:

Sample in Which Accommodations Were

Not Permitted

• In Oklahoma, male students’ average scale score

was 153 in 2000. This did not differ significantly

from that of female students (150).

• In 2000, male students in Oklahoma had an average

scale score in science (153) that did not differ

significantly from that of male students across the

nation (151). Female students in Oklahoma had

an average score (150) that was higher than that

of female students nationwide (146).

Grade 4 Achievement Level Results by Gender:

Sample in Which Accommodations Were

Not Permitted

• In 2000, 29 percent of males and 24 percent of

females performed at or above the Proficient level

in Oklahoma. The difference between these

percentages was not statistically significant.

• The percentage of males in Oklahoma’s public

schools who were at or above the Proficient level

in 2000 (29 percent) was not significantly different

from that of males in the nation (31 percent).

• The percentage of females in Oklahoma at or above

the Proficient level in 2000 (24 percent) was not

significantly different from that of the nation’s

females (24 percent).

Average science scale scores and achievement level results for public school

students by gender at grade 4 for the sample in which accommodations were

not permitted: 2000

TABLE

2A

Male

2000 Oklahoma 49 ( 1.2) 153 ( 1.9) 27 ( 2.3) 73 ( 2.3) 29 ( 2.3) 3 ( 0.7)

Nation 50 ( 0.5) 151 ( 1.0) 33 ( 1.1) 67 ( 1.1) 31 ( 1.2) 5 ( 0.5)

Female

2000 Oklahoma 51 ( 1.2) 150 ( 1.4) 31 ( 2.7) 69 ( 2.7) 24 ( 2.3) 1 ( 0.4)

Nation 50 ( 0.5) 146 ( 0.9) 38 ( 1.2) 62 ( 1.2) 24 ( 1.0) 2 ( 0.4)

NOTE: The NAEP science scale ranges from 0 to 300. The achievement levels correspond to the following points on the NAEP science scale at

grade 4: Basic, 138–169; Proficient, 170–204; and Advanced, 205 and above. The standard errors of the statistics in the table appear in parentheses.

SOURCE: National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2000 Science Assessment.

 NAEP STATE SCIENCE 2000 REPORT 19
Oklahoma

Grade 8 Scale Score Results by Gender:

Sample in Which Accommodations Were

Not Permitted

• In Oklahoma, male students’ average scale score

was 152 in 2000. This was higher than that of

female students (146).

• In 2000, male students in Oklahoma had an average

scale score in science (152) that did not differ

significantly from that of male students across the

nation (153). Female students in Oklahoma had

an average score (146) that did not differ

significantly from that of female students

nationwide (146).

Grade 8 Achievement Level Results by Gender:

Sample in Which Accommodations Were

Not Permitted

• In 2000, 31 percent of males and 22 percent of

females performed at or above the Proficient level

in Oklahoma. The difference between these

percentages was statistically significant.

• The percentage of males in Oklahoma’s public

schools who were at or above the Proficient level

in 2000 (31 percent) was not significantly different

from that of males in the nation (35 percent).

• The percentage of females in Oklahoma at or above

the Proficient level in 2000 (22 percent) was not

significantly different from that of the nation’s

females (26 percent).

Average science scale scores and achievement level results for public school

students by gender at grade 8 for the sample in which accommodations were

not permitted: 2000

TABLE 2B

Male

2000 Oklahoma 51 ( 1.0) 152 ( 1.6) 35 ( 1.9) 65 ( 1.9) 31 ( 1.8) 3 ( 0.6)

Nation 51 ( 0.5) 153 ( 0.8) 38 ( 0.9) 62 ( 0.9) 35 ( 0.9) 5 ( 0.7)

Female

2000 Oklahoma 49 ( 1.0) 146 ( 1.2) 42 ( 1.8) 58 ( 1.8) 22 ( 1.8) 1 ( 0.3)

Nation 49 ( 0.5) 146 ( 0.9) 45 ( 1.2) 55 ( 1.2) 26 ( 1.2) 3 ( 0.4)

NOTE: The NAEP science scale ranges from 0 to 300. The achievement levels correspond to the following points on the NAEP science scale at

grade 8: Basic, 143–169; Proficient, 170–207; and Advanced, 208 and above. The standard errors of the statistics in the table appear in parentheses.

*** Sample size is insufficient to permit a reliable estimate.

  Standard error estimates cannot be accurately determined.

SOURCE: National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2000 Science Assessment.

20 NAEP STATE SCIENCE 2000 REPORT 
Oklahoma

Race/Ethnicity

As part of the background questionnaire administered

to students with the assessment, students were asked

to identify the racial/ethnic subgroup that best

described them. The five mutually exclusive categories

were White, Black, Hispanic, Asian/Pacific Islander,

and American Indian or Alaskan Native. This

information was the primary contributor to the

classifications appearing below. For details of the

derivation of this variable, see the Technical

Information section of the web site at

http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard. Tables 3A and 3B

show scale scores and achievement data by racial and

ethnic group membership for public school students at

grades 4 and 8 in the sample in which accommodations

were not permitted. Only the race/ethnicity categories

with sufficient membership to meet reporting

requirements in Oklahoma are reported below.

Grade 4 Scale Score Results by Race/Ethnicity:

Sample in Which Accommodations Were

Not Permitted

• In 2000, White students in Oklahoma had an

average scale score that was higher than those of

Black, Hispanic, and American Indian students.

Grade 4 Achievement Level Results by

Race/Ethnicity:

Sample in Which Accommodations Were

Not Permitted

• In Oklahoma in 2000, the percentage of White

students performing at or above the Proficient level

was greater than those of Black, Hispanic, and

American Indian students.

Average science scale scores and achievement level results for public school

students by race/ethnicity at grade 4 for the sample in which accommodations

were not permitted: 2000

TABLE

3A

White

2000 Oklahoma 62 ( 2.0) 159 ( 1.3) 19 ( 2.0) 81 ( 2.0) 34 ( 2.1) 3 ( 0.6)

Nation 64 ( 0.4) 159 ( 0.9) 22 ( 1.0) 78 ( 1.0) 37 ( 1.2) 5 ( 0.5)

Black

2000 Oklahoma 9 ( 1.8) 133 ( 2.5) 57 ( 4.7) 43 ( 4.7) 9 ( 2.6) 1 (** **)

Nation 15 ( 0.2) 124 ( 1.7) 67 ( 2.1) 33 ( 2.1) 6 ( 0.9) 0 ( )

Hispanic

2000 Oklahoma 15 ( 1.0) 136 ( 2.3) 50 ( 3.8) 50 ( 3.8) 11 ( 2.3) 1 ( 0.4)

Nation 16 ( 0.3) 127 ( 1.4) 60 ( 1.6) 40 ( 1.6) 10 ( 0.9) 1 ( 0.4)

American Indian

2000 Oklahoma 13 ( 1.1) 148 ( 2.9) 34 ( 4.8) 66 ( 4.8) 22 ( 3.8) 2 ( 1.1)

Nation 2 ( 0.2) 139 ( 2.9) 44 ( 3.9) 56 ( 3.9) 17 ( 3.6) 1 ( 0.9)

NOTE: The NAEP science scale ranges from 0 to 300. The achievement levels correspond to the following points on the NAEP science scale at

grade 4: Basic, 138–169; Proficient, 170–204; and Advanced, 205 and above. The standard errors of the statistics in the table appear in parentheses.

** ** Standard error estimates cannot be accurately determined.

SOURCE: National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2000 Science Assessment.

 NAEP STATE SCIENCE 2000 REPORT 21
Oklahoma

Grade 8 Scale Score Results by Race/Ethnicity:

Sample in Which Accommodations Were

Not Permitted

• In 2000, White students in Oklahoma had an

average scale score that was higher than those of

Black, Hispanic, and American Indian students.

Grade 8 Achievement Level Results by

Race/Ethnicity:

Sample in Which Accommodations Were

Not Permitted

• In Oklahoma in 2000, the percentage of White

students performing at or above the Proficient level

was greater than those of Black, Hispanic, and

American Indian students.

Average science scale scores and achievement level results for public school

students by race/ethnicity at grade 8 for the sample in which accommodations

were not permitted: 2000

TABLE 3B

White

2000 Oklahoma 70 ( 1.5) 156 ( 1.1) 30 ( 1.8) 70 ( 1.8) 32 ( 1.8) 2 ( 0.5)

Nation 66 ( 0.3) 160 ( 0.8) 28 ( 1.0) 72 ( 1.0) 40 ( 1.1) 5 ( 0.7)

Black

2000 Oklahoma 9 ( 1.1) 127 ( 2.6) 72 ( 3.9) 28 ( 3.9) 7 ( 2.2) 0 ( )

Nation 14 ( 0.2) 121 ( 1.3) 76 ( 1.6) 24 ( 1.6) 6 ( 0.8) 0 ( 0.2)

Hispanic

2000 Oklahoma 9 ( 0.8) 123 ( 5.2) 68 ( 5.6) 32 ( 5.6) 10 ( 2.9) 1 (** **)

Nation 14 ( 0.2) 127 ( 1.4) 67 ( 1.7) 33 ( 1.7) 11 ( 1.2) 1 ( 0.2)

American Indian

2000 Oklahoma 11 ( 0.9) 145 ( 2.2) 45 ( 4.0) 55 ( 4.0) 19 ( 2.3) 1 ( )

Nation 2 ( 0.2) 132 ( 3.4) 63 ( 6.1) 37 ( 6.1) 14 ( 3.6) 2 ( 1.2)

NOTE: The NAEP science scale ranges from 0 to 300. The achievement levels correspond to the following points on the NAEP science scale at

grade 8: Basic, 143–169; Proficient, 170–207; and Advanced, 208 and above. The standard errors of the statistics in the table appear in parentheses.

** * Sample size is insufficient to permit a reliable estimate.

**** Standard error estimates cannot be accurately determined.

SOURCE: National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2000 Science Assessment.

22 NAEP STATE SCIENCE 2000 REPORT 
Oklahoma

Free/Reduced-Price Lunch Program Eligibility

NAEP collects data on eligibility for the federal

program providing free or reduced-price school

lunches. Eligibility is determined through the USDA’s

Income Eligibility Guidelines and is included in this

report as an indicator of poverty. The

free/reduced-price lunch component of the National

School Lunch Program (NSLP), offered through the

U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), is designed

to ensure that children near or below the poverty line

receive nourishing meals. This program is available to

public schools, nonprofit private schools, and

residential child care institutions. Tables 4A and 4B

present results for grades 4 and 8 for the sample in

which accommodations were not permitted.

Grade 4 Scale Score Results by Free/Reduced-Price

Lunch Program Eligibility:

Sample in Which Accommodations Were

Not Permitted

• Students in Oklahoma eligible for the

free/reduced-price lunch program had an average

science scale score of 144. This was lower than

that of students in Oklahoma not eligible for this

program (162).

• Students in Oklahoma eligible for the

free/reduced-price lunch program had an average

scale score (144) that was higher than that of

similar students in the nation (129).

Grade 4 Achievement Level Results by

Free/Reduced-Price Lunch Program Eligibility:

Sample in Which Accommodations Were

Not Permitted

• In Oklahoma, 17 percent of students who were

eligible for the free/reduced-price lunch program

and 39 percent of those who were not eligible for

this program performed at or above the Proficient

level. These percentages were significantly

different.

• For students in Oklahoma who were eligible for the

free/reduced-price lunch program, the percentage

at or above the Proficient level (17 percent) was

higher than the corresponding percentage for their

counterparts around the nation (11 percent).

Average science scale scores and achievement level results for public school

students by eligibility for the free/reduced-price lunch program at grade 4 for

the sample in which accommodations were not permitted: 2000

TABLE

4A

Eligible

2000 Oklahoma 52 ( 2.8) 144 ( 1.6) 39 ( 3.0) 61 ( 3.0) 17 ( 1.8) 1 ( 0.3)

Nation 37 ( 1.1) 129 ( 1.2) 58 ( 1.3) 42 ( 1.3) 11 ( 0.7) 1 ( 0.2)

Not Eligible

2000 Oklahoma 42 ( 2.7) 162 ( 1.3) 16 ( 2.0) 84 ( 2.0) 39 ( 2.6) 4 ( 0.9)

Nation 51 ( 1.9) 159 ( 1.0) 22 ( 1.1) 78 ( 1.1) 37 ( 1.4) 5 ( 0.5)

Information Not Available

2000 Oklahoma 6 ( 1.8) 149 ( 6.0)! 31 ( 8.1)! 69 ( 8.1)! 23 ( 6.1)! 1 ( )! 

Nation 12 ( 2.1) 160 ( 2.4) 22 ( 2.4) 78 ( 2.4) 39 ( 3.4) 6 ( 1.7)

NOTE: The NAEP science scale ranges from 0 to 300. The achievement levels correspond to the following points on the NAEP science scale at

grade 4: Basic, 138–169; Proficient, 170–204; and Advanced, 205 and above. The standard errors of the statistics in the table appear in parentheses.

! Interpret with caution—the nature of the sample does not allow accurate determination of the variability of this statistic.

** ** Standard error estimates cannot be accurately determined.

SOURCE: National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2000 Science Assessment.

 NAEP STATE SCIENCE 2000 REPORT 23
Oklahoma

Grade 8 Scale Score Results by Free/Reduced-Price

Lunch Program Eligibility:

Sample in Which Accommodations Were

Not Permitted

• Students in Oklahoma eligible for the

free/reduced-price lunch program had an average

science scale score of 137. This was lower than

that of students in Oklahoma not eligible for this

program (158).

• Students in Oklahoma eligible for the

free/reduced-price lunch program had an average

science score (137) that was higher than that of

eligible students across the nation (127).

Grade 8 Achievement Level Results by

Free/Reduced-Price Lunch Program Eligibility:

Sample in Which Accommodations Were

Not Permitted

• In Oklahoma, 16 percent of students who were

eligible for the free/reduced-price lunch program

and 33 percent of those who were not eligible for

this program performed at or above the Proficient

level. These percentages were significantly

different.

• For students who were eligible for the

free/reduced-price lunch program in Oklahoma, the

percentage at or above the Proficient level (16

percent) was not significantly different from the

corresponding percentage of eligible students

nationwide (12 percent).

Average science scale scores and achievement level results for public school

students by eligibility for the free/reduced-price lunch program at grade 8 for

the sample in which accommodations were not permitted: 2000

TABLE 4B

Eligible

2000 Oklahoma 38 ( 1.7) 137 ( 2.3) 54 ( 3.0) 46 ( 3.0) 16 ( 2.4) 1 ( )

Nation 27 ( 1.1) 127 ( 1.1) 67 ( 1.4) 33 ( 1.4) 12 ( 1.0) 1 ( 0.3)

Not Eligible

2000 Oklahoma 56 ( 2.1) 158 ( 1.1) 28 ( 1.9) 72 ( 1.9) 33 ( 1.7) 3 ( 0.6)

Nation 55 ( 2.0) 160 ( 0.9) 29 ( 1.2) 71 ( 1.2) 39 ( 1.2) 5 ( 0.7)

Information Not Available

2000 Oklahoma 6 ( 2.1) 148 ( 5.2)! 39 ( 6.8)! 61 ( 6.8)! 27 ( 5.5)! 1 (** **)! 

Nation 18 ( 2.1) 151 ( 2.1) 40 ( 2.5) 60 ( 2.5) 31 ( 2.0) 3 ( 0.7)

NOTE: The NAEP science scale ranges from 0 to 300. The achievement levels correspond to the following points on the NAEP science scale at

grade 8: Basic, 143–169; Proficient, 170–207; and Advanced, 208 and above. The standard errors of the statistics in the table appear in parentheses.

! Interpret with caution—the nature of the sample does not allow accurate determination of the variability of this statistic.

*** Sample size is insufficient to permit a reliable estimate.

**** Standard error estimates cannot be accurately determined.

SOURCE: National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2000 Science Assessment.

24 NAEP STATE SCIENCE 2000 REPORT 
Oklahoma

Type of Community in which School is Located

Schools that participated in the assessment were

classified into three mutually exclusive types of

community in which the school is located: central city,

urban fringe/large town, and rural/small town. These

categories indicate the geographic locations of schools

and are not intended to indicate or imply social or

economic meanings for location types. General

information (including definitions) about these

categories will be available in future technical reports

for the 2000 NAEP state assessments. Data are

reported for the year 2000 only because between 1996

and 2000, the U.S. Department of Education changed

the geographic classifications assigned to a large

number of schools. While this has improved the

quality of the indicator, it has rendered impossible

direct comparisons between 2000 data and earlier

years. Table 5A presents fourth- and eighth-grade

results according to type of community in Oklahoma

and the nation for 2000 in the sample in which

accommodations were not permitted.

Grade 4 Scale Score and Achievement Level Results

by Type of Community:

Sample in Which Accommodations Were

Not Permitted

• In 2000 in Oklahoma, the average scale score of

students attending schools in central cities was not

significantly different from those of students in

urban fringes/large towns or rural areas/small

towns.

• The average scale score of students attending

schools in central cities was higher in Oklahoma

than in similar types of communities nationwide.

The average scale score of students in Oklahoma

attending schools in urban fringes/large towns or

rural areas/small towns did not differ significantly

from that in similar types of communities

nationwide.

• In 2000, the percentage of students attending

schools in central cities in Oklahoma who

performed at or above the Proficient level was not

significantly different from the corresponding

percentages for students in urban fringes/large

towns and rural areas/small towns.

• The respective percentages of students attending

schools in all three types of locations in Oklahoma

who performed at or above the Proficient level did

not differ significantly in Oklahoma from those in

the nation.

Grade 8 Scale Score and Achievement Level Results

by Type of Community:

Sample in Which Accommodations Were

Not Permitted

• In 2000 in Oklahoma, the average scale score of

students attending schools in central cities was not

significantly different from those of students in

urban fringes/large towns or rural areas/small

towns.

• The average scale scores of students in Oklahoma

attending schools in all three types of locations did

not differ significantly from those in similar types

of communities nationwide.

• In 2000, the percentage of students attending

schools in central cities in Oklahoma who

performed at or above the Proficient level was not

significantly different from the corresponding

percentages for students in urban fringes/large

towns and rural areas/small towns.

• The percentage of students attending schools in

rural areas/small towns who performed at or above

the Proficient level was smaller in Oklahoma than

in similar types of communities nationwide. The

percentage of students attending schools in central

cities or urban fringes/large towns who performed

at or above the Proficient level did not differ

significantly in Oklahoma from that in similar

types of communities nationwide.

 NAEP STATE SCIENCE 2000 REPORT 25
Oklahoma

Average science scale scores and achievement level results for public school

students by type of community in which school is located at grades 4 and 8 for

the sample in which accommodations were not permitted: 2000

TABLE

5A

Central City

Grade 4 Oklahoma 30 ( 1.7) 147 ( 3.3) 35 ( 4.5) 65 ( 4.5) 23 ( 3.0) 2 ( 0.6)

Nation 29 ( 1.5) 137 ( 2.0) 50 ( 2.4) 50 ( 2.4) 19 ( 1.6) 2 ( 0.5)

Grade 8 Oklahoma 26 ( 1.3) 144 ( 3.0) 44 ( 3.3) 56 ( 3.3) 23 ( 2.8) 1 ( 0.8)

Nation 28 ( 1.2) 138 ( 1.9) 54 ( 2.2) 46 ( 2.2) 21 ( 1.7) 3 ( 0.6)

Urban Fringe/Large Town

Grade 4 Oklahoma 24 ( 2.2) 157 ( 3.0) 24 ( 4.1) 76 ( 4.1) 33 ( 4.4) 3 ( 1.4)

Nation 46 ( 2.4) 154 ( 1.3) 29 ( 1.5) 71 ( 1.5) 33 ( 1.5) 4 ( 0.5)

Grade 8 Oklahoma 31 ( 2.0) 154 ( 2.0) 33 ( 2.3) 67 ( 2.3) 31 ( 2.0) 3 ( 1.0)

Nation 45 ( 2.2) 155 ( 1.2) 35 ( 1.4) 65 ( 1.4) 35 ( 1.7) 4 ( 0.7)

Rural/Small Town

Grade 4 Oklahoma 46 ( 2.5) 152 ( 1.4) 28 ( 2.7) 72 ( 2.7) 25 ( 2.2) 2 ( 0.5)

Nation 25 ( 2.1) 152 ( 1.9) 30 ( 2.1) 70 ( 2.1) 30 ( 2.3) 3 ( 0.7)

Grade 8 Oklahoma 43 ( 1.9) 149 ( 1.6) 38 ( 2.6) 62 ( 2.6) 25 ( 2.2) 2 ( 0.5)

Nation 27 ( 1.9) 152 ( 1.8) 38 ( 2.1) 62 ( 2.1) 33 ( 2.0) 4 ( 0.7)

NOTE: The NAEP science scale ranges from 0 to 300. The achievement levels correspond to the following points on the NAEP science scale at

grade 4 (and 8): Basic, 138–169 (143–169); Proficient, 170–204 (170–207); and Advanced, 205 (208) and above. The standard errors of the statistics

in the table appear in parentheses.

SOURCE: National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2000 Science Assessment.

26 NAEP STATE SCIENCE 2000 REPORT 
Oklahoma

Toward a More Inclusive NAEP

NAEP endeavors to assess all students selected in the

randomized sampling process including students with

disabilities (SD) as well as students who are classified

by their schools as limited English proficient (LEP).

The percentages of students classified as SD or LEP in

all participating states and jurisdictions are available in

an interactive database at the NAEP web site. It is

important to note that school personnel, guided by the

student’s Individualized Education Program (IEP),

make the ultimate decision as to whether or not a

particular student should participate in NAEP.

Percentages of students excluded from NAEP may vary

considerably across states and within a state across

years. Comparisons of achievement results across

states and within a state across years should be

interpreted with caution if the exclusion rates vary

widely.

The results displayed in the The Nation’s Report

Card: Science Highlights 2000 are based on

representative national and state samples that include

students with disabilities and limited English proficient

students. In past assessments, however, no testing

accommodations or adaptations were made available to

the special-needs students in these samples. To

preserve comparability with the samples from 1996,

these assessment results for 2000 are based on a sample

of students for whom testing accommodations were not

permitted. This sample allowed the maintenance of

NAEP trend data.

In the 1996 and 2000 science assessments,

however, the NAEP program drew a second,

representative national sample of schools. For students

in this sample, accommodations were made available.

The program has used this split-sample design to study

the effects on NAEP results of including special-needs

students in the assessments. A series of technical

research papers has been published with the results of

these comparisons.1 The NAEP 2000 Report Card

series is the first to present the results from both the

reporting sample of schools in which accommodations

were not permitted and the sample in which

accommodations were permitted for special-needs

students who normally receive them in their state

assessments.

Also in 2000, the split-sample design was used

for the first time in the state assessment of mathematics

and science. Both samples included students who were

not classified as having special needs and students who

were classified as having special needs. In both

samples there were special-needs students who took the

NAEP science assessment without accommodations.

In the sample where accommodations were permitted,

those special-needs students who normally receive

accommodations in their state assessment were allowed

to receive them for the NAEP assessment, unless the

accommodations were judged to change the construct

being measured. It should be noted that accommodated

students generally make up a small proportion of the

total weighted number of students assessed. For

example, in the 2000 national science assessment,

accommodated students made up 3 percent of the total

weighted number of students assessed.

In the NAEP science assessment, more students

were excluded from the sample in which

accommodations were not offered in 2000 than in prior

years. This may be accounted for in a variety of ways.

Among the most far-reaching is the implementation of

the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA).

States that have been diligent in implementing IDEA

in their state assessment programs may have higher

exclusion rates in the NAEP sample that does not

permit accommodations. Local district staff who are

accustomed to providing accommodations in state

testing situations may have opted for exempting

students from the NAEP assessment rather than

including them without their customary

accommodations. In addition, state population shifts

may also account for higher exclusion rates.

As a result, exclusion rates vary considerably

within states between the current assessment year and

past years. In addition, there is considerable variation

in exclusion rates across states. Comparisons of

achievement results across states and within states

across years should be made with caution, since a

comparison within a state across years or between two

states may be based on samples with exclusion rates

that differ considerably.

1

 Olson, J.F. and Goldstein, A.A. (1997). The inclusion of students with disabilities and limited English proficient students in large-scale assessments: A

summary of recent progress. (NCES Publication No. 97–482). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics.

Mazzeo, J., Carlson, J.E., Voelkl, K.E., & Lutkus, A.D. (1999). Increasing the participation of special-needs students in NAEP: A report on 1996 research

activities. (NCES Publication No. 2000–473). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics.

 NAEP STATE SCIENCE 2000 REPORT 27
Oklahoma

Table 6A shows the percentage of students in

Oklahoma and the nation who were classified as SD

or LEP and also the percentages of students who were

excluded in the sample in which accommodations were

not permitted. Table 6B shows the same information

for the sample in which accommodations were

permitted.

Percentage of students in Oklahoma and the nation classified as limited English

proficient or as having disabilities in the sample in which accommodations were

not permitted: 2000

TABLE

6A

Percentage of students who are Grade 4 Grade 8

Oklahoma Nation Oklahoma Nation

Classified as LEP 5% 6% 2% 4%

Excluded from the assessment due to LEP 1% 2% 0% 2%

Classified as having a disability 16% 11% 13% 12%

Excluded from the assessment due to disability 10% 6% 7% 6%

SOURCE: National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2000 Science Assessment.

Percentage of students in Oklahoma and the nation classified as limited English

proficient or as having disabilities in the sample in which accommodations were

permitted: 2000

TABLE 6B

Percentage of students who are Grade 4 Grade 8

Oklahoma Nation Oklahoma Nation

Classified as LEP 5% 6% 2% 3%

Excluded from the assessment due to LEP 1% 1% 0% 1%

Tested with accommodations 0% 1% 0% 0%

Classified as having a disability 16% 12% 13% 11%

Excluded from the assessment due to disability 4% 4% 3% 3%

Tested with accommodations 4% 3% 1% 2%

SOURCE: National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2000 Science Assessment.

Table 7 presents a comparison between

performance within a state on the two samples: the

sample in which accommodations were not permitted,

and the sample in which accommodations

were permitted. This table displays the number of

students assessed in each jurisdiction and indicates

whether the scale score difference between the two

samples is significant.

28 NAEP STATE SCIENCE 2000 REPORT 
Oklahoma

Sample sizes and average scale scores in the sample in which accommodations

were not permitted and the sample in which accommodations were permitted

for each jurisdiction participating in the 2000 science assessment

TABLE

7

Grade 4 Grade 8

Sample in which

accommodations were

not permitted

Sample in which

accommodations were

permitted

Sample in which

accommodations were

not permitted

Sample in which

accommodations were

permitted

N Average N Average N Average N Average

Alabama 2526 143 ( 1.7) 2552 143 ( 1.7) 2400 141 ( 1.9) 2382 143 ( 1.7) 

Arizona † 2080 141 ( 1.4) 2068 140 ( 1.8) 1783 146 ( 1.6) 1822 145 ( 1.3) 

Arkansas 2175 144 ( 1.7) 2214 145 ( 1.3) 2115 143 ( 1.3) 2140 142 ( 1.2) 

California † 1682 131 ( 2.0) 1714 129 ( 3.0) 1650 132 ( 1.5) 1723 129 ( 1.8) 

Connecticut 2493 156 ( 1.3) 2550 156 ( 1.3) 2506 154 ( 1.4) 2551 153 ( 1.6) 

Georgia 2640 143 ( 1.4) 2687 142 ( 1.4) 2550 144 ( 1.5) 2578 142 ( 1.6) 

Hawaii 2425 136 ( 1.4) 2439 136 ( 1.4) 2268 132 ( 1.2) 2285 130 ( 1.4) 

Idaho † 1717 153 ( 1.5) 1750 152 ( 1.4) 1973 159 ( 1.1) 2003 158 ( 1.0) 

Illinois † 1596 151 ( 1.6) 1671 150 ( 2.4) 1753 150 ( 1.9) 1808 148 ( 1.7) 

Indiana † 1812 155 ( 1.6) 1870 154 ( 1.5) 1878 156 ( 1.7) 1904 154 ( 1.4) 

Iowa † 1887 160 ( 1.4) 1951 159 ( 1.3) ---- --- (--.-) ---- --- (--.-) 

Kentucky 2248 152 ( 1.1) 2311 152 ( 1.2) 2303 152 ( 1.3) 2383 150 ( 1.2) 

Louisiana 2452 139 ( 1.9) 2538 139 ( 1.8) 2373 136 ( 1.7) 2393 134 ( 1.5) 

Maine † 2094 161 ( 1.0) 2184 161 ( 1.1) 2156 160 ( 1.0) 2254 158 ( 0.9) 

Maryland 2648 146 ( 1.3) 2737 145 ( 1.3) 2336 149 ( 1.3) 2434 146 ( 1.4) 

Massachusetts 2274 162 ( 1.2) 2351 161 ( 1.4) 2277 161 ( 1.6) 2389 158 ( 1.1) 

Michigan † 1875 154 ( 1.8) 1922 152 ( 1.8) 2024 156 ( 1.7) 2047 155 ( 1.8) 

Minnesota † 1853 157 ( 1.5) 1894 157 ( 1.6) 1435 160 ( 2.1) 1458 159 ( 1.2) 

Mississippi 2776 133 ( 1.4) 2799 133 ( 1.4) 2495 134 ( 1.2) 2514 134 ( 1.2) 

Missouri 2367 156 ( 1.6) 2473 157 ( 1.2) 2320 156 ( 1.1) 2415 154 ( 1.2) 

Montana † 1176 160 ( 2.1) 1201 160 ( 1.5) 1692 165 ( 1.2) 1745 164 ( 1.4) 

Nebraska 1289 150 ( 1.8) 1315 150 ( 1.8) 1898 157 ( 1.0) 1863 158 ( 1.4) 

Nevada 2526 142 ( 1.3) 2619 142 ( 1.2) 2694 143 ( 1.1) 2733 141 ( 1.0) 

New Mexico 1895 138 ( 2.0) 1999 140 ( 1.8) 1903 140 ( 1.6) 1981 139 ( 1.5) 

New York † 1764 149 ( 1.4) 1848 148 ( 1.3) 1616 149 ( 2.4) 1697 145 ( 2.1) 

North Carolina 2374 148 ( 1.4) 2482 147 ( 1.3) 2342 147 ( 1.5) 2452 145 ( 1.4) 

North Dakota 2338 160 ( 0.8) 2400 160 ( 0.9) 2194 161 ( 0.9) 2221 159 ( 1.1) 

Ohio † 1887 154 ( 1.6) 1922 155 ( 1.4) 2122 161 ( 1.5) 2169 159 ( 1.5) 

Oklahoma 2377 152 ( 1.4) 2475 151 ( 1.3) 2452 149 ( 1.2) 2515 149 ( 1.1) 

Oregon † 1625 150 ( 1.9) 1686 148 ( 2.0) 1751 154 ( 1.6) 1780 154 ( 1.4) 

Rhode Island 2395 148 ( 1.5) 2500 148 ( 1.3) 2360 150 ( 1.3) 2440 148 ( 0.9) 

South Carolina 2448 141 ( 1.2) 2495 140 ( 1.3) 2298 142 ( 1.3) 2336 140 ( 1.4) 

Tennessee 2496 147 ( 1.5) 2522 145 ( 1.4) 2227 146 ( 1.5) 2257 145 ( 1.5) 

Texas 2125 147 ( 1.6) 2229 145 ( 1.8) 2302 144 ( 1.5) 2331 143 ( 1.7) 

Utah 2652 155 ( 1.1) 2694 154 ( 1.3) 2446 155 ( 0.9) 2475 154 ( 1.0) 

Vermont † 1237 159 ( 1.7) 1312 160 ( 1.3) 1966 161 ( 0.9) 2021 159 ( 1.0) 

Virginia 2502 156 ( 1.6) 2615 155 ( 1.4) 2435 152 ( 1.2) 2508 151 ( 1.0) 

West Virginia 2522 150 ( 1.1) 2639 149 ( 1.3) 2436 150 ( 1.1) 2567 146 ( 1.1)* 

Wyoming 1745 158 ( 1.1) 1821 156 ( 1.3) 2560 158 ( 1.0) 2575 156 ( 1.0) 

American Samoa 453 51 ( 1.7) 475 54 ( 1.6) 445 72 ( 2.3) 471 74 ( 4.2) 

DDESS 1295 157 ( 0.7) 1300 157 ( 0.9) 650 159 ( 1.2) 701 155 ( 1.6) 

DoDDS 2790 156 ( 0.5) 2825 155 ( 0.8) 1962 159 ( 0.8) 1999 159 ( 0.8) 

Guam 996 110 ( 2.3) 1064 114 ( 1.2) 945 114 ( 4.5) 921 114 ( 1.8) 

Virgin Islands 690 116 ( 1.1) 698 116 ( 1.7) ---- --- (--.-) ---- --- (--.-) 

NOTE: The NAEP science scale ranges from 0 to 300. The standard errors of the statistics in the table appear in parentheses.

† Indicates that the jurisdiction did not meet one or more of the guidelines for school participation in one or both grades.

* Indicates that the average scale score for the sample in which accommodations were permitted was significantly different from the average scale score

for the sample in which accommodations were not permitted within a single jurisdiction.

** Indicates that the average scale score for the sample in which accommodations were permitted was significantly different from the average scale score

for the sample in which accommodations were not permitted using a multiple comparison procedure based on all jurisdictions that participated.

--- Iowa did not participate at grade 8. Virgin Islands failed to meet participation guidelines to report results at grade 8.

SOURCE: National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2000 Science Assessment.

 NAEP STATE SCIENCE 2000 REPORT 29
Oklahoma

Where to Find More Information

The NAEP Science Assessment

The latest news about the NAEP 2000 science

assessment and the results of the assessment can be

found on the science page of the NAEP web site at

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

Information about the assessment and interpretation of

results is also available in the Technical Information

section on the same web site. The individual State

Reports are also available on the NAEP web site,

http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard. The Science

Framework for the National Assessment of Educational

Progress, on which the assessment is based, is

available at http://www.nagb.org.

Participation in 2000

Information on each jurisdiction’s participation rates

for schools and students can be found in the Technical

Information section of the NAEP web site.

Additional Results from the Science

Assessment

For more findings from the 2000 science assessments,

refer to the NAEP 2000 results at

http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/tables. The

interactive database at this site includes student and

school variables for all jurisdictions, the nation, and the

four NAEP geographic regions. Data tables are also

available for each jurisdiction, with all background

questions cross-tabulated with the major demographic

variables.

Publications on the inclusion of students with

disabilities and limited English proficient

students

Olson, J.F. and Goldstein, A.A. (1997). The inclusion

of students with disabilities and limited English

proficient students in large-scale assessments: A

summary of recent progress. (NCES Publication No.

97–482). Washington, DC: National Center for

Education Statistics.

Mazzeo, J., Carlson, J.E., Voelkl, K.E., & Lutkus, A.D.

(1999). Increasing the participation of special-needs

students in NAEP: A report on 1996 research

activities. (NCES Publication No. 2000–473).

Washington, DC: National Center for Education

Statistics.

To Order Publications

Recent NAEP publications related to science are listed

on the science page of the NAEP web site and are

available electronically. Publications can be also be

ordered from:

Education Publications Center (ED Pubs)

P.O. Box 1398

Jessup, MD 20794–1398

Call toll free: 1–877–4ED PUBS (877–433–7827)

TTY/TDD: 1–877–576–7734

FAX: 1–301–470–1244

The 2000 Science State Reports in this series were prepared

by Charlotte Solomon, Laura Jerry, and Anthony Lutkus of

Educational Testing Service.

30 NAEP STATE SCIENCE 2000 REPORT 
What is The Nation’s Report Card?

THE NATION’S REPORT CARD, the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), is the only nationally

representative and continuing assessment of what America’s students know and can do in various subject areas. Since

1969, assessments have been conducted periodically in reading, mathematics, science, writing, history, geography, and

other fields. By making objective information on student performance available to policymakers at the national, state,

and local levels, NAEP is an integral part of our nation’s evaluation of the condition and progress of education. Only

information related to academic achievement is collected under this program. NAEP guarantees the privacy of

individual students and their families.

NAEP is a congressionally mandated project of the National Center for Education Statistics, the U.S. Department

of Education. The Commissioner of Education Statistics is responsible, by law, for carrying out the NAEP project

through competitive awards to qualified organizations. NAEP reports directly to the Commissioner, who is also

responsible for providing continuing reviews, including validation studies and solicitation of public comment, on

NAEP’s conduct and usefulness.

In 1988, Congress established the National Assessment Governing Board (NAGB) to formulate policy guidelines

for NAEP. The Board is responsible for selecting the subject areas to be assessed from among those included in the

National Education Goals; for setting appropriate student performance levels; for developing assessment objectives and

test specifications through a national consensus approach; for designing the assessment methodology; for developing

guidelines for reporting and disseminating NAEP results; for developing standards and procedures for interstate,

regional, and national comparisons; for determining the appropriateness of test items and ensuring they are free from

bias; and for taking actions to improve the form and use of the National Assessment.

The National Assessment Governing Board

Mark D. Musick, Chair

President

Southern Regional Education Board

Atlanta, Georgia

Michael T. Nettles, Vice Chair

Professor of Education

University of Michigan

Ann Arbor, Michigan

Moses Barnes

Secondary School Principal

Fort Lauderdale, Florida

Melanie A. Campbell

Fourth-Grade Teacher

Topeka, Kansas

Honorable Wilmer S. Cody

Former Commissioner of Education

State of Kentucky

Frankfort, Kentucky

Daniel A. Domenech

Superintendent of Schools

Fairfax County Public Schools

Fairfax, Virginia

Edward Donley

Former Chairman

Air Products & Chemicals, Inc.

Allentown, Pennsylvania

Thomas H. Fisher

Director

Student Assessment Services

Florida Department of Education

Tallahassee, Florida

Edward H. Haertel

Professor, School of Education

Stanford University

Stanford, California

Juanita Haugen

Local School Board Member

Pleasanton, California

Honorable Nancy Kopp

State Legislator

Annapolis, Maryland

Honorable Ronnie Musgrove

Governor of Mississippi

Jackson, Mississippi

Roy M. Nageak, Sr.

First Vice-Chair

Alaska Board of Education and

Early Development

Barrow, Alaska

Debra Paulson

Eighth-Grade Mathematics Teacher

El Paso, Texas

Honorable Jo Ann Pottorff

State Legislator

Wichita, Kansas

Diane Ravitch

Research Professor

New York University

New York, New York

Sister Lourdes Sheehan, R.S.M.

Secretary for Education

United States Catholic Conference

Washington, DC

John H. Stevens

Executive Director

Texas Business and Education

Coalition

Austin, Texas

Migdania D. Vega

Principal

Coral Way Elementary Bilingual

School

Miami, Florida

Deborah Voltz

Assistant Professor

Department of Special Education

University of Louisville

Louisville, Kentucky

Honorable Michael E. Ward

State Superintendent of Public

Instruction

North Carolina Public Schools

Raleigh, North Carolina

Marilyn A. Whirry

Twelfth-Grade English Teacher

Manhattan Beach, California

Dennie Palmer Wolf

Senior Research Associate

Harvard University

Graduate School of Education

Cambridge, Massachusetts

Grover J. Whitehurst (Ex-Officio)

Assistant Secretary of Education

Office of Educational Research and

Improvement

U.S. Department of Education

Washington, DC

Roy Truby

Executive Director, NAGB

Washington, DC