NATIONAL CENTER FOR EDUCATION STATISTICS

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

OFFICE OF EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH AND IMPROVEMENT CARD

REPORT

THE NA ION’S T 25TH ANNIVERSARY•1969–1994

NAEP 1994 Geography Report Card

FINDINGS FROM THE NATIONAL ASSESSMENT OF EDUCATIONAL PROGRESS
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

Honorable Roy Romer

Governor of Colorado

Denver, Colorado

Honorable Edgar D. Ross

Judge

Territorial Court of the Virgin Islands

Christiansted, St. Croix

U.S. Virgin Islands

Fannie L. Simmons

Mathematics Coordinator

District 5 of Lexington/Richland County

Ballentine, South Carolina

Adam Urbanski

President

Rochester Teachers Association

Rochester, New York

Deborah Voltz

Assistant Professor

Department of Special Education

University of Louisville

Louisville, Kentucky

Marilyn A. Whirry

Twelfth-grade English Teacher

Mira Costa High School

Manhattan Beach, California

Dennie Palmer Wolf

Senior Research Associate

Harvard Graduate School of Education

Cambridge, Massachusetts

Sharon P. Robinson (Ex-Officio)

Assistant Secretary

Office of Educational Research

and Improvement

U.S. Department of Education

Washington, DC

Roy Truby

Executive Director, NAGB

Washington, DC

Jan B. Loveless

District Communications Specialist

Midland Public Schools

Midland, Michigan

Marilyn McConachie

School Board Member

Glenbrook High Schools

Glenview, Illinois

Jason Millman

Prof. of Educational Research Methodology

Cornell University

Ithaca, New York

Honorable Richard P. Mills

Commissioner of Education

State of New York

Albany, New York

William J. Moloney

Superintendent of Schools

Calvert County Public Schools

Prince Frederick, Maryland

Honorable Annette Morgan

Member

Missouri House of Representatives

Jefferson City, Missouri

Mark D. Musick

President

Southern Regional Education Board

Atlanta, Georgia

Mitsugi Nakashima

Chairman

Hawaii State Board of Education

Honolulu, Hawaii

Michael T. Nettles

Professor of Education & Public Policy

University of Michigan

Ann Arbor, Michigan

and Director

Frederick D. Patterson Research Institute

United Negro College Fund

Honorable William T. Randall, Chair

Commissioner of Education

State of Colorado

Denver, Colorado

Mary R. Blanton

Attorney

Salisbury, North Carolina

Patsy Cavazos

Principal

W.G. Love Accelerated Elementary School

Houston, Texas

Catherine A. Davidson

Secondary Education Director

Central Kitsap School District

Silverdale, Washington

Edward Donley

Former Chairman

Air Products & Chemicals, Inc.

Allentown, Pennsylvania

Honorable James Edgar

Governor of Illinois

Springfield, Illinois

James E. Ellingson

Fourth-grade Classroom Teacher

Probstfield Elementary School

Moorhead, Minnesota

Chester E. Finn, Jr.

John M. Olin Fellow

Hudson Institute

Washington, DC

Michael J. Guerra

Executive Director

Secondary Schools Department

National Catholic Educational Association

Washington, DC
NATIONAL CENTER FOR EDUCATION STATISTICS

NAEP 1994 Geography Report Card

Findings from the

National Assessment of Educational Progress

Hilary R. Persky

Clyde M. Reese

Christine Y. O’Sullivan

Stephen Lazer

Jerry Moore

Sharif Shakrani

Office of Educational Research and Improvement

U.S. Department of Education

Prepared by Educational Testing Service under contract

with the National Center for Education Statistics

May 1996
U.S. Department of Education

Richard W. Riley

Secretary

Office of Educational Research and Improvement

Sharon P. Robinson

Assistant Secretary

National Center for Education Statistics

Jeanne E. Griffith

Acting Commissioner

Education Assessment Division

Gary W. Phillips

Associate Commissioner

May 1996

FOR MORE INFORMATION:

For ordering information on this report, write:

National Library of Education

Office of Educational Research and Improvement

U.S. Department of Education

555 New Jersey Avenue, NW

Washington, D.C. 20208-5641

or call 1-800-424-1616 (in the Washington, DC, metropolitan area

call 202-219-1651).

The work upon which this publication is based was performed for the

National Center for Education Statistics, Office of Educational Research

and Improvement, by Educational Testing Service.

Educational Testing Service is an equal opportunity, affirmative action employer.

Educational Testing Service, ETS, and the ETS logo are registered trademarks of Educational Testing Service.
iii

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xi

CHAPTER 1. NAEP 1994 ASSESSMENT IN GEOGRAPHY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

Geography in American Education . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

Overview of the 1994 National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) . . . . . . . . . . . 1

The NAEP 1994 Geography Framework . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

Geography Content Areas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

Geography Cognitive Areas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

The NAEP 1994 Geography Assessment Instrument . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

Description of School and Student Samples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

Reporting NAEP Geography Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

The Geography Scale . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

Geography Achievement Levels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

Interpreting NAEP Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

Sample Questions from the NAEP 1994 Geography Assessment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

CHAPTER 2. GEOGRAPHY RESULTS FOR THE NATION AND REGIONS . . . . . . . . . . . 15

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

Geography Results for the Nation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15

Geography Results for Major Reporting Subgroups . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16

Race/Ethnicity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17

Gender . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17

Parents’ Highest Level of Education . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18

Type of Location . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18

Title I Participation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19

Type of School . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19

An In-Depth Look at Selected Background Characteristics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20

Gender and Race/Ethnicity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20

Gender and Parental Education . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21

Type of School (Public and Nonpublic) and Parental Education . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22

Race/Ethnicity and Parental Education . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22

Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24

TABLE OF CONTENTS
i v

CHAPTER 3. GEOGRAPHY ACHIEVEMENT LEVELS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25

Geography Achievement Levels for the Nation and Regions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28

Geography Achievement Levels for Major Reporting Subgroups . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29

Race/Ethnicity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29

Gender . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31

Parents’ Highest Level of Education . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32

Type of Location . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34

Title I Participation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35

Type of School . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36

Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37

CHAPTER 4. CONTEXTS IN WHICH STUDENTS LEARN GEOGRAPHY . . . . . . . . . . . . 39

The Extent of Students’ Social Studies and Geography Instruction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39

Social Studies and Geography Instruction at Grade 4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39

Geography Course Taking at Grades 8 and 12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40

Geography Course Taking Within Subgroups at Grades 8 and 12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41

Teacher Background and Experience . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42

The Context for Learning Geography at Grades 4 and 8 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44

Instructional Materials and Practices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44

The Use of Maps and Globes in Learning Geography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45

The Use of Projects in Learning Geography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46

The Use of Computers in Learning Geography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47

The Use of Films, Videos, or Filmstrips in Learning Geography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48

The Use of Homework in Learning Geography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49

The Use of Newspapers, Magazines, or Journals in Learning Geography . . . . . . . . . . . 50

Students’ Home Support . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51

Discussing Schoolwork at Home . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51

Literacy Materials in the Home . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52

Television Viewing Habits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53

Student Interest in Geography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54

Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
v

CHAPTER 5. WHAT STUDENTS KNOW AND CAN DO IN GEOGRAPHY . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57

Overview of Students’ Performance on the NAEP Geography Scale . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57

Fourth-Grade Profile . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57

Eighth-Grade Profile . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57

Twelfth-Grade Profile . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59

Profiles of Students’ Geography Knowledge, Abilities, and Study Habits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59

Average Performance by Content Areas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63

Performance on Geography Content Areas for the Nation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64

Performance on Geography Content Areas by Region . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65

Performance on Geography Content Areas by Race/Ethnicity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66

Performance on Geography Content Areas by Gender . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67

Performance on Geography Content Areas by Parents’ Highest Level of Education . . 68

Performance on Geography Content Areas by Type of Location . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69

Performance on Geography Content Areas by Type of School . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70

Profiling Students’ Performance on the Three Geography Content Areas . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71

Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78

CONCLUSION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79

APPENDICES

A. Overview of Procedures Used in the NAEP 1994 Geography Assessment . . . . . . . . . . . 81

B. Describing Students’ Geography Performance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93

C. Sample Questions from the NAEP 1994 Geography Assessment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99
v i

TABLES

Table 1.1

Distribution of Assessment Time Across Geography Content Areas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

Table 1.2

Distribution of Assessment Time Across Cognitive Areas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

Table 2.1

Average Geography Scale Scores by Percentile, Grades 4, 8, and 12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15

Table 2.2

Average Geography Scale Scores, for the Nation and by Region, Grades 4, 8, and 12 . . . . . 16

Table 2.3

Average Geography Scale Scores by Race/Ethnicity, Grades 4, 8, and 12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17

Table 2.4

Average Geography Scale Scores by Gender, Grades 4, 8, and 12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17

Table 2.5

Average Geography Scale Scores by Parents’ Highest Level of Education,

Grades 4, 8, and 12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18

Table 2.6

Average Geography Scale Scores by Type of Location, Grades 4, 8, and 12 . . . . . . . . . . . 18

Table 2.7

Average Geography Scale Scores by Title I Participation, Grades 4, 8, and 12 . . . . . . . . 19

Table 2.8

Average Geography Scale Scores by Type of School, Grades 4, 8, and 12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19

Table 2.9

Average Geography Scores of Male and Female Students

by Race/Ethnicity, Grades 4, 8, and 12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20

Table 2.10

Average Geography Scores of Male and Female Students

in Relation to Parents’ Highest Level of Education, Grades 4, 8, and 12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21

Table 2.11

Average Geography Scores of Students Attending Public and

Nonpublic Schools in Relation to Parents’ Highest Level of Education,

Grades 4, 8, and 12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22

Table 2.12

Average Geography Scores of White, Black, and Hispanic Students

in Relation to Parents’ Highest Level of Education, Grade 12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23

Table 3.1

Geography Achievement Levels, for the Nation and by Region, Grades 4, 8, and 12 . . . . 28

Table 3.2

Geography Achievement Levels by Race/Ethnicity, Grades 4, 8, and 12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29

Table 3.3

Geography Achievement Levels by Gender, Grades 4, 8, and 12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
vii

Table 3.4

Geography Achievement Levels by Parents’ Highest Level of Education,

Grades 4, 8, and 12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32

Table 3.5

Geography Achievement Levels by Type of Location, Grades 4, 8, and 12 . . . . . . . . . . . . 34

Table 3.6

Geography Achievement Levels by Title I Participation, Grades 4, 8, and 12 . . . . . . . . . 35

Table 3.7

Geography Achievement Levels by Type of School, Grades 4, 8, and 12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36

Table 4.1

Students’ Reports on Social Studies Course Taking, Grade 4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39

Table 4.2

Teachers’ Reports on Time Spent Per Week in Social Studies Class

on Geography Teaching, Grade 4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39

Table 4.3

Students’ Reports on Geography Course Taking, Grades 8 and 12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40

Table 4.4

Students’ Reports on Number of Semesters of History, Geography,

or Social Studies Taken, Grade 12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41

Table 4.5

Students’ Reports on Geography Course Taking for Selected Subgroups, Grade 8 . . . . 41

Table 4.6

Students’ Reports on Geography Course Taking for Selected Subgroups, Grade 12 . . . 42

Table 4.7

Teachers’ Reports on Undergraduate Majors, Grades 4 and 8 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42

Table 4.8

Teachers’ Reports on Graduate Majors, Grades 4 and 8 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43

Table 4.9

Teachers’ Reports on Continuing Education, Grades 4 and 8 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43

Table 4.10

Teachers’ Reports on Use of Maps and Globes, Grade 4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45

Table 4.11

Students’ Reports on Use of Maps and Globes, Grades 4 and 8 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45

Table 4.12

Teachers’ Reports on Use of Geography Projects, Grade 4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46

Table 4.13

Students’ Reports on Doing Geography Projects, Grades 4 and 8 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46

Table 4.14

Students’ Reports on Doing Geography Projects for Students

Currently Enrolled in a Geography Course, Grade 8 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
viii

Table 4.15

Teachers’ Reports on Use of Computers, Grade 4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47

Table 4.16

Students’ Reports on Use of Computers for Geography, Grades 4 and 8 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47

Table 4.17

Teachers’ Reports on the Use of Films, Videos, or Filmstrips, Grade 4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48

Table 4.18

Students’ Reports on the Use of Films, Videos, or Filmstrips, Grades 4 and 8 . . . . . . . . 48

Table 4.19

Students’ Reports on Time Spent on Homework Each Day, Grades 4, 8, and 12 . . . . . . 49

Table 4.20

Students’ Reports on Time Spent on Geography Homework Each Week, Grade 8 . . . . 49

Table 4.21

Students’ Reports on Reading Newspapers, Magazines or Journals

Related to Geography, Grades 4 and 8 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50

Table 4.22

Students’ Reports on the Frequency with Which they Discuss Their Studies

at Home, Grades 4, 8, and 12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51

Table 4.23

Students’ Reports on the Number of Different Types of Literacy Materials

in their Home, Grades 4, 8, and 12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52

Table 4.24

Students’ Reports on the Amount of Time Spent Watching Television

Each Day, Grades 4, 8, and 12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53

Table 4.25

Students’ Reports on How Much They Like Studying Geography,

Grades 4, 8, and 12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54

Table 5.1

Average Scale Scores at Various Percentiles by Geography Content Areas,

Grades 4, 8, and 12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64

Table 5.2

Average Scale Scores in Geography Content Areas by Region, Grades 4, 8, and 12 . . . . 65

Table 5.3

Average Scale Scores in Geography Content Areas by Race/Ethnicity,

Grades 4, 8, and 12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66

Table 5.4

Average Scale Scores in Geography Content Areas by Gender, Grades 4, 8, and 12 . . . . 67

Table 5.5

Average Scale Scores in Geography Content Areas by Parents’ Highest Level

of Education, Grades 4, 8, and 12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68
i x

Table 5.6

Average Scale Scores in Geography Content Areas by Type of Location,

Grades 4, 8, and 12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69

Table 5.7

Average Scale Scores in Geography Content Areas by Type of School,

Grades 4, 8, and 12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70

Table A.1

Target and Actual Distribution of Assessment Time

by Grade and Content Area, Grades 4, 8, and 12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82

Table A.2

Unweighted and Weighted Sample Sizes by Grade and Region

Public and Nonpublic Schools, Grades 4, 8, and 12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84

Table A.3

Percentage of Students Who Reported Not Knowing

Their Parents’ Highest Level of Education, by Race/Ethnicity,

Grades 4, 8, and 12 1994 Geography Assessment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89

Table A.4

Correlations Between Students’ and Parents’ Reports of

Parents’ Highest Level of Education, by Race/Ethnicity, Grades 8 and 12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89

Table B.1

Responses of Students Near Selected Percentile Points to

General Study Habit Questions, Grade 4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 94

Table B.2

Responses of Students Near Selected Percentile Points to

General Study Habit Questions, Grade 8 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95

Table B.3

Responses of Students Near Selected Percentile Points to

General Study Habit Questions, Grade 12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96
x

FIGURES

Figure 1.1

NAEP 1994 Geography Assessment Framework Elements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

Figure 1.2

Policy Definitions of NAEP Achievement Levels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

Figure 1.3

NAEP 1994 Geography Sample Questions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

Figure 2.1

Average NAEP Geography Scale Scores by Grade and by Region . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16

Figure 3.1

Geography Achievement Levels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28

Figure 5.1

Profiles of Lower, Middle, and Higher Performing Fourth Graders:

Geography Knowledge, Abilities, and Study Habits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60

Figure 5.2

Profiles of Lower, Middle, and Higher Performing Eighth Graders:

Geography Knowledge, Abilities, and Study Habits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61

Figure 5.3

Profiles of Lower, Middle, and Higher Performing Twelfth Graders:

Geography Knowledge, Abilities, and Study Habits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62

Figure 5.4

Map of Selected Items on the Geography Content Area Subscales for Grade 4 . . . . . . . 72

Figure 5.5

Map of Selected Items on the Geography Content Area Subscales for Grade 8 . . . . . . . 74

Figure 5.6

Map of Selected Items on the Geography Content Area Subscales for Grade 12 . . . . . . 76

Figure A.1

NAEP 1994 Geography Assessment Framework Elements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81

Figure A.2

States Included in the Four Regions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88
x i

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

If policymakers, educators, and concerned citizens are

to reform and improve the United States educational

system, they need valid and reliable information on the

strengths and weaknesses of American students and on

the instructional factors that are related to differing

levels of performance. For more than 25 years, the

National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP)

has provided such information. NAEP assessments have

probed students’ abilities in a variety of subject areas,

reporting both on what students know and can do and

on the relationships between instructional, institutional,

and background variables and differing levels of educational achievement. As the nation’s foremost ongoing

education survey, the national assessment data track

trends in student performance and allow concerned

readers to evaluate whether America’s students have the

skills and knowledge necessary to participate in today’s

economic and political worlds.

In 1994 NAEP conducted national assessments in

reading, geography, and United States history at grades

4, 8, and 12. The geography results included in this

Report Card describe students’ achievement at each

grade and within subgroups of the general population.

In addition, the report discusses the relationships among

student performance and instructional and home background variables. Taken together, this information will

give educators a context for evaluating the geography

achievement of students and data that may be used to

guide reform efforts.

Student performance on the NAEP 1994 geography

assessment is summarized on the NAEP geography scale,

which ranges from 0 to 500. The geography scale allows for

the discussion of what students know and can do in terms

of the geography content covered by the assessment. In

addition, results are reported according to geography

achievement levels adopted by the National Assessment

Governing Board. For each grade, three achievement

levels were set — Basic, Proficient, and Advanced. These

are based on judgments, made by broadly representative

panels, about what students should know and should be

able to do in geography.

The Proficient achievement level represents solid

academic performance that demonstrates competency

over challenging subject matter for each grade assessed.

The Basic achievement level denotes partial mastery of

prerequisite knowledge and skills that are fundamental

for proficient work. The Advanced achievement level

signifies superior performance.

To maximize usefulness to policymakers, educators,

parents, and other interested parties, the NAEP results

are presented both as average scores on the NAEP

geography scale, and in terms of the percentage of

students attaining NAEP geography achievement levels.

Thus, NAEP results not only provide information about

what students know and can do, but also indicate

whether their achievement meets expectations of what

students should know and should be able to do. Furthermore, the descriptions of skills and abilities expected of

students at each achievement level help make the

reporting of assessment results more meaningful.

Major Findings for the Nation

© The Proficient achievement level was reached by

22 percent of fourth graders, 28 percent of eighth

graders, and 27 percent of twelfth graders.

© At each grade, roughly 70 percent of students were

at or above the Basic level.

© As students’ geography scores increased, the

complexity and sophistication of the geographic

knowledge and skills they exhibited increased.

For example:

● At grade 4, 79 percent of students could identify

the water cycle from an illustration; 70 percent

could draw a generally accurate map of an island

from a written description; 59 percent could use a

map to explain the concentration of highways in

the eastern United States; and 13 percent could

describe two important effects of an oil spill in

the ocean.

● At grade 8, 90 percent of students knew where to

locate information in an atlas; 70 percent could

understand why immigrants congregate in New

York City; 48 percent could identify latitude on a

polar map projection; and 36 percent could identify

and explain two reasons why a particular route

for a railroad would prove cheaper to construct

than an alternate route.

● At grade 12, 91 percent of students could use a

map to identify an area of earthquake activity;

66 percent could construct a precipitation pie

chart from tabled data; 55 percent could give at

least two geographically accurate reasons that a

shopping center should be placed at a given

location; and 10 percent could identify Canada as

the United States’ largest trading partner.
xii

© Generally, students across grades in the higher

percentiles exhibited greater abilities to work with

a range of geographic tools, create maps based on

tabular or narrative data, grasp processes and

relationships, bring outside knowledge to bear on

answering questions, and analyze data.

Major Findings for Student Subgroups

© As in other NAEP assessments, statistically significant

differences existed in the performance of major

subgroups of the population. For example, at all

three grades, White and Asian students had higher

scores than did their Black and Hispanic counterparts. In addition, at all grades, Hispanic students had

higher average scale scores than did Black students.

© Consistent with findings in other assessments, there

was a strong relationship between differing levels of

parental education and performance in geography.

As a general rule, the more education students’

parents had received, the better they performed on

the assessment.

© On the overall geography scale, male students

performed better than female students at all three

grades. However, gender differences were not consistent across content areas within geography. For

example, at grade 4 males outperformed females on

tasks assessing the content area “Space and Place,”

while there were no significant performance differences in the two other content areas.

© At all three grades, students attending nonpublic

schools performed at a higher level than did those

attending public schools.

Contextual Factors Related to

Geography Performance

A diverse range of home and school factors are related to

the ways and extent to which students learn geography.

Students who participated in the NAEP assessment were

asked to complete questionnaires about home and

school experiences related to geography learning. Also,

teachers and school administrators completed questionnaires about their students’ instructional experiences.

The results of these surveys help place the assessment

scores into context, and allow policymakers to determine

which variables are positively and negatively related to

geography achievement.

© Over 40 percent of the students at grades 4 and 8,

and 25 percent of the students at grade 12 reported

watching four or more hours of television each day.

In most cases, the more television students reported

watching, the worse they performed on the geography assessment.

© Fifty-six percent of fourth graders, 39 percent of

eighth graders, and 31 percent of twelfth graders

reported discussing their studies at home daily. By

contrast, 17, 21, and 24 percent of students at

grades 4, 8, and 12, respectively, reported never or

hardly ever discussing their studies at home. Students who reported not discussing their studies at

home performed at a lower level than did students

who discussed their studies on a regular basis.

© Geography instruction is limited for grade 4 students.

More than 60 percent of students had teachers who

reported spending less than 45 minutes per week on

geography instruction. Most eighth-grade students

reported having taken at least one geography class

since the sixth grade.

© Twenty-six percent of fourth graders, 19 percent of

eighth graders, and 14 percent of twelfth graders

indicated that geography was their favorite subject.

At all grades, students who indicated that geography

was their favorite subject performed at a higher level

than did those who indicated that they liked other

subjects better.
xiii

About This Report

As the nation’s Report Card in geography, this

document provides a broad examination of students’

learning. In addition, specific aspects of students’

performance and their experiences at home and school

are reviewed in some depth. As such, this report

provides a portrait of what students know and can do in

geography, as well as the contexts in which they have

developed their geographic knowledge and skills.

A limited assessment of the geography achievement

of high school seniors was conducted by NAEP in

conjunction with the National Geographic Society in

1988. However, the content framework that underlies

the NAEP 1994 geography assessment is markedly

different from the framework used for the 1984

assessment. Therefore, information cannot be reported

on trends in high school seniors’ geography achievement

between 1988 and 1994.

Chapter 1 presents the overview of the NAEP 1994

geography assessment — its content framework, design,

and administration. Also included in Chapter 1 are

sample questions and student responses from the

assessment. Chapter 2 provides overall average scale

score results for the nation, regions, and subgroups of

students. Chapter 3 describes student performance in

terms of achievement levels. Chapter 4 describes

contextual factors related to students’ geography

achievement. Chapter 5 describes the specific abilities

that students demonstrated on the NAEP 1994

geography assessment and reports student performance

in different content areas of geography.
xiv
1

CHAPTER 1

NAEP 1994 Assessment

in Geography

“The social progress, order, security, and peace of each

country are necessarily connected with the social

progress, order, security, and peace of all other countries.”

Pope John XXIII

Council for Geographic Education and the American

Association of Geographers created a joint committee to

reestablish geography in the school curriculum. Their

report, Guidelines for Geographic Education: Elementary

and Secondary Schools (1984), provided educators with

five themes central to the teaching and learning of

geography.2

 This document was disseminated broadly to

teachers and geography educators.

Also in the mid-1980s, the National Geographic

Society, through commentaries in the National

Geographic magazine, began calling for substantial

changes in American attitudes toward geography and

the United States educational system.3

 In addition, the

National Geographic Society and the National Center for

Education Statistics (NCES) commissioned a NAEP

geography assessment of high school seniors in 1988.4

The information provided by this assessment, along with

data from a 1988 Gallup survey of geographic literacy,

suggested the need for significant reform of geographic

education in the United States. Both surveys indicated

that student knowledge and skills were far short of what

was needed for responsible and productive citizenship.5

When President Bush convened the nation’s governors

at the education summit in 1989, the value of geography

and the need for better geography education were further

emphasized when geography was established as one of

five core subjects in the nation’s schools. Subsequently

NAEP was authorized to conduct a comprehensive

assessment of geography in 1994 at grades 4, 8, and 12.

Overview of the 1994 National

Assessment of Educational Progress

(NAEP)

A project of the NCES, NAEP collects valuable

information about what students know and can do in

different curricular areas. Since being initiated by

Congress in 1969, NAEP has carried out its federally

supported mandate as the only ongoing national

assessment of student achievement. Both public and

nonpublic school students in grades 4, 8, and 12 are

regularly sampled and assessed in reading, history,

geography, mathematics, science, writing, and other

subjects. The assessments are based on content

frameworks developed through a national consensus

process involving teachers, curriculum experts, parents,

and members of the general public. The frameworks

attempt to maintain a balance between current

instructional efforts, curriculum reform, research

results, and desirable levels of achievement.

Introduction

Governments, economies, and ecosystems do not exist

in isolation. People and regions are connected by trade

agreements, global markets, communications networks,

political alliances, and international organizations.

Increasingly, nations are sharing concerns about the

global environment. United States foreign and economic

policies must account for events across the globe:

Competition for jobs in Peoria is as likely to come from

Kuala Lumpur as from Fresno. Events from around the

world, such as the unification of Germany, affect us in

profound ways. If our children are to be productive and

responsible citizens of both the United States and the

global community, they must know and understand the

connections among the world’s regions and peoples and

the circumstances that lead these connections to evolve

and change. In other words, they must have a working

knowledge of the subject of geography.

Geography in American Education

In spite of the importance of geographic skills and

competencies, geography has occupied an inconsistent

place in the American classroom. In the nineteenth

century, geography was viewed as a core element of the

school curriculum. However, with the growth of the

field of social studies since the second decade of the

twentieth century, geography began to be squeezed out

of the curriculum. In addition, pressure on schools to

include a range of different subjects in their instructional

programs has further reduced the time allocated to

geography.1

Attitudes toward the place of geography in the

school curriculum began to undergo a substantial

change in the 1980s. Concerned about levels of

geographic literacy in our nation’s schools, the National
2

tors, policymakers, professional geographers, representatives of the business community, assessment experts,

and curriculum specialists. In addition, several hundred

other experts and interested members of the public

contributed to the development process, either by

participating in hearings or by reviewing drafts of

documents.

The NAEP 1994 geography framework is organized

along two dimensions, a content dimension and a

cognitive dimension. The three content areas of the

framework — Space and Place, Environment and

Society, and Spatial Dynamics and Connections —

served to clarify specifics of subject matter that were

measured in the 1994 geography assessment.

The cognitive dimension of the framework specified

areas of thinking expected of students as they embrace

specific geography content. These cognitive areas were

defined as Knowing, Understanding, and Applying.

As Figure 1.1 illustrates, the content and cognitive

dimensions of the framework form a matrix: The

assessment addresses each cognitive process in each

content area. The content and cognitive areas of the

geography framework are described in greater detail in

the following sections.

The NAEP 1994 geography assessment was administered to national samples of fourth-, eighth-, and

twelfth-grade students attending public and nonpublic

schools. In all, approximately 19,000 students were

assessed. Students’ geography performance is described

on a scale ranging from 0 to 500 and in relation to three

levels of achievement: Basic, Proficient, and Advanced.

The assessment results are reported for national populations and for specific subgroups.

The NAEP 1994 Geography

Framework

The structure and content of the assessment were

determined by the Geography Framework for the 1994

National Assessment of Educational Progress.

6

 Although

geography had been assessed at the grade 12 level in

1988, the 1994 framework offered a new description of

the content of the discipline and mandated a new format

for the assessment. This forward-looking framework was

developed under the auspices of the National Assessment

Governing Board (NAGB) through a consensus process

managed by the Council of Chief State School Officers.

The consensus process involved more than 50 educaFigure 1.1 NAEP 1994 Geography Assessment Framework Elements

Spatial Dynamics

and Connections

What factors stimulate

human migrations?

Explain the motivations

of modern-day Mexicans

and Cubans for immigrating to the United States.

Compare current settlement and employment

patterns of Cuban and

Mexican immigrants in

the United States.

Environment

and Society

What mineral resources are

often extracted by strip

mining?

Explain the effects of strip

mining and shaft mining on

the landscape.

How can both economic and

environmental interests be

reconciled in an area of strip

mining?

Content Dimension

Cognitive

Dimension

Knowing

Understanding

Applying*

Space

and Place

Where is the world’s largest

tropical rain forest?

Why are tropical rain forests

located near the equator?

Support the conclusion that

tropical rain forests

promote wide species

variation.

Note: Example questions are illustrative only, and are not meant to represent the full array of assessment content.

*Applying refers to a range of higher-order thinking skills.

SOURCE: Geography Framework for the 1994 National Assessment of Educational Progress (1994), NAGB.
3

Content Area Grades 4, 8, and 12

Space and Place 40%

Environment and Society 30%

Spatial Dynamics and Connections 30%

Finally, students must understand the causes and

effects of natural hazards and disasters on the livability

of certain areas and that the phrase “a safe place to live”

is subject to personal interpretation.

3. Spatial Dynamics and Connections: Knowledge of

geography as it relates to spatial connections

among people, places, and regions.

This content area requires students to demonstrate

comprehension of cultural, economic, and political

regions and the connections among them, and explores

critical problems in human interaction. Students must

understand how peoples and places are alike and how

they differ. They must demonstrate that a comprehensive understanding of these similarities and differences

can contribute to our performance as citizens on both a

personal and broad international scale.

Students should know that people of every nation

are increasingly connected to and dependent upon other

peoples and places of the world for both human and

natural resources. In this content area, students must

demonstrate the knowledge that the world’s resources

are unevenly distributed, and an understanding of

how this contributes to the movements of people,

patterns of trade, and patterns of conflict. Students also

should understand the increasing significance of human

interdependence as various populations are searching

for clearer identities and independence.

Table 1.1 shows the percentages of assessment time

to be devoted to each content area, as specified in the

framework.

Geography Content Areas

Three geography content areas form the core organizing

structure of the framework. The content areas were

intended to ensure that all branches of geographic study

were covered and that emphases on various areas were

balanced. The content areas are also used to define

subscales for reporting. The content areas, as described

in the assessment framework, are summarized below.7

1. Space and Place: Knowledge of geography as it

relates to particular places on Earth, to spatial

patterns on Earth’s surface, and to physical and

human processes that shape such spatial patterns.

The study of space and place is basic to geography.

Space is the basic resource and organizing element for

the discipline. Patterns that are illustrated on maps

reflect both natural features and human activities. This

content area requires students to distinguish between

and understand the spatial distribution of physical and

human characteristics. To accomplish this, they must

locate significant features and places on Earth, recognize

existing patterns in the distribution of features and

places, and comprehend the reasons for the development

and existence of these patterns.

2. Environment and Society: Knowledge of geography

as it relates to the interactions between environment

and society.

Geography is an integrative discipline that focuses on

the interrelationships between the physical environment

and society. Human adaptation to and modification of

the environment have been of continual and increasing

importance to economies and polities. Understanding

the nature, scale, and ramifications of such environmental transformations is fundamental in geography

education, and is the core of this content area.

Students must be aware that every environmental

issue lends itself to many interpretations, depending on

people’s perspectives. Students must consider such

multiple perspectives as they evaluate decisions about

issues such as land use and resource development,

because the results of such decisions often have complicated and unpredictable consequences. Making wise

decisions concerning the costs and benefits of such

environmental modification is an expressed goal of

geography education.

Distribution of Assessment Time Across

Geography Content Areas

TABLE 1.1
4

Geography Cognitive Areas

The NAEP geography framework also outlines three

cognitive areas to be assessed: Knowing, Understanding,

and Applying. These are described below.7

1. Knowing — What is it? Where is it?

In this area, students are assessed on their ability

to perform two related functions concerning information:

(1) an observation function and (2) a recall function.

In general, tasks in this cognitive area are meant to

measure students’ ability to observe different elements

of the landscape and to answer questions by recalling,

for example, the name of a place or a resource

indigenous to a particular country or by finding

information about trading patterns among several

countries.

2. Understanding — Why is it there? How did it get

there? What is its significance?

In this area, students are asked to attribute meaning

to what has been observed and to explain events. Explaining events and placing them in context requires

students to demonstrate the ability to comprehend, to

see connections among diverse bits of geographic

information, and to use that information to explain

existing patterns and processes on Earth.

3. Applying — How can knowledge and understanding

be used to solve geographic problems?

In this area, students were involved in a range of

higher order thinking skills. Students are asked to

classify, hypothesize, use inductive and deductive

reasoning, and form problem-solving models. This area

of thinking calls on students to use many tools and skills

of geography as they attempt to develop a comprehensive understanding of a problem en route to proposing

viable solutions.

The cognitive areas are not used as reporting

subscales, but rather were used in the assessment

construction process to ensure appropriate coverage.

Table 1.2 shows the percentages of the assessment time

to be devoted to each cognitive level, as specified in the

framework.

The NAEP 1994 Geography

Assessment Instrument

Guided by the NAEP 1994 geography framework, test

development staff at Educational Testing Service worked

to craft an assessment that measured the range and

breadth of skills central to geography. As a national

assessment, it was imperative that the NAEP 1994

geography assessment reflect the scope of perspectives

and opinions among educators about geography content

and how it should be assessed. Therefore, the assessment

development process encompassed an extensive series of

reviews conducted by content and measurement experts,

teachers, and researchers. All components of the

assessment were evaluated for curricular relevance,

developmental appropriateness, and adherence to the

framework and test specifications.

The resulting assessment had many innovative and

interesting features, each designed to allow for accurate

measurement of the domain. Some of the most notable

of these features are described below.

© As called for in the framework, over half of student

assessment time was devoted to constructedresponse questions. Some of these questions

required short responses (one or two sentences),

while many required more extended answers (a

paragraph or more).

© The assessment used a wide range of stimulus

materials designed to assess spatial and interpretive

skills intrinsic to geography and to engage students

as actively as possible in the assessment. Stimuli

included maps, charts, cartoons, tables, text,

historical documents, and photographs.

© One section of the assessment at each grade was

designed to assess students’ ability to work with

atlases.

© Constructed-response questions were not limited to

those that required students to produce written

responses. At each grade, a certain number of

questions asked students to create their own maps,

charts, or other data displays.

© In addition to portions of the assessment that were

structured as broad surveys of knowledge and skills,

certain sections were designed to allow students to

work in-depth on a particular topical area.

Distribution of Assessment Time

Across Cognitive Areas

Grade Knowing Understanding Applying

4 45% 30% 25%

8 40% 30% 30%

12 30% 30% 40%

TABLE 1.2
5

In addition to multiple-choice questions, the

assessment included both short and extended

constructed-response questions. The percentage of

response time devoted to answering constructedresponse questions was approximately 60 percent at

each grade. Each constructed-response question was

scored according to a scoring guide, or rubric, that gave

credit for partially correct answers. The exercises called

for a range of responses. Short constructed-response

questions called for a word, a phrase, or a sentence or

two to demonstrate understanding of specific material.

Extended constructed-response questions called for

more developed argument, gathering of evidence, or

interpretation of data. Short constructed-response

questions were scored according to three-part scoring

guides, in which a score of 3 represented an appropriate

answer, a score of 2 a partially correct answer, and a

score of 1 an inappropriate answer. Extended

constructed-response questions were scored according

to four-part scoring guides, in which a 4 was assigned to

complete responses, a 3 to responses that responded to

essential components of the task, a 2 to partially correct

responses, and a 1 to inappropriate answers. Many of the

constructed-response questions were scaffolded; that is,

students were asked to respond first to one portion of the

question and then to another. In a few cases, students

were asked to do other tasks, such as drawing a map.

A national field test of assessment exercises was

conducted prior to use in the assessment to ensure their

appropriateness for assessing geography knowledge.

Statistical analyses and qualitative reviews were

conducted in selecting materials from the field test to be

included in the assessment. The NAEP 1994 geography

assessment that emerged from this broad consensus and

development effort represented a new generation of

large-scale geography assessments.

Across the three grades assessed — fourth, eighth,

and twelfth — a total of 228 multiple-choice, 80 short

constructed-response, and 30 extended constructedresponse questions comprised the NAEP1994 geography

assessment. For efficiency, some questions were

administered at two grade levels. The assessment design

is discussed in more detail in Appendix A and in the

NAEP 1994 Technical Report.

Description of School and Student

Samples

As with all NAEP assessments, the schools and students

participating in the 1994 geography assessment were

selected through scientifically designed, stratified

random sampling procedures. Approximately 19,000

students in 1,500 public and nonpublic schools across

the country participated in the geography assessment.

The results presented in this report are based on

representative samples of students at each of the three

grades. Each selected school that participated in the

assessment, and each student assessed, represented a

portion of the population of interest. As a result, the

findings provided in this report pertained to all fourth,

eighth, and twelfth graders in the nation. (For a more

detailed description of the sample and the sampling

procedures, see Appendix A.)

Reporting NAEP Geography Results

The NAEP 1994 geography assessment provides a wealth

of information on the geography abilities of the nation’s

fourth-, eighth-, and twelfth-grade students. To

maximize usefulness to policymakers, educators,

parents, and other interested parties, the NAEP results

are presented both as average scores on the NAEP

geography scale, and in terms of the percentage of

students attaining NAEP geography achievement levels.

Thus, NAEP results not only provide information about

what students know and can do, but also indicate

whether their achievement meets expectations of

what students should know and should be able to do.

Furthermore, the descriptions of skills and abilities

expected of students at each achievement level

help make the reporting of assessment results

more meaningful.
6

The Geography Scale

Student responses to the NAEP 1994 geography assessment were analyzed to determine the percentage of

students responding correctly to each multiple-choice

question and the percentages of students responding in

each of the score categories for constructed-response

questions. Item response theory (IRT) methods were

used to produce within-grade scales that summarize

results for each of the three geography content areas

described earlier. Each subscale for grade 4 was linked

to the corresponding subscale for grade 8. Likewise,

each subscale for grade 12 was linked to the corresponding subscale for grade 8. Then, each linked subscale was

mapped onto a scale with a range of 0 to 500. These

separate subscales were then weighted by the percentages shown in Table 1.1 to produce a composite NAEP

geography scale. Chapters 2, 4, and 5 present results

based on the geography scale. (The scales for each of the

NAEP subjects assessed in 1994 — reading, U.S. history,

and geography — were developed independently.

Therefore, results should not be compared across subjects. Details of the scaling procedures are presented in the

NAEP 1994 Technical Report.)

Geography Achievement Levels

The 1994 assessment results are also reported using the

geography achievement levels as authorized by the

NAEP legislation and adopted by the NAGB. The

achievement levels are based on collective judgments

gathered about what students should know and should

be able to do relative to the body of content reflected in

the NAEP assessment framework. Three achievement

levels were defined for each grade level assessed: Basic,

Proficient, and Advanced. The levels were defined by a

broadly representative panel of teachers, education

specialists, and members of the general public.

For reporting purposes, the achievement levels for

each grade are placed on the NAEP geography scale

defining in four ranges — Basic, Proficient, Advanced,

and the region below Basic. Figure 1.2 presents the

policy definitions of the three achievement levels.

Chapter 3 contains specific descriptions for the geography achievement.

It should be noted that the setting of achievement

levels on the national assessment is relatively new and

in transition. Some evaluations have concluded that the

percentage of students at certain levels may be

underestimated.8

 On the other hand, critiques of those

evaluations have found that such conclusions are not

supported by the weight of the empirical evidence.9

Figure 1.2 Policy Definitions of NAEP Achievement Levels

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 student achievement levels in this report have

been developed carefully and responsibly, and have been

subject to refinements and revisions in procedures as

new technologies have become available. Upon review of

the available information, the Commissioner of NCES

has judged that the achievement levels are in a

developmental status. However, the commissioner and

the NAGB also believe that the achievement levels are

useful and valuable in reporting on the educational

achievement of students in the United States. Results

reported in terms of the geography achievement levels

are presented in Chapter 3 of this report.

Interpreting NAEP Results

The average geography scale scores and the percentages

presented in this report are estimates because they

are based on samples rather than on the entire

population(s). As such, the results are subject to a

measure of uncertainty, reflected in the standard errors

of the estimates. These standard errors are presented in

parentheses along with the estimated average scale

scores or percentages in tables throughout this report.

The significant differences discussed in the

following chapters take into account the standard errors

associated with the estimates. The comparisons are

based on statistical tests that consider both the

magnitude of the differences between the average scale

scores or percentages and the standard errors of those

statistics. Throughout this report, differences are

defined as significant when they are significant from a

statistical perspective. This means that observed

differences are unlikely to be due to chance factors

associated with sampling variability. All differences

reported are significant at the .05 level with appropriate
7

students below Basic — who answered the questions

successfully. (A fuller description of the achievement

levels can be found in Chapter 3. At grades 4 and 12,

the percentages for students at the Advanced level are

not presented for these questions because of small

sample sizes.)

The first exercise presented in Figure 1.3 is a short

constructed-response question administered at grade 4

that asks students to list an advantage and disadvantage

of a particular method of waste disposal. A sample

response for a student who received a score of

“Complete” (defined as a score of 3 on a three-part

scoring rubric) on this question is also provided. The

table shows that few fourth graders (11 percent)

provided answers that received a score of “Complete.”

Less than 1 percent of those students below Basic and

only 8 percent of those who scored within the Basic

achievement level interval provided answers rated as

“Complete.” Almost one-quarter (28 percent) of fourth

graders who scored within the Proficient achievement

level interval provided answers rated as “Complete.”

The second exercise presented in Figure 1.3 is a

multiple-choice question administered at grade 8. The

table shows that about one-fifth (21 percent) of all

eighth graders answered this question correctly.

Seventeen percent of eighth graders who scored below

the Basic achievement level answered the question

correctly, compared to 19 percent for students who

scored within the Basic level. One-quarter of students

who scored within the Proficient achievement level

interval and nearly half (47 percent) of students who

scored within the Advanced level answered the question

correctly.

The third exercise shown in Figure 1.3 is an

extended constructed-response question administered at

grade 12. The questions ask students to select a site for a

proposed shopping center and to support their selection

with available information. (Neither site alternative was

“correct”; student responses were scored based on the

students’ ability to support their selection.) Sample

responses for students who received scores of

“Essential” and “Complete” (scores of 4 or 3 on a fourpart scoring guide) are provided. For this extended

constructed-response question, over half (55 percent) of

all twelfth graders provided answers rated “Essential” or

better. For those twelfth graders who scored below the

Basic achievement level, 27 percent provided answers

rated “Essential” or better, compared with 57 percent of

students within the Basic level. Almost three-quarters

(76 percent) of twelfth graders who scored within the

Proficient achievement level interval provided answers

rated “Essential” or better.

adjustments for multiple comparisons. The term

“significant,” therefore, is not necessarily intended to

imply judgment about the absolute magnitude or

educational relevance of the differences. The term is

intended to identify statistically dependable population

differences as an aid in focusing subsequent dialogue

among policymakers, educators, and the public.

The use of a common, cross-grade metric for the

three geography subscales and the composite geography

scale was primarily for ease of reporting. However, the

methodology used to produce the 0 to 500 scales used to

report fourth-, eighth-, and twelfth-grade results

(described in Appendix A) may not allow meaningful

comparisons across grades. Similarly, scale score

differences (e.g., between subscale or composite scale

averages for males and females) should probably not be

compared across grade. The reader is best served by

focusing on within-grade group comparisons and

inferences.

Cautions in Interpretations. The reader is cautioned

against using the NAEP results reported herein to make

simple or casual inferences related to subgroup

membership or the effectiveness of public and nonpublic

schools. For example, performance differences observed

among racial/ethnic subgroups are almost certainly

associated with a broad range of socioeconomic and

educational factors not discussed in this report and

possibly not addressed by the NAEP assessment program.

Similarly, differences between public and nonpublic

schools may be better understood after accounting for

factors such as composition of the student body,

parents’ highest level of education, and parental

interest.

Sample Questions from the

NAEP 1994 Geography Assessment

As discussed earlier, the NAEP 1994 geography

assessment is a rich collection of exercises developed to

survey the geographic knowledge and skills of students

in grades 4, 8, and 12. Each student received a mixture

of multiple-choice and constructed-response questions.

Figure 1.3 presents samples of assessment exercises.

(Additional example questions are shown in Appendix

C.) The tables accompanying the exercises present two

types of percentages: (1) the overall percentage of

students within a grade who answered the question

correctly and (2) the percentages of students within

each of the achievement level intervals — Basic,

Proficient, and Advanced as well as the percentage of
8

Example of a Grade 4 Short Constructed-Response Question

WAYS TO GET RID OF WASTE

• Dumping far out in the ocean

• Burning

• Recycling

• Burying in landfills

From the list above, select one method of getting rid of waste and identify one

advantage and one disadvantage of this method.

Method of waste disposal: __________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________

Advantage: ______________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________

Disadvantage:____________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________

Geography Content Area: Environment and Society

*NAEP geography composite scale range. ***Sample size insufficient to permit a reliable estimate (see Appendix A).

The standard errors of the estimated percentages appear in parentheses. It can be said with 95-percent certainty that, for each population

of interest, the value for the whole population is within plus or minus two standard errors of the estimate for the sample.

Figure 1.3 NAEP 1994 Geography Sample Questions

Percentage “Complete” Within

Grade 4 Achievement Level Intervals

Overall Percentage Below Basic Basic Proficient Advanced

Complete 186 and below* 187-239* 240-275* 276 and above*

11 (0.9) 0 (0.1) 8 (1.3) 28 (3.2) ***
9

Figure 1.3 NAEP 1994 Geography Sample Questions (continued )

Sample Response (Score of 3)

A Complete response (score of 3) accurately describes an advantage and disadvantage of one

method of waste disposal. Explanations should be both specific to that method and geographically

logical.
1 0

Example of a Grade 8 Multiple-Choice Question (© indicates correct answer)

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

©A glaciers

 B volcanic activity

 C decaying organic matter

 D eroded sandstone

Geography Content Area: Environment and Society

*NAEP geography composite scale range.

The standard errors of the estimated percentages appear in parentheses. It can be said with 95-percent certainty that, for each population

of interest, the value for the whole population is within plus or minus two standard errors of the estimate for the sample.

Figure 1.3 NAEP 1994 Geography Sample Questions (continued )

Percentage Correct Within

Grade 8 Achievement Level Intervals

Overall Percentage Below Basic Basic Proficient Advanced

Correct 241 and below* 242-281* 282-314* 315 and above*

21 (1.2) 17 (2.1) 19 (2.4) 25 (3.3) 47 (11.2)
1 1

Maddieville is building a new shopping center. There is a disagreement in the

city council over whether to build the shopping center at site A or at site B on

the map.

As a resident of the city who would like to shop at the new shopping center,

write a letter to the mayor in support of either site A or site B. Give three

reasons why the site you support is better than the other site.

_______________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________

Geography Content Area: Spatial Dynamics and Connections

*NAEP geography composite scale range. ***Sample size insufficient to permit a reliable estimate (see Appendix A).

The standard errors of the estimated percentages appear in parentheses. It can be said with 95-percent certainty that, for each population

of interest, the value for the whole population is within plus or minus two standard errors of the estimate for the sample.

Figure 1.3 NAEP 1994 Geography Sample Questions (continued )

Example of a Grade 12 Extended Constructed-Response Question

Percentage “Essential“ or “Complete“ Within

Grade 12 Achievement Level Intervals

Overall Percentage Below Basic Basic Proficient Advanced

Essential or Complete 269 and below* 270-304* 305-338* 339 and above*

55 (1.5) 27 (3.2) 57 (2.7) 76 (2.8) ***
1 2

Figure 1.3 NAEP 1994 Geography Sample Questions (continued )

Sample Response (Score of 3)

Maddieville is building a new shopping center. There is a disagreement in the

city council over whether to build the shopping center at site A or at site B on

the map.

As a resident of the city who would like to shop at the new shopping center,

write a letter to the mayor in support of either site A or site B. Give three

reasons why the site you support is better than the other site.

An Essential response (score of 3) chooses a site and supports the choice with two reasons.
1 3

Figure 1.3 NAEP 1994 Geography Sample Questions (continued )

Sample Response (Score of 4)

Maddieville is building a new shopping center. There is a disagreement in the

city council over whether to build the shopping center at site A or at site B on

the map.

As a resident of the city who would like to shop at the new shopping center,

write a letter to the mayor in support of either site A or site B. Give three

reasons why the site you support is better than the other site.

A Complete response (score of 4) chooses a site and gives three reasons for the choice.
1 4

Endnotes

1. Salter, C.L., Missing the Magic Carpet: The Real

Significance of Geographic Ignorance. Educational

Testing Service, 1990, Princeton, NJ. pp 10-11.

2. Guidelines for Geographic Education: Elementary

and Secondary Schools. Washington, DC:

Association of American Geographers and the

National Council for Geographic Education, 1984.

3. Salter, C.L., Missing the Magic Carpet: The Real

Significance of Geographic Ignorance. Educational

Testing Service. 1990, Princeton, NJ. p 5.

4. Allen, R., Bettis, N., Kurfman, D., MacDonald, W.,

Mullis, I.V.S., & Salter, C. (1990), The Geography

Learning of High-School Seniors. National

Assessment of Educational Progress, Educational

Testing Service, Princeton, NJ.

5. The NAEP survey found that, “Most students did not

demonstrate an understanding of the basic concepts

of physical and cultural geography, and many did

not correctly identify the locations of major

countries, cities, and landmarks.” Allen et al. The

Geography Learning of High-School Seniors.

National Assessment of Educational Progress,

Educational Testing Service, 1990, Princeton, NJ.

6. Geography Framework for the 1994 National

Assessment of Educational Progress. Washington,

DC: National Assessment Governing Board, 1994.

7. The content and cognitive area descriptions are

taken from the Geography Framework for the 1994

National Assessment of Educational Progress.

Washington, DC: National Assessment Governing

Board, 1994.

8. Education Achievement Standards, NAGB’s Approach

Yields Misleading Interpretations. U.S. General

Accounting Office Report to Congressional

Requestors. GAO/PEMD-93-12 Educational

Achievement Standards. Washington, DC: GPO,

June 1993.

Setting Achievement Levels for the Nation.

The Second Report of the National Academy of

Education Panel on the Evaluation of the NAEP

Trial State Assessment, 1992 Trial State Assessment.

Stanford, CA: National Academy of Education, 1993.

9. Cizek, G., Reactions to National Academy of

Education Report. Washington, DC: National

Assessment Governing Board, 1993.

American College Testing, Technical Report on

Setting Achievement Levels on the 1992 National

Assessment of Educational Progress in

Mathematics, Reading, and Writing. Washington,

DC: National Assessment Governing Board, 1993.
1 5

Grade 4 206 (1.2) 146 (1.9) 179 (1.4) 211 (1.3) 237 (1.2) 257 (1.8)

Grade 8 260 (0.7) 213 (1.3) 237 (0.9) 263 (1.0) 285 (0.9) 302 (1.6)

Grade 12 285 (0.7) 244 (0.9) 265 (0.9) 287 (0.8) 306 (0.9) 321 (0.9)

The standard errors of the estimated percentages and average scale scores appear in parenthesis. It can be said with 95-percent certainty that, for each population of interest, the value for the whole population is within plus or minus

two standard errors of the estimate for the sample.

SOURCE: National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 1994 Geography Assessment.

Average Geography Scale Scores by Percentile

Grades 4, 8, and 12

CHAPTER 2 significance should not necessarily be equated with

educational or instructional significance.

In addition, the NAEP 1994 geography assessment

data are explored in more depth by examining the

interactions among several major reporting variables.

Average geography scale scores are examined for

subgroups of students within various demographic

populations. By doing so, it is possible to determine

whether general patterns of geography performance for

certain groups of students are related to additional

background characteristics.

Geography Results for the Nation

Table 2.1 presents the average geography scale scores for

fourth-, eighth-, and twelfth-grade students across the

nation attending both public and nonpublic schools.

© At grade 4, the average geography scale score was

206. The bottom 10 percent of the population scored

at or below 146 and the top 10 percent scored at or

above 257.

© At grade 8, the average score was 260. The bottom

10 percent of the population scored at or below 213

and the top 10 percent of the population scored at or

above 302.

© At grade 12, the average geography scale score was

285. The bottom 10 percent of the population scored

at or below 244 and the top 10 percent scored at or

above 321.

Geography Results for the

Nation and Regions

Introduction

This chapter presents the overall NAEP geography

scale scores of students in grades 4, 8, and 12.

Findings are presented for the nation, regions of the

country, and selected subgroups of students. Student

performance is reported on the NAEP geography scale,

which ranges from 0 to 500. (For a visual representation

of student performance on each of the geography

content subscales — also ranging from 0 to 500 —

see Chapter 5.)

The results provided in this chapter address

statistically significant differences that were found

between reporting subgroups. In other cases, score

estimates for various subgroups may appear to differ,

but these differences are not statistically significant.

(Significant differences are those that are unlikely to

be due to sampling variability or chance.) All significant

differences among reported subgroups are indicated to

provide a comprehensive and balanced discussion of the

results. However, when reading this report, statistical

Average 10th 25th 50th 75th 90th

Grade Levels Scale Score Percentile Percentile Percentile Percentile Percentile

TABLE 2.1 CARD

REPORT

THE NA ION’S T

1994
 Geography Assessment
1 6

Grade 4

Nation 100 206 (1.2)

Region

Northeast 22 (0.8) 203 (2.7)

Southeast 23 (1.0) 200 (2.5)

Central 25 (0.8) 215 (3.2)

West 30 (0.7) 205 (1.7)

Grade 8

Nation 100 260 (0.7)

Region

Northeast 20 (0.8) 266 (1.9)

Southeast 25 (1.0) 252 (1.6)

Central 24 (0.6) 268 (1.6)

West 31 (0.7) 255 (1.8)

Grade 12

Nation 100 285 (0.7)

Region

Northeast 21 (0.5) 284 (1.6)

Southeast 23 (0.8) 278 (1.1)

Central 28 (0.7) 289 (1.8)

West 29 (0.7) 286 (1.9)

Differences between the groups may be partially explained by other factors not included in this table.

The standard errors of the estimated percentages and average scale scores appear in parenthesis. It can be

said with 95-percent certainty that, for each population of interest, the value for the whole population is

within plus or minus two standard errors of the estimate for the sample.

Percentages of students in the subgroups may not total 100 due to rounding.

SOURCE: National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 1994

Geography Assessment.

Percentage

of Students

Figure 2.1 Average NAEP Geography Scale Scores by Grade and by Region

290

280

270

260

250

240

230

220

210

200

190

 0

West

Grade 4

Grade 8

Grade 12

 SOURCE: National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 1994 Geography Assessment. 

285

278

289 286

260 268

255

205

206

284

266

203

Nation Northeast Southeast Central West

500

252

200

215

Average

Scale Score

TABLE 2.2 CARD

REPORT

THE NA ION’S T

1994
 Geography Assessment

Average Geography Scale Scores,

for the Nation and by Region

Grades 4, 8, and 12

Table 2.2 and Figure 2.1 present results for the

nation as well as the four regions of the country:

Northeast, Southeast, Central, and West. (The

composition of the regions is described in Appendix A.)

At grade 4, students in the Central region outperformed

those in the other three regions. At grade 8, the

students in the Northeast and Central regions had higher

average scores than their counterparts in the Southeast

and West. Among grade 12 students, those in the

Southeast had lower average scores than did those in

each of the other regions.

Geography Results for Major

Reporting Subgroups

Tables 2.3 through 2.8 present the average geography

scale score estimates for major subgroups of the fourth-,

eighth-, and twelfth-grade student populations.

Cautions in Interpretation. In interpreting the results

presented in this section, the reader is cautioned against

making simple or causal inferences related to subgroup

membership or effectiveness of Title I programs or

public and nonpublic schools. Performance differences

among groups of students may result from differences

in socioeconomic status and home background variables.

For example, differences observed among racial/ethnic

subgroups can almost certainly be associated with a

broad range of socioeconomic and educational factors.
1 7

Grade 4

Nation 100 206 (1.2)

Gender

Male 51 (1.0) 208 (1.4)

Female 49 (1.0) 203 (1.4)

Grade 8

Nation 100 260 (0.7)

Gender

Male 51 (0.7) 262 (0.9)

Female 49 (0.7) 258 (0.8)

Grade 12

Nation 100 285 (0.7)

Gender

Male 50 (1.0) 288 (0.8)

Female 50 (1.0) 281 (0.9)

Differences between the groups may be partially explained by other factors not included in this table.

The standard errors of the estimated percentages and average scale scores appear in parenthesis. It can be

said with 95-percent certainty that, for each population of interest, the value for the whole population is

within plus or minus two standard errors of the estimate for the sample.

SOURCE: National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 1994

Geography Assessment.

Grade 4

Nation 100 206 (1.2)

Race/Ethnicity

White 69 (0.2) 218 (1.5)

Black 15 (0.1) 168 (2.5)

Hispanic 12 (0.2) 183 (2.5)

Asian 2 (0.2) 218 (5.0)

Pacific Islander 1 (0.1) 205 (5.3)

American Indian 1 (0.2) 193 (3.6)

Grade 8

Nation 100 260 (0.7)

Race/Ethnicity

White 69 (0.2) 270 (0.8)

Black 15 (0.1) 229 (1.7)

Hispanic 11 (0.1) 239 (1.9)

Asian 2 (0.1) 271 (2.7)

Pacific Islander 1 (0.4) ! 252 (8.5) !

American Indian 2 (0.4) ! 248 (3.4) !

Grade 12

Nation 100 285 (0.7)

Race/Ethnicity

White 74 (0.3) 291 (0.8)

Black 12 (0.4) 258 (1.4)

Hispanic 8 (0.2) 268 (1.5)

Asian 3 (0.2) 287 (3.2)

Pacific Islander 1 (0.3) ! 282 (3.1) !

American Indian 1 (0.2) ! ***

Differences between the groups may be partially explained by other factors not included in this table.

The standard errors of the estimated percentages and average scale scores appear in parenthesis. It can be

said with 95-percent certainty that, for each population of interest, the value for the whole population is

within plus or minus two standard errors of the estimate for the sample.

Percentages of students in the subgroups may not total 100 due to rounding or, in the case of the race/

ethnicity variable, because some students categorized themselves as “other.”

! Interpret with caution any comparisons involving this statistic. The nature of the sample does not allow for

accurate determination of the variability of this value.

*** Sample size insufficient to permit a reliable estimate (see Appendix A).

SOURCE: National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 1994

Geography Assessment.

Similarly, differences between public and nonpublic

schools may be better understood if differences in

composition of the student body, parents’ highest level

of education, and parental involvement in education are

considered.

Race/Ethnicity. As part of the background questionnaire

that was administered in conjunction with the NAEP

1994 geography assessment, students were asked to

identify themselves as belonging to one of six mutually

exclusive categories: White, Black, Hispanic, Asian,

Pacific Islander, and American Indian (including Alaskan

Natives). Table 2.3 presents the average scale scores for

racial/ethnic subgroups. The geography assessment,

like other NAEP surveys, revealed substantial variation

in performance among the different racial/ethnic

subgroups. At all three grades, the average scores of

White and Asian students were significantly higher than

those of Black and Hispanic students. In addition, at all

three grades, the average scores of Hispanic students

were higher than those of Black students.

At grade 4, White and Asian students also

outperformed American Indian students. American

Indian students exhibited a higher average score than

Black students. Finally, at grade 4, Pacific Islander

students scored higher, on average, than did Black and

Hispanic students.

At grades 8 and 12, the samples do not permit

accurate determination of the standard errors associated

with the average scale scores of Pacific Islander and

American Indian students. For this reason, differences

between these and other population subgroups are not

discussed.

Gender. Table 2.4 presents the average geography scores

for male and female students in grades 4, 8, and 12. At

all three grades, male students had significantly higher

average scale scores than did female students. Specifically,

the average score for male students was five points

higher than female students at grade 4, four points

higher at grade 8, and seven points higher at grade 12.

Average

Scale Score

Percentage

of Students

TABLE 2.4 CARD

REPORT

THE NA ION’S T

1994
 Geography Assessment

Average

Scale Score

Percentage

of Students

TABLE 2.3 CARD

REPORT

THE NA ION’S T

1994
 Geography Assessment

Average Geography Scale Scores

by Race/Ethnicity

Grades 4, 8, and 12

Average Geography Scale Scores

by Gender

Grades 4, 8, and 12
1 8

Percentage

of Students

Average Geography Scale Scores

by Type of Location

Grades 4, 8, and 12

Average Geography Scale Scores

by Parents' Highest Level of Education

Grades 4, 8, and 12

Grade 4

Nation 100 206 (1.2)

Parents' Education Level

Graduated College 42 (1.0) 216 (1.6)

Some Education After High School 7 (0.4) 216 (2.5)

Graduated High School 12 (0.6) 197 (2.5)

Did Not Finish High School 4 (0.4) 186 (3.7)

I Don't Know 34 (0.9) 197 (1.4)

Grade 8

Nation 100 260 (0.7)

Parents' Education Level

Graduated College 42 (1.2) 272 (1.0)

Some Education After High School 19 (0.7) 265 (1.0)

Graduated High School 22 (0.9) 250 (1.2)

Did Not Finish High School 7 (0.5) 238 (1.7)

I Don't Know 10 (0.5) 234 (1.5)

Grade 12

Nation 100 285 (0.7)

Parents' Education Level

Graduated College 44 (1.2) 294 (0.9)

Some Education After High School 25 (0.7) 286 (1.0)

Graduated High School 22 (0.8) 274 (1.1)

Did Not Finish High School 7 (0.4) 263 (1.2)

I Don't Know 3 (0.2) 257 (2.8)

Differences between the groups may be partially explained by other factors not included in this table.

The standard errors of the estimated percentages and average scale scores appear in parenthesis. It can be

said with 95-percent certainty that, for each population of interest, the value for the whole population is

within plus or minus two standard errors of the estimate for the sample.

Percentages of students in the subgroups may not total 100 due to rounding.

SOURCE: National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 1994

Geography Assessment.

Parents’ Highest Level of Education. Students were

asked to report on the education level of their parents or

guardians: did not finish high school, graduated

from high school, has some education after high

school, or graduated from college. (Those who did

not have this information chose the response option

“I don’t know.”) The level of parents’ education

discussed in this section is the highest level reported

by students for either parent.

Before reviewing the findings for parental

education, it should be noted that approximately one in

three fourth graders and one in ten eighth graders

reported not knowing the highest level of education

attained by either of their parents. Furthermore,

research has questioned the accuracy of student

reported data among similar groups of students.1

These caveats notwithstanding, the NAEP geography

results indicate a strong positive relationship between

parental education and student achievement. The results

(summarized in Table 2.5) show that, as a general rule,

groups of students reporting given levels of parental

education had higher average scores than all groups

reporting lower levels of education. The only exception

to this pattern occurred at grade 4. There was no

significant difference in performance between fourth

graders who reported that a parent had completed

college and those who reported that a parent had

completed some education after high school.

Type of Location. Each participating school in the

NAEP 1994 geography assessment was classified

according to its geographic location. The three types of

location — central city, urban fringe/large town, and

rural/small town — are based on U.S. Bureau of the

Census definitions of standard metropolitan statistical

areas, population size, and density. These categories

indicate the geographic location of the students’ school

and are not intended to indicate or imply social or

economic meanings for these location types. (The type

of location classifications are described in Appendix A.)

Table 2.6 presents results for students attending schools

in each type of location.

Average

Scale Score

Percentage

of Students

TABLE 2.5 CARD

REPORT

THE NA ION’S T

1994
 Geography Assessment

Average

Scale Score

TABLE 2.6 CARD

REPORT

THE NA ION’S T

1994
 Geography Assessment

Grade 4

Nation 100 206 (1.2)

Type of Location

Central City 35 (2.1) 196 (2.2)

Urban Fringe/Large Town 43 (2.4) 213 (1.9)

Rural/Small Town 22 (2.2) 207 (2.4)

Grade 8

Nation 100 260 (0.7)

Type of Location

Central City 36 (2.4) 255 (1.6)

Urban Fringe/Large Town 38 (2.9) 264 (1.3)

Rural/Small Town 26 (1.9) 261 (1.9)

Grade 12

Nation 100 285 (0.7)

Type of Location

Central City 31 (2.3) 282 (1.4)

Urban Fringe/Large Town 42 (2.8) 288 (1.4)

Rural/Small Town 26 (1.9) 282 (1.1)

Differences between the groups may be partially explained by other factors not included in this table.

The standard errors of the estimated percentages and average scale scores appear in parenthesis. It can be

said with 95-percent certainty that, for each population of interest, the value for the whole population is

within plus or minus two standard errors of the estimate for the sample.

Percentages of students in the subgroups may not total 100 due to rounding.

SOURCE: National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 1994

Geography Assessment.
1 9

TABLE 2.8 Average Geography Scale Scores

by Type of School

Grades 4, 8, and 12

Percentage

of Students

The percentage of students receiving Title I services

was larger at grade 4 (13 percent) than at grade 8

(7 percent). At grades 4 and 8, the average geography score

for recipients of Title I programs was significantly lower

than the average score for nonrecipients. (Differences

for twelfth graders are not discussed here because the

nature of the grade 12 sample does not allow for

accurate estimation of the variability of the percentage

and average scale score for Title I recipients.)

Type of School. The national assessment collects data

on students attending both public and nonpublic

schools. Nonpublic schools include Catholic, other

religious, and private institutions. As shown in Table

2.8, students in nonpublic schools outperformed

students in public schools at all three grades.

As noted in Chapter 1, the reader is cautioned

against using these results to make simplistic inferences

about the relative effectiveness of public and nonpublic

schools. Average performance differences between the

two types of schools may, in part, be related to socioecoThe relationship between this variable and

performance differs somewhat across the three grades.

At grades 4 and 8, students attending schools in central

city locations had significantly lower average scores

than did students in other types of locations. At grade

12, students attending schools in urban fringe/large

town locations performed at a significantly higher level

than those attending schools in other locations.

Title I Participation. Staff members at each school that

took part in the NAEP 1994 geography assessment were

asked to identify which of the students participated in Title I

programs or received services funded by Title I grants.2

The Title I legislation provides funds to state and local

educational agencies to support mathematics and

reading programs and initiatives aimed at assisting

disadvantaged students (those who are failing or are at

risk of failing) in low-income communities.

Table 2.7 presents the results for students who

received Title I services and for those who did not. As

stated earlier, differences in performance between these

recipients and nonrecipients should not be viewed as an

evaluation of Title I programs. Typically, Title I services

are intended for students who score poorly on

assessments.

Average

Scale Score

TABLE 2.7 CARD

REPORT

THE NA ION’S T

1994
 Geography Assessment

Grade 4

Nation 100 206 (1.2)

Title I Participation

Yes 13 (1.3) 162 (2.8)

No 87 (1.3) 212 (1.4)

Grade 8

Nation 100 260 (0.7)

Title I Participation

Yes 7 (1.0) 230 (3.0)

No 93 (1.0) 262 (0.8)

Grade 12

Nation 100 285 (0.7)

Title I Participation

Yes 2 (0.5) ! 251 (2.1) !

No 98 (0.5) 285 (0.7)

Differences between the groups may be partially explained by other factors not included in this table.

The standard errors of the estimated percentages and average scale scores appear in parenthesis. It can be

said with 95-percent certainty that, for each population of interest, the value for the whole population is

within plus or minus two standard errors of the estimate for the sample.

! Interpret with caution any comparisons involving this statistic. The nature of the sample does not allow for

accurate determination of the variability of this value.

SOURCE: National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 1994

Geography Assessment.

Average Geography Scale Scores

by Title I Participation

Grades 4, 8, and 12

Average

Scale Score

Percentage

of Students

CARD

REPORT

THE NA ION’S T

1994
 Geography Assessment

Grade 4

Nation 100 206 (1.2)

Type of School

Public Schools 90 (0.8) 204 (1.4)

Nonpublic Schools 10 (0.8) 221 (2.2)

Catholic Schools 6 (0.7) 222 (2.6)

Other Nonpublic Schools 4 (0.5) 220 (3.8)

Grade 8

Nation 100 260 (0.7)

Type of School

Public Schools 90 (0.8) 258 (0.8)

Nonpublic Schools 10 (0.8) 276 (1.3)

Catholic Schools 6 (0.6) 276 (1.6)

Other Nonpublic Schools 4 (0.6) 276 (2.6)

Grade 12

Nation 100 285 (0.7)

Type of School

Public Schools 89 (1.0) 283 (0.8)

Nonpublic Schools 11 (1.0) 294 (1.6)

Catholic Schools 6 (0.9) 291 (3.0)

Other Nonpublic Schools 4 (0.6) 298 (2.0)

Differences between the groups may be partially explained by other factors not included in this table.

The standard errors of the estimated percentages and average scale scores appear in parenthesis. It can be

said with 95-percent certainty that, for each population of interest, the value for the whole population is

within plus or minus two standard errors of the estimate for the sample.

Percentages for students in the two types of nonpublic schools may not total the percentage in nonpublic

schools only due to rounding.

SOURCE: National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 1994

Geography Assessment.
2 0

Grade 4

Male 208 (1.4) 222 (1.7) 166 (3.0) 184 (3.5)

Female 203 (1.4) 214 (1.8) 169 (2.9) 183 (2.5)

Male - Female = 5 (2.0) * 8 (2.5) * –4 (4.2) 1 (4.3)

Grade 8

Male 262 (0.9) 272 (1.1) 232 (2.1) 239 (2.1)

Female 258 (0.8) 268 (0.8) 227 (1.8) 239 (2.6)

Male - Female = 4 (1.2) * 4 (1.4) * 4 (2.7) 0 (3.3)

Grade 12

Male 288 (0.8) 294 (0.9) 263 (1.8) 271 (2.1)

Female 281 (0.9) 288 (1.0) 254 (1.7) 264 (1.9)

Male - Female = 7 (1.2) * 6 (1.3) * 9 (2.4) * 6 (2.8) *

Differences between the groups may be partially explained by other factors not included in this table.

The standard errors of the estimated scale scores appear in parenthesis. It can be said with 95-percent certainty that, for each population of interest, the value for the whole population is within plus or minus two standard errors of the

estimate for the sample.

Differences were calculated prior to rounding.

* Indicates either an overall significant difference, or a significant difference between male and female students by racial/ethnic subgroups.

SOURCE: National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 1994 Geography Assessment.

nomic and sociological factors, such as levels of parental

involvement in their child’s education. To get a clearer

picture of the differences between public and nonpublic

schools, more in-depth analyses must be undertaken.

An In-Depth Look at Selected

Background Characteristics

One way to take a closer look at the performance of

students within selected demographic populations is to see

if the magnitude of the differences among groups of

students varies when other background characteristics

are taken into account. This section presents NAEP

geography results for subgroups of students within

various demographic populations. Three specific

background characteristics are explored with these

analyses: gender, race/ethnicity, and parents’ highest

level of education. In addition, type of school (public

and nonpublic) results conditioned on parents’

education are examined.

Many factors can influence differences among

subgroups. While looking at some of the NAEP variables

concurrently yields interesting results, these results can

be due to a variety of circumstances that cannot be

controlled for in a large-scale assessment such as NAEP.

Gender and Race/Ethnicity. The first two student

characteristics examined are gender and race/ethnicity.

As mentioned earlier, at all three grades, male students

outperformed female students, and White students

displayed higher average scores than Black or Hispanic

students. (Asian, Pacific Islander, and American Indian

students are not included in this section because, for

the purposes of this analysis, their sample sizes are

insufficient.) One question that might be asked is

whether or not this pattern in male and female students’

scores holds regardless of race/ethnicity. Furthermore,

was the difference in performance between male and

female students larger in some racial/ethnic subgroups

than in others?

White Black

TABLE 2.9

CARD

REPORT

THE NA ION’S T

1994
 Geography Assessment

Overall Hispanic

Average Geography Scores of Male and Female Students

by Race/Ethnicity

Grades 4, 8, and 12
2 1

Grade 4

Male 208 (1.4) 187 (5.2) 196 (3.1) 217 (3.5) 219 (2.1)

Female 203 (1.4) 185 (5.0) 199 (3.9) 215 (3.4) 212 (1.8)

Male - Female = 5 (2.0) * 2 (7.2) –2 (5.0) 2 (4.8) 7 (2.7) *

Grade 8

Male 262 (0.9) 241 (3.0) 251 (1.6) 267 (1.6) 273 (1.4)

Female 258 (0.8) 236 (2.0) 249 (1.6) 263 (1.6) 271 (1.1)

Male - Female = 4 (1.2) * 4 (3.6) 2 (2.3) 4 (2.2) 2 (1.8)

Grade 12

Male 288 (0.8) 270 (2.1) 277 (1.4) 290 (1.4) 297 (1.1)

Female 281 (0.9) 257 (2.1) 270 (1.2) 283 (1.1) 291 (1.0)

Male - Female = 7 (1.2) * 13 (3.0) * 7 (1.8) * 7 (1.8) * 6 (1.5) *

Differences between the groups may be partially explained by other factors not included in this table.

The standard errors of the estimated scale scores appear in parenthesis. It can be said with 95-percent certainty that, for each population of interest, the value for the whole population is within plus or minus two standard errors of the

estimate for the sample.

Differences were calculated prior to rounding.

* Indicates either an overall significant difference, or a significant difference between male and female students by level of parents’ education.

SOURCE: National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 1994 Geography Assessment.

Average Geography Scores of Male and Female Students

in Relation to Parents' Highest Level of Education

Grades 4, 8, and 12

Table 2.9 presents results of analyses carried out to

answer these questions. Average scores of male and

female students and the differences between these

averages are presented separately for three racial/ethnic

subgroups. Overall, male students outperformed female

students across all three grades. However, when the

racial/ethnic subgroups are examined, the differences

for White students at grades 4 and 8, and all three racial/

ethnic groups at grade 12 were significant.

A comparison of the magnitude of the average score

differences between male and female students yielded

no evidence that these differences varied significantly

across racial/ethnic groups of students.

Gender and Parental Education. Table 2.10 presents an

analysis of gender differences in geography performance

relating to parents’ highest level of education. Average

scores of male and female students and the differences

TABLE 2.10

CARD

REPORT

THE NA ION’S T

1994
 Geography Assessment

Graduated

College

Some Education

After High School

Graduated

High School Overall Less than

High School

between these averages are presented separately for the

different levels of parental education reported by

students. One question that can be answered with these

data is whether or not differences in average geography

scores between male and female students were evident

for students at all levels of parental education.

Furthermore, were gender differences larger at some

parental education levels than at others?

Consistent with the overall gender results, average

scale scores at grade 12 were higher for males than for

females across all levels of parental education. Also, at

grade 4 for students reporting that at least one parent

graduated college, males outperformed females.

Again, a comparison of the magnitude of the average

score differences between male and female students

yielded no evidence that these differences varied significantly across parental education levels.
2 2

(Again, the reader is cautioned against drawing causal

inferences from these results.)

A comparison of the magnitude of the average

score differences between nonpublic and public school

students yielded little or no evidence that these

differences varied significantly across levels of

parental education.

Race/Ethnicity and Parental Education. Racial/ethnic

differences in twelfth-grade average geography scores

are presented in relation to parental education levels in

Table 2.12. The average scores of White, Black, and

Hispanic students and the differences between those

scores are presented separately for the different levels of

parents’ education reported by students.One question

that can be answered with these data is whether or not

the differences in average geography scores among

White, Black, and Hispanic students were evident for

students at all levels of parental education. In addition,

were the performance differences between racial/ethnic

groups larger at some parental education levels than at

others?

Type of School (Public and Nonpublic) and Parental

Education. As reported earlier in this chapter, at all

grades students attending nonpublic schools had significantly higher average scores than those attending public

schools. Was this difference in geography performance

between nonpublic and public schools evident at all levels

of parental education? Furthermore, was the difference

in performance larger for some levels of parental

education than for others?

Table 2.11 presents results of analyses carried out to

address these questions. One striking result presented in

Table 2.11 is that the sample sizes for students attending

nonpublic schools whose parents did not graduate high

school were too small to estimate an average score.

Therefore, discussions of public/nonpublic differences at

this level of parental education are not possible. As with

the overall results, students attending nonpublic schools

in each grade had higher average scores than their

public school counterparts across all levels of parental

education. All of these differences were significant, with

the exception of twelfth graders who reported that at

least one parent had some education after high school.

Less than

High School

TABLE 2.11

CARD

REPORT

THE NA ION’S T

1994
 Geography Assessment

Grade 4

Public 204 (1.4) 185 (3.8) 196 (2.7) 215 (2.8) 214 (1.8)

Nonpublic 221 (2.2) *** 215 (4.3) 226 (3.6) 228 (2.6)

Public - Nonpublic = –17 (2.6) * *** –18 (5.1) * –11 (4.6) * –13 (3.2) *

Grade 8

Public 258 (0.8) 237 (1.8) 249 (1.3) 264 (1.1) 271 (1.1)

Nonpublic 276 (1.3) *** 264 (2.9) 276 (1.7) 281 (1.5)

Public - Nonpublic = –18 (1.6) * *** –15 (3.2) * –12 (2.0) * –10 (1.9) *

Grade 12

Public 283 (0.8) 262 (1.2) 273 (1.2) 286 (1.1) 293 (1.0)

Nonpublic 294 (1.6) *** 280 (2.8) 289 (2.2) 301 (1.3)

Public - Nonpublic = –11 (1.8) * *** –7 (3.1) * –4 (2.4) –7 (1.6) *

Differences between the groups may be partially explained by other factors not included in this table.

The standard errors of the estimated scale scores appear in parenthesis. It can be said with 95-percent certainty that, for each population of interest, the value for the whole population is within plus or minus two standard errors of the

estimate for the sample.

Differences were calculated prior to rounding.

* Indicates either an overall significant difference, or a significant difference between students attending public and nonpublic schools by level of parents’ education.

*** Sample size insufficient to permit a reliable estimate (see Appendix A).

SOURCE: National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 1994 Geography Assessment.

Graduated

College

Some Education

After High School

Graduated

After High School Overall

Average Geography Scores of Students Attending Public and Nonpublic Schools

in Relation to Parents' Highest Level of Education

Grades 4, 8, and 12
2 3

Grade 12

White 291 (0.8) 270 (2.1) 279 (1.1) 291 (1.1) 299 (0.9)

Black 258 (1.4) 244 (3.4) 251 (2.2) 266 (1.9) 264 (2.0)

Hispanic 268 (1.5) 259 (2.2) 265 (2.0) 277 (3.4) 278 (2.5)

White - Black = 33 (1.6) * 26 (4.0) * 28 (2.5) * 25 (2.2) * 36 (2.2) *

White - Hispanic = 23 (1.7) * 11 (3.0) * 15 (2.3) * 14 (3.5) * 21 (2.7) *

Black - Hispanic = –9 (2.1) * –16 (4.0) * –14 (3.0) * –11 (3.9) * –14 (3.2) *

Differences between the groups may be partially explained by other factors not included in this table.

The standard errors of the estimated scale scores appear in parenthesis. It can be said with 95-percent certainty that, for each population of interest, the value for the whole population is within plus or minus two standard errors of the

estimate for the sample.

Differences were calculated prior to rounding.

* Indicates either an overall significant difference, or a significant difference between racial/ethnic subgroups by level of parents’ education.

SOURCE: National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 1994 Geography Assessment.

across different levels of parental educational

attainment. These NAEP patterns run somewhat

counter to previous findings from other studies. The

National Education Longitudinal Study of 1988, with

more complete measures of socioeconomic status, found

substantial reductions in achievement differences

associated with racial/ethnic group membership after

accounting for family resources.3

 In addition, the

College Board has found that racial differences on the

Scholastic Aptitude Test are diminished somewhat when

family income differences are taken into account.4

 So,

the NAEP findings should be interpreted carefully in

relation to these other results.

In interpreting these findings, it is important to

understand that student achievement is a result of

multiple factors including educational experience,

resources from the home, and the larger social

environment. These factors may also differ depending

on the students’ racial/ethnic groups and thus

contribute — along with parents’ educational level — to

achievement differences. Such factors might contribute

to reasonable explanations for why parents’ educational

levels might be associated differently with student

achievement for different racial/ethnic groups.

At the twelfth grade, the average scores of White

students was significantly higher than that of Black or

Hispanic students across all levels of parental education.

In addition, Hispanic twelfth graders significantly

outperformed Black students at all levels of parental

education. (Data for fourth and eighth graders are not

presented in this tabulation because of wide variation

among racial/ethnic groups in the accuracy of reporting

parental education. For further details, see discussion in

Appendix A under “Parents’ Education Level.”)

A comparison of the magnitude of the score

differences among White, Black, and Hispanic students

yielded no evidence that these differences varied

significantly across levels of parental education, with

one exception. The magnitude of the difference in

geography scores between White and Black twelfth

graders whose parents had some education after high

school was less than the magnitude of the difference

between White and Black students whose parents were

college graduates.

The data in Table 2.12 show that the racial and

ethnic differences in average geography scores, as in

the other subjects assessed by NAEP in 1994, persist

TABLE 2.12

CARD

REPORT

THE NA ION’S T

1994
 Geography Assessment

Overall Graduated

College

Some Education

After High School

Graduated

High School

Less than

High School

Average Geography Scores of White, Black, and Hispanic Students

in Relation to Parents' Highest Level of Education

Grade 12
2 4

Endnotes

1. Looker, E. D. (1989). Accuracy of proxy reports of

parental status characteristics. Sociology of

Education, 62(4), 257-76.

2. As a result of the Elementary and Secondary

Education Act reauthorized by Congress in 1994, the

federal program formerly referred to as “Chapter

One” was renamed “Title I.”

3. Green, P. J., Dugone, B. L., Ingels, S. J., & Camburn, E.

(1995). A profile of the American high school senior

in 1992. Washington, DC: National Center for

Education Statistics, NCES 95-384.

4. College Entrance Examination Board and

Educational Testing Service (1995). College bound

seniors national profile report: SAT program test

takers 1995. Additional unpublished tables.

Summary

The NAEP geography assessment showed patterns of

performance among reporting subgroups, some of

whom consistently performed better than others. These

patterns of performance were also evident in interactions among those reporting variables.

© Among the different regions of the nation, students’

scores varied at each grade level. Grade 4 students

from the Central region, for example, outperformed

students from the other three regions.

© In general, the higher the level of parental education, the higher the level of student performance.

© White and Asian students at all three grades had

higher scores than did Black and Hispanic students.

Also, Hispanic students outperformed Black

students at all three grades.

© At all three grades, male students scored higher

than female students. At grade 12, these significant

differences persisted across racial/ethnic subgroups

and across all levels of parental education.

© Students in nonpublic schools outperformed public

school students. These differences were significant

regardless of parental education levels. The only

exception was at grade 12 for students reporting

parents had some education after high school.
2 5

CHAPTER 3 The student achievement levels in this report have

been developed and adopted by the National Assessment

Governing Board, NAEP’s independent policy-making

body, with contributions from a wide variety of

educators, business and government leaders, and

interested citizens. These levels of student achievement

have been established to help Americans answer two

questions that are important to parents and to all

citizens in the communities and nation in which we

live. These questions are: “What should students know

and be able to do as they progress and graduate from

school?” and “How good is good enough in terms of

student achievement on NAEP?” Answering these

questions obviously involves judgments. The National

Assessment Governing Board is not suggesting that

there is a single answer to these questions. Rather, the

Board is trying to put forward reasonable judgments

that can inform citizens across America — information

they can use to answer these questions in their own

schools and communities.

Developing carefully considered judgments about

“what students should know and should be able to do”

and “how good is good enough” is both difficult and

controversial. The Governing Board believes that these

questions are so important that answers must be sought

in an informed, responsible way. The process is subject

to revision and refinement, as appropriate.

The student achievement levels in this report approved

by the Governing Board are the result of many hours of

work. The levels are based on preliminary descriptions

developed as part of the national consensus process to

determine the assessment design and content. The

Board’s contractor, American College Testing (ACT),

which has extensive experience in standard-setting in

many fields, designed the achievement level-setting

process. This process was reviewed by scores of individuals, including policy-makers, professional organizations,

teachers, parents, and other members of the general

public. To develop the levels, ACT convened a crosssection of educators and interested citizens from across

the nation and asked them to recommend what students

should know and be able to do in geography. Prior to

adopting these levels of student achievement, the Board

engaged a large number of persons to comment on the

recommended levels and to review the results.

The result of the achievement level-setting process

is a set of achievement level descriptions, a set of

achievement level cutpoints on the 500-point NAEP

scale, and exemplar questions. The cutpoints are scores

that define the Basic, Proficient, and Advanced

achievement levels at grades 4, 8, and 12 on the NAEP

scale. At present, evaluations conducted in other NAEP

Geography Achievement Levels

Introduction

The average geography performance of our nation’s

students as presented in the previous chapter can be

explored further by considering the percentage of

students who attained specific levels of achievement.

Viewing students’ performance from this perspective

provides some insight into the adequacy of students’

geographic knowledge and skills and the extent to which

they are achieving expected levels of performance.

The National Education Statistics Act of 1994

requires that the National Assessment Governing Board

develop “appropriate student performance levels” for

reporting NAEP results. The NAEP law requires that

these levels be “used on a developmental basis until the

Commissioner of Education Statistics determines . . .

that such levels are reasonable, valid, and informative

to the public.” It requires the Commissioner and

the Board to make clear the developmental status of

such levels.
2 6

Figure 3.1 Geography Achievement Levels

GRADE 4

Basic Students should be able to use words or diagrams to define basic geographic vocabulary; identify personal behaviors and

(187) perspectives related to the environment and describe some environmental and cultural issues in their community; use visual

and technological tools to access information; identify major geographic features on maps and globes; be able to read and draw

simple maps, map keys and legends; demonstrate how people depend upon, use, and adapt to the environment; and give

examples of the movement of people, goods, services, and ideas from one place to another. In addition to demonstrating an

understanding of how individuals are alike and different, they should demonstrate a knowledge of the ways people depend on

each other.

Proficient Students should be able to use fundamental geographic knowledge and vocabulary to identify basic geographic patterns and

(240) processes; describe an environmental or cultural issue from more than one perspective; and read and interpret information

from visual and technological tools such as photographs, maps and globes, aerial photography, and satellite images. They

should be able to use number and letter grids to plot specific locations; understand relative location terms; and sketch simple

maps and describe and/or draw landscapes they have observed or studied. Proficient students should be able to illustrate how

people depend upon, adapt to, and modify the environment, describe and/or illustrate geographic aspects of a region using

fundamental geographic vocabulary and give reasons for current human migration; discuss the impact a location has upon

cultural similarities and differences; and be able to demonstrate how an event in one location can have an impact upon

another location.

Advanced Students should be able to use basic geographic knowledge and vocabulary to describe global patterns and processes; describe

(276) ways individuals can protect and enhance environmental quality; describe how modifications to the environment may have a

variety of consequences; explain differing perspectives that apply to local environmental or cultural issues; and demonstrate an

understanding of forces that result in migration, changing demographics, and boundary changes. They should be able to solve

simple problems by applying information learned through working with visual and technological tools such as aerial and other

photographs, maps and globes, atlases, news media, and computers. They should be able to construct models and sketch and

label maps of their own state, the United States, and the world; use them to describe and compare differences, similarities, and

patterns of change in landscapes; and be able to predict the impact a change in one location can have on another. They should

be able to analyze the ways individuals and groups interact.

subject areas on the level-setting process and critiques

of these evaluations have provided mixed reviews.

Therefore, both the Governing Board and the

Commissioner of Education Statistics regard the

achievement levels as developmental; they should not be

interpreted as statistically conclusive. Because these

levels are still considered developmental, the reader of

this report is advised to consider that status when

interpreting the results. The reader should recognize

that the results are based on the judgments, approved by

the Governing Board, of what advanced, proficient, and

basic students should know and be able to do in each

subject assessed, as well as on their judgments

regarding what percent of students at the borderline for

each level should answer each test question correctly.

The latter information is used in translating the

achievement level descriptions into cutpoints on the

NAEP scale. NCES uses these levels in reporting NAEP

results, but it does not currently adjudicate the reliability

or validity of these achievement levels. Rather they are

reported directly as adopted by the Governing Board.

The National Assessment Governing Board urges all

who are concerned about “what students should know

and be able to do” and “how good is good enough” to

read and interpret these performance levels recognizing

that this is a developing, judgmental process and is

subject to various interpretations. The decision to include

the levels in NAEP reports is an attempt to make the

assessment results more useful for parents, educators,

and policymakers by providing performance standards

against which to measure educational progress.

The three geography achievement levels — Basic,

Proficient, and Advanced — were established by the

National Assessment Governing Board for reporting

NAEP results. As described in Chapter 1, the Basic level

denotes partial mastery of prerequisite knowledge and

skills that are fundamental for proficient work at each

grade. The Proficient level represents solid academic

performance and demonstrated competence over

challenging subject matter. The Advanced level signifies superior performance. The geographic knowledge

and skills associated with each achievement level are

described in Figure 3.1.

The geography achievement levels attained by

fourth-, eighth-, and twelfth-grade students in the NAEP

assessment are presented in this chapter. Results are

displayed for the nation, regions of the country, and

major reporting subgroups. The cautions mentioned in

Chapter 2 also are warranted when interpreting differences

among subgroups.
2 7

Figure 3.1 Geography Achievement Levels (continued )

GRADE 8

Basic Students should possess fundamental knowledge and vocabulary of concepts relating to patterns, relationships, distance,

(242) direction, scale, boundary, site, and situation; solve fundamental locational questions using latitude and longitude; interpret

simple map scales; identify continents and their physical features, oceans, and various countries and cities; respond accurately

to descriptive questions using information obtained by use of visual and technological tools such as geographic models and/or

translate that information into words; explain differences between maps and globes; and find a wide range of information using

an atlas or almanac. Students should be able to recognize and illustrate the relationships that exist between humans and their

environments, and provide evidence showing how physical habitat can influence human activity. They should be able to define

a region and identify its distinguishing characteristics. Finally, they should be able to demonstrate how the interaction that

takes place between and among regions is related to the movement of people, goods, services, and ideas.

Proficient Students should possess a fundamental geographic vocabulary; understand geography’s analytical concepts; solve locational

(282) questions requiring integration of information from two or more sources, such as atlases or globes; compare information

presented at different scales; identify a wide variety of physical and cultural features and describe regional patterns. Students

should be able to respond accurately to interpretive questions using geography’s visual and technological tools and translate

that information into patterns; identify differences in map projections and select proper projections for various purposes; and

develop a case study working with geography’s analytical concepts. In addition, students should be able to describe the physical

and cultural characteristics of places; explain how places change due to human activity; explain and illustrate how the concept

of regions can be used as a strategy for organizing and understanding Earth’s surface. Students should be able to analyze and

interpret data bases and case studies as well as use information from maps to describe the role that regions play in influencing

trade and migration patterns and cultural and political interaction.

Advanced Students should have a command of extensive geographic knowledge, analytical concepts, and vocabulary; be able to analyze

(315) spatial phenomena using a variety of sources with information presented at a variety of scales and show relationships between

them; and use case studies for spatial analysis and to develop maps and other graphics. Students should be able to identify

patterns of climate, vegetation, and population across Earth’s surface and interpret relationships between and among these

patterns, and use one category of a map or aerial photograph to predict other features of a place such as vegetation based on

climate or population density based on topographic features. Students should also be able to relate the concept of region to

specific places and explain how regions change over time due to a variety of factors. They should be able to profile a region of

their own design using geographic concepts, tools, and skills.

GRADE 12

Basic Students should possess a knowledge of concepts and terms commonly used in physical and human geography as well as skills

(270) enabling them to employ applicable units of measurement and scale when solving simple locational problems using maps and

globes. They should be able to read maps; provide examples of plains, plateaus, hills, and mountains; and locate continents,

major bodies of water, and selected countries and cities. They should be able to interpret geographic data and use visual and

technological tools such as charts, tables, cartograms, and graphs; know the nature of and be able to identify several basic

types of map projections; understand the basic physical structure of the planet; explain and apply concepts such as continental

drift and plate tectonics; and describe geography’s analytical concepts using case studies. Students should have a comprehensive understanding of spatial relationships including the ability to recognize patterns that exist across Earth in terms of

phenomena, including climate regions, time zones, population distributions, availability of resources, vegetation zones, and

transportation and communication networks. They should be able to develop data bases about specific places and provide a

simple analysis about their importance.

Proficient Students should have an extensive understanding and knowledge of the concepts and terminology of physical and human

(305) geography. They should be able to use geographic concepts to analyze spatial phenomena and to discuss economic, political

and social factors that define and interpret space. They should be able to do this through the interpretation of maps and other

visual and technological tools, through the analysis of case studies, the utilization of data bases, and the selection of appropriate research materials. Students should be able to design their own maps based on descriptive data; describe the physical and

cultural attributes of major world regions; relate the spatial distribution of population to economic and environmental factors;

report both historical and contemporary events within a geographic framework using tools such as special purpose maps, and

primary and secondary source materials.

Advanced Students should possess a comprehensive understanding of geographic knowledge and concepts; apply this knowledge to

(339) case studies; formulate hypotheses and test geographic models that demonstrate complex relationships between physical

and human phenomena; apply a wide range of map skills; develop maps using fundamental cartographic principles including

translating narratives about places and events into graphic representations, and use other visual and technological tools to

perform locational analysis and interpret spatial relationships. Students should also be able to undertake sophisticated analysis

from aerial photographs or satellite imagery and other visuals. Advanced students should be able to develop criteria assessing

issues relating to human spatial organization and environmental stability and, through research skills and the application of

critical thinking strategies, identify alternative solutions. They should be able to compile data bases from disparate pieces of

information and from these data develop generalizations and speculations about outcomes when data change.
2 8

Grade 4

Nation 100 3 (0.4) 22 (1.2) 70 (1.1) 30 (1.1)

Region

Northeast 22 (0.8) 3 (0.8) 22 (2.5) 67 (2.7) 33 (2.7)

Southeast 23 (1.0) 2 (0.5) 17 (2.0) 64 (2.6) 36 (2.6)

Central 25 (0.8) 4 (1.3) 28 (3.3) 78 (2.6) 22 (2.6)

West 30 (0.7) 3 (0.6) 21 (1.7) 70 (1.7) 30 (1.7)

Grade 8

Nation 100 4 (0.4) 28 (1.0) 71 (1.0) 29 (1.0)

Region

Northeast 20 (0.8) 6 (1.0) 33 (2.0) 76 (2.2) 24 (2.2)

Southeast 25 (1.0) 3 (0.5) 21 (1.6) 62 (2.1) 38 (2.1)

Central 24 (0.6) 6 (0.9) 36 (2.1) 80 (1.7) 20 (1.7)

West 31 (0.7) 3 (0.7) 23 (2.0) 67 (2.4) 33 (2.4)

Grade 12

Nation 100 2 (0.5) 27 (1.2) 70 (0.9) 30 (0.9)

Region

Northeast 21 (0.5) 2 (0.6) 25 (2.1) 69 (2.3) 31 (2.3)

Southeast 23 (0.8) 1 (0.6) 20 (1.3) 60 (1.5) 40 (1.5)

Central 28 (0.7) 2 (1.0) 32 (2.9) 75 (2.1) 25 (2.1)

West 29 (0.7) 2 (0.7) 29 (2.6) 72 (2.1) 28 (2.1)

Differences between the groups may be partially explained by other factors not included in this table.

The standard errors of the estimated percentages appear in parenthesis. It can be said with 95-percent certainty that, for each population of interest, the value for the whole population is within plus or minus two standard errors of the

estimate for the sample.

Percentages of students in the subgroups may not total 100 due to rounding.

SOURCE: National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 1994 Geography Assessment.

Percentage of Students

Percentage At or Above At or Above

of Students At Advanced Proficient Basic Below Basic

Southeast. In addition, when compared with children from

the Southeast and Northeast, a higher percentage of

Central region students were able to reach the Basic

level. There were no significant regional differences in

attainment of the Advanced level.

At grade 8, a somewhat different pattern was evident.

The percentages of students in the Central and Northeast

regions who reached the Proficient and Basic levels

were higher than the percentages for the Southeast and

West. The percentage of students at the Advanced level

was higher in the Central region than in the Southeast.

A smaller percentage of high school seniors reached

the Basic level in the Southeast than in the rest of the

country. In addition, the percentage of students in the

Southeast who reached the Proficient level was lower

than the percentages in the Central or West regions. At

grade 12, there were no statistically significant regional

differences in the attainment of the Advanced level.

Geography Achievement Levels

for the Nation and Regions

Table 3.1 shows the percentages of fourth-, eighth-, and

twelfth-grade students at or above the three geography

achievement levels. At all three grades, roughly 70 percent

of students scored at or above the Basic level. Roughly

one-quarter of the students at each grade were able to

reach the Proficient level. Few students at any grade were

at the Advanced level: 3 percent at the fourth grade,

4 percent at the eighth grade, and 2 percent at the

twelfth grade. (Note that the percentage of students below

Basic is 100 percent minus the percentage at or above

Basic.)

There were several differences in regional performance

on the geography assessment. At grade 4, the percentage

of students in the Central region who reached the

Proficient level was higher than the percentage in the

TABLE 3.1 Geography Achievement Levels,

for the Nation and by Region

Grades 4, 8, and 12

CARD

REPORT

THE NA ION’S T

1994
 Geography Assessment
2 9

Geography Achievement Levels for

Major Reporting Subgroups

In this section, variations in performance among the

major reporting subgroups are discussed. Again, the

discussion is confined to those differences that were

statistically significant.

Grade 4

Nation 100 3 (0.4) 22 (1.2) 70 (1.1) 30 (1.1)

Race/Ethnicity

White 69 (0.2) 4 (0.6) 29 (1.6) 81 (1.3) 19 (1.3)

Black 15 (0.1) 0 (0.2) 3 (0.6) 34 (2.4) 66 (2.4)

Hispanic 12 (0.2) 1 (0.4) 10 (1.7) 49 (2.7) 51 (2.7)

Asian 2 (0.2) 5 (3.3) 32 (6.0) 79 (4.8) 21 (4.8)

Pacific Islander 1 (0.1) 1 (1.5) 17 (6.5) 70 (6.2) 30 (6.2)

American Indian 1 (0.2) 0 (1.5) 9 (3.9) 62 (5.7) 38 (5.7)

Grade 8

Nation 100 4 (0.4) 28 (1.0) 71 (1.0) 29 (1.0)

Race/Ethnicity

White 69 (0.2) 5 (0.5) 36 (1.3) 82 (0.9) 18 (0.9)

Black 15 (0.1) 0 (0.3) 5 (0.7) 34 (2.9) 66 (2.9)

Hispanic 11 (0.1) 1 (0.5) 10 (1.2) 50 (3.6) 50 (3.6)

Asian 2 (0.1) 8 (3.6) 40 (3.9) 79 (4.3) 21 (4.3)

Pacific Islander 1 (0.4) ! 3 (3.1) ! 15 (4.6) ! 63 (10.6) ! 37 (10.6) !

American Indian 2 (0.4) ! 2 (1.3) ! 15 (3.6) ! 59 (5.1) ! 41 (5.1) !

Grade 12

Nation 100 2 (0.5) 27 (1.2) 70 (0.9) 30 (0.9)

Race/Ethnicity

White 74 (0.3) 2 (0.6) 33 (1.5) 78 (0.9) 22 (0.9)

Black 12 (0.4) 0 (0.1) 5 (1.0) 32 (2.3) 68 (2.3)

Hispanic 8 (0.2) 0 (0.2) 10 (1.8) 48 (2.8) 52 (2.8)

Asian 3 (0.2) 3 (1.6) 32 (5.7) 69 (3.9) 31 (3.9)

Pacific Islander 1 (0.3) ! 1 (1.3) ! 19 (4.4) ! 69 (5.1) ! 31 (5.1) !

American Indian 1 (0.2) ! *** *** *** ***

Differences between the groups may be partially explained by other factors not included in this table.

The standard errors of the estimated percentages appear in parenthesis. It can be said with 95-percent certainty that, for each population of interest, the value for the whole population is within plus or minus two standard errors of the

estimate for the sample.

Percentages of students in the subgroups may not total 100 due to rounding or, in the case of the race/ethnicity variable, because some students categorized themselves as “other.”

The estimates of population percentages reported as zero (and standard errors reported as 0.0) are actually nonzero, but rounded to zero when reporting to the nearest integer (or nearest tenth in the case of the standard errors).

! Interpret with caution any comparisons involving this statistic. The nature of the sample does not allow for accurate determination of the variability of this value.

*** Sample size insufficient to permit a reliable estimate (see Appendix A).

SOURCE: National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 1994 Geography Assessment.

Percentage of Students

Percentage At or Above At or Above

of Students At Advanced Proficient Basic Below Basic

CARD

REPORT

THE NA ION’S T

1994
 Geography Assessment

Geography Achievement Levels

by Race/Ethnicity

Grades 4, 8, and 12

TABLE 3.2

Race/Ethnicity. Table 3.2 presents achievement level

results for students in six racial/ethnic groups. Consistent with past assessments, results from the NAEP 1994

geography assessment indicated differences in performance among racial/ethnic subgroups. Significant

differences among racial/ethnic groups were observed in

the percentages of students at or above each of the three

achievement levels: Basic, Proficient, and Advanced.
3 0

At grade 4, the percentages of White students who

attained each of the three achievement levels were

higher than the percentages for Black and Hispanic

students. Furthermore, higher percentages of White

students reached the Basic and Proficient levels than did

American Indian students. Higher percentages of Asian

students than Black and Hispanic students reached the

Basic and Proficient levels. Also, the percentage of Asian

students at or above the Proficient level was higher than

that of American Indian students. The percentage of

Pacific Islander students who reached the Basic level

was higher than that of Black and Hispanic students.

The percentages of Hispanic and American Indian

students who reached the Basic level were higher than

the percentage of Black students. Finally, a higher

percentage of Hispanic students than Black students

reached the Proficient level.

At grade 8, the pattern shown at grade 4 was largely

repeated. However, the sample at grade 8 does not allow

for accurate determination of the standard errors

associated with the percentages for Pacific Islander and

American Indian students. Therefore, these groups

cannot be compared with other groups at this grade.

At grade 12, fewer significant differences existed

across the racial/ethnic subgroups than at the other

grades. For example, there were no significant

differences among racial/ethnic subgroups in the

percentages of students reaching the Advanced level.

The percentages of White and Asian students who

reached the Basic and Proficient levels were higher than

those for Black and Hispanic students. Finally, a lower

percentage of Black students than Hispanic students

reached the Basic level. As at grade 8, Pacific Islander

and American Indian students are not included in group

comparisons at grade 12 because of sample limitations.

When considering these data, readers should keep in

mind the cautions about interpreting group differences

discussed in Chapter 1. A further reason for caution is

that, while the percentages of White students scoring at the

Advanced level were larger (in a statistically significant

sense) than the percentages of Black or Hispanic

students at grades 4 and 8, the practical importance of

these differences may be limited by the small numbers

of students reaching the Advanced level.
3 1

Percentage of Students

Percentage At or Above At or Above

of Students At Advanced Proficient Basic Below Basic

Gender. Table 3.3 presents achievement level results for

male and female students. At grades 4 and 8, the

significant gender differences observed in average scale

scores were also observed in the percentages of students

reaching the Proficient and Advanced achievement

levels. For example, the percentages of male students at

or above the Proficient level (26 percent at grade 4 and

30 percent at grade 8) were significantly higher than the

percentages for female students (19 and 25 percent,

respectively).

At grade 12, the achievement level results also showed

a significant gender difference, with male students

outperforming their female peers. The percentages of

male twelfth graders at or above the Basic and Proficient

achievement levels were higher than the percentages of

female students. Nearly three-quarters (73 percent) of

male high school seniors reached the Basic level,

compared with two-thirds (67 percent) of female high

school seniors.

Grade 4

Nation 100 3 (0.4) 22 (1.2) 70 (1.1) 30 (1.1)

Gender

Male 51 (1.0) 4 (0.7) 26 (1.7) 71 (1.3) 29 (1.3)

Female 49 (1.0) 2 (0.5) 19 (1.3) 68 (1.4) 32 (1.4)

Grade 8

Nation 100 4 (0.4) 28 (1.0) 71 (1.0) 29 (1.0)

Gender

Male 51 (0.7) 5 (0.6) 30 (1.2) 72 (1.3) 28 (1.3)

Female 49 (0.7) 3 (0.4) 25 (1.1) 69 (1.1) 31 (1.1)

Grade 12

Nation 100 2 (0.5) 27 (1.2) 70 (0.9) 30 (0.9)

Gender

Male 50 (1.0) 2 (0.7) 32 (1.4) 73 (1.1) 27 (1.1)

Female 50 (1.0) 1 (0.4) 22 (1.4) 67 (1.2) 33 (1.2)

Differences between the groups may be partially explained by other factors not included in this table.

The standard errors of the estimated percentages appear in parenthesis. It can be said with 95-percent certainty that, for each population of interest, the value for the whole population is within plus or minus two standard errors of the

estimate for the sample.

SOURCE: National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 1994 Geography Assessment.

CARD

REPORT

THE NA ION’S T

1994
 Geography Assessment

Geography Achievement Levels

by Gender

Grades 4, 8, and 12

TABLE 3.3
3 2

Grade 4

Nation 100 3 (0.4) 22 (1.2) 70 (1.1) 30 (1.1)

Parents’ Education Level

Graduated College 42 (1.0) 5 (0.9) 31 (2.0) 78 (1.5) 22 (1.5)

Some Education After High School 7 (0.4) 3 (1.1) 30 (3.4) 80 (2.3) 20 (2.3)

Graduated High School 12 (0.6) 1 (0.6) 15 (2.1) 63 (2.9) 37 (2.9)

Did Not Finish High School 4 (0.4) 0 (0.0) 8 (3.3) 52 (5.2) 48 (5.2)

I Don’t Know 34 (0.9) 1 (0.4) 14 (1.1) 63 (1.4) 37 (1.4)

Grade 8

Nation 100 4 (0.4) 28 (1.0) 71 (1.0) 29 (1.0)

Parents’ Education Level

Graduated College 42 (1.2) 7 (0.7) 41 (1.4) 82 (1.2) 18 (1.2)

Some Education After High School 19 (0.7) 3 (0.8) 29 (2.3) 79 (1.3) 21 (1.3)

Graduated High School 22 (0.9) 1 (0.6) 15 (1.5) 62 (2.0) 38 (2.0)

Did Not Finish High School 7 (0.5) 1 (0.5) 8 (1.6) 47 (3.4) 53 (3.4)

I Don’t Know 10 (0.5) 1 (0.4) 8 (1.5) 44 (2.9) 56 (2.9)

Grade 12

Nation 100 2 (0.5) 27 (1.2) 70 (0.9) 30 (0.9)

Parents’ Education Level

Graduated College 44 (1.2) 3 (0.8) 40 (1.6) 81 (1.1) 19 (1.1)

Some Education After High School 25 (0.7) 1 (0.7) 24 (1.8) 75 (1.5) 25 (1.5)

Graduated High School 22 (0.8) 0 (0.3) 14 (1.6) 56 (2.0) 44 (2.0)

Did Not Finish High School 7 (0.4) 0 (0.0) 7 (2.0) 41 (2.9) 59 (2.9)

I Don’t Know 3 (0.2) 0 (0.0) 7 (1.6) 36 (4.4) 64 (4.4)

Differences between the groups may be partially explained by other factors not included in this table.

The standard errors of the estimated percentages appear in parenthesis. It can be said with 95-percent certainty that, for each population of interest, the value for the whole population is within plus or minus two standard errors of the

estimate for the sample.

Percentages of students in the subgroups may not total 100 due to rounding.

The estimates of population percentages reported as zero (and standard errors reported as 0.0) are actually nonzero, but rounded to zero when reporting to the nearest integer (or nearest tenth in the case of the standard errors).

SOURCE: National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 1994 Geography Assessment.

Parents’ Highest Level of Education. As shown in

Table 3.4, a positive relationship exists between level of

parents’ education and the percentages of students at

or above the three achievement levels. In general, the

higher the level of education reported, the higher the

percentages of students at each achievement level.

At all three grades, a higher percentage of students

who reported that at least one parent had graduated

from college reached the Advanced level than did those

reporting that at least one parent had graduated from

high school. In addition, at grade 8, a higher percentage

of students who reported that at least one parent had

TABLE 3.4

CARD

REPORT

THE NA ION’S T

1994
 Geography Assessment

Percentage of Students

Percentage At or Above At or Above

of Students At Advanced Proficient Basic Below Basic

Geography Achievement Levels

by Parents’ Highest Level of Education

Grades 4, 8, and 12
3 3

graduated from college reached the Advanced level

than did those reporting all other levels of parental

education.

At the Proficient and Basic levels, the patterns were

similar. At grade 4, higher percentages of students who

reported that at least one parent graduated from college

or had some education after high school reached the

Basic and Proficient levels than did those reporting

that their parents had a high school or lower level of

education. (At grade 4, the percentage of students

reaching the Proficient and Basic levels were not

significantly different for the groups of students

reporting the two higher education levels or for the

groups reporting the two lower education levels.)

At grades 8 and 12, higher percentages of students

reporting that their parents had achieved a given level of

education reached the Basic and Proficient achievement

levels than did those reporting lower levels of parental

education. For example, at grade 12, higher percentages

of students who reported that at least one parent graduated from college scored at or above the Basic and

Proficient levels than did students who reported that at

least one parent had some education after high school.

Higher percentages of the latter group scored at or

above the Basic and Proficient levels than did students

who reported at least one parent graduated from high

school; these students, in turn, showed higher

achievement than those who reported that neither

parent had finished high school. The exception to this

rule was at grade 8, where there were no significant

differences in the percentages of students at or above the

Basic level who reported that at least one parent graduated

from college and those who reported that at least one

parent had some education after high school.

One-third of fourth graders and one-tenth of eighth

graders did not know their parents’ level of education.

In addition, as noted previously, the accuracy of student

self-reported data may be open to some question. Nonetheless, the positive relationship between parental

education and achievement in geography remains striking.
3 4

Type of Location. Table 3.5 presents achievement level

results by type of location. Type of location categories

indicate the location of students’ schools and are not

intended to indicate or imply social and economic

meanings. (The type of location classifications are

described in Appendix A.)

At all three grades, no statistically significant

differences existed among percentages of students

attending schools in different types of location who

attained the Advanced level. At grades 4 and 8, higher

percentages of students attending schools in urban

fringe/large town locations than students in central city

Grade 4

Nation 100 3 (0.4) 22 (1.2) 70 (1.1) 30 (1.1)

Type of Location

Central City 35 (2.1) 2 (0.5) 18 (1.6) 61 (2.1) 39 (2.1)

Urban Fringe/Large Town 43 (2.4) 3 (0.8) 26 (2.0) 76 (1.7) 24 (1.7)

Rural/Small Town 22 (2.2) 3 (0.7) 21 (2.6) 71 (2.3) 29 (2.3)

Grade 8

Nation 100 4 (0.4) 28 (1.0) 71 (1.0) 29 (1.0)

Type of Location

Central City 36 (2.4) 4 (0.6) 24 (1.3) 64 (2.2) 36 (2.2)

Urban Fringe/Large Town 38 (2.9) 4 (0.6) 31 (1.5) 76 (1.6) 24 (1.6)

Rural/Small Town 26 (1.9) 4 (0.5) 28 (2.2) 73 (2.3) 27 (2.3)

Grade 12

Nation 100 2 (0.5) 27 (1.2) 70 (0.9) 30 (0.9)

Type of Location

Central City 31 (2.3) 2 (0.6) 25 (1.7) 66 (1.8) 34 (1.8)

Urban Fringe/Large Town 42 (2.8) 2 (0.8) 31 (2.2) 74 (1.5) 26 (1.5)

Rural/Small Town 26 (1.9) 1 (0.5) 22 (1.8) 68 (1.8) 32 (1.8)

Differences between the groups may be partially explained by other factors not included in this table.

The standard errors of the estimated percentages appear in parenthesis. It can be said with 95-percent certainty that, for each population of interest, the value for the whole population is within plus or minus two standard errors of the

estimate for the sample.

Percentages of students in the subgroups may not total 100 due to rounding.

SOURCE: National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 1994 Geography Assessment.

Geography Achievement Levels

by Type of Location

Grades 4, 8, and 12

TABLE 3.5

locations reached the Proficient level. At grades 4 and 8,

higher percentages of students attending schools in urban

fringe/large town and rural/small town locations than

students in central city locations reached the Basic level.

At grade 12, a higher percentage of students

attending schools in urban fringe/large town locations

than those in rural/small town locations reached the

Proficient level. Finally, the percentage of urban fringe/

large town students who reached the Basic level was

higher than the percentages of students in other types

of location.

Percentage of Students

Percentage At or Above At or Above

of Students At Advanced Proficient Basic Below Basic

CARD

REPORT

THE NA ION’S T

1994
 Geography Assessment
3 5

TABLE 3.6

Percentage of Students

Percentage At or Above At or Above

of Students At Advanced Proficient Basic Below Basic

Title I Participation. Table 3.6 provides achievement

level results by Title I status. Compared with their

counterparts who did not receive Title I services, lower

percentages of fourth-grade Title I recipients performed

at or above the Basic and Proficient achievement levels.

Significantly lower percentages of eighth-grade students

who received Title I services performed at or above each

of the achievement levels when compared with their

counterparts who did not receive Title I services. The

percentages of Title I students who performed below

Basic were 71 percent at grade 4 and 62 percent at grade

8. Conversely, between 24 and 27 percent of students

who did not receive Title I services performed below the

Basic level. Grade 12 differences are not discussed here

because the nature of the grade 12 sample does not

allow for accurate estimation of the variability of the

percentages for Title I recipients.

Grade 4

Nation 100 3 (0.4) 22 (1.2) 70 (1.1) 30 (1.1)

Title I Participation

Yes 13 (1.3) 0 (0.0) 2 (0.9) 29 (3.0) 71 (3.0)

No 87 (1.3) 3 (0.5) 25 (1.4) 76 (1.2) 24 (1.2)

Grade 8

Nation 100 4 (0.4) 28 (1.0) 71 (1.0) 29 (1.0)

Title I Participation

Yes 7 (1.0) 0 (0.6) 6 (1.8) 38 (4.3) 62 (4.3)

No 93 (1.0) 4 (0.4) 29 (1.0) 73 (1.0) 27 (1.0)

Grade 12

Nation 100 2 (0.5) 27 (1.2) 70 (0.9) 30 (0.9)

Title I Participation

Yes 2 (0.5) ! 0 (0.0) ! 3 (1.2) ! 24 (2.8) ! 76 (2.8) !

No 98 (0.5) 2 (0.5) 27 (1.2) 71 (0.9) 29 (0.9)

Differences between the groups may be partially explained by other factors not included in this table.

The standard errors of the estimated percentages appear in parenthesis. It can be said with 95-percent certainty that, for each population of interest, the value for the whole population is within plus or minus two standard errors of the

estimate for the sample.

The estimates of population percentages reported as zero (and standard errors reported as 0.0) are actually nonzero, but rounded to zero when reporting to the nearest integer (or nearest tenth in the case of the standard errors).

! Interpret with caution any comparisons involving this statistic. The nature of the sample does not allow for accurate determination of the variability of this value.

SOURCE: National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 1994 Geography Assessment.

Geography Achievement Levels

by Title I Participation

Grades 4, 8, and 12

CARD

REPORT

THE NA ION’S T

1994
 Geography Assessment
3 6

Type of School. Table 3.7 presents results for public and

nonpublic schools. At each grade, the percentages of

nonpublic school students who reached both the Basic

and Proficient levels were significantly higher than the

percentages of students attending public schools. At the

eighth grade, a higher percentage of nonpublic school

students reached the Advanced level.

As noted in Chapter 1, the reader is cautioned against

making causal inferences about the relative effectiveness

of public and nonpublic schools. Achievement level

differences between the two types of schools are, in part,

related to socioeconomic and sociological factors, such

as levels of parental involvement in their child’s education. To get a clearer picture of the differences between

public and nonpublic schools, more in-depth analyses

are required.

Geography Achievement Levels

by Type of School

Grades 4, 8, and 12

Grade 4

Nation 100 3 (0.4) 22 (1.2) 70 (1.1) 30 (1.1)

Type of School

Public Schools 90 (0.8) 3 (0.5) 21 (1.3) 68 (1.2) 32 (1.2)

All Nonpublic Schools 10 (0.8) 5 (1.2) 30 (2.5) 84 (2.2) 16 (2.2)

Catholic Schools 6 (0.7) 5 (1.9) 30 (3.0) 85 (2.8) 15 (2.8)

Other Nonpublic Schools 4 (0.5) 4 (1.2) 30 (4.1) 82 (3.5) 18 (3.5)

Grade 8

Nation 100 4 (0.4) 28 (1.0) 71 (1.0) 29 (1.0)

Type of School

Public Schools 90 (0.8) 4 (0.4) 26 (1.0) 69 (1.0) 31 (1.0)

All Nonpublic Schools 10 (0.8) 8 (1.4) 44 (2.2) 87 (1.7) 13 (1.7)

Catholic Schools 6 (0.6) 8 (1.6) 44 (2.6) 89 (1.8) 11 (1.8)

Other Nonpublic Schools 4 (0.6) 7 (2.0) 45 (4.8) 86 (3.2) 14 (3.2)

Grade 12

Nation 100 2 (0.5) 27 (1.2) 70 (0.9) 30 (0.9)

Type of School

Public Schools 89 (1.0) 1 (0.5) 26 (1.3) 68 (1.0) 32 (1.0)

All Nonpublic Schools 11 (1.0) 3 (0.7) 36 (2.3) 83 (2.2) 17 (2.2)

Catholic Schools 6 (0.9) 1 (0.5) 33 (3.8) 80 (3.9) 20 (3.9)

Other Nonpublic Schools 4 (0.6) 5 (1.5) 40 (3.1) 87 (2.4) 13 (2.4)

Differences between the groups may be partially explained by other factors not included in this table.

The standard errors of the estimated percentages appear in parenthesis. It can be said with 95-percent certainty that, for each population of interest, the value for the whole population is within plus or minus two standard errors of the

estimate for the sample.

Percentages for students in the two types of nonpublic schools may not total the percentage in nonpublic schools only due to rounding.

SOURCE: National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 1994 Geography Assessment.

CARD

REPORT

THE NA ION’S T

1994
 Geography Assessment

Percentage of Students

Percentage At or Above At or Above

of Students At Advanced Proficient Basic Below Basic

TABLE 3.7
3 7

Summary

For the most part, performances of reporting subgroups

reflected patterns of average scale scores noted in

Chapter 2 of this report.

© For the nation as a whole, approximately 70 percent

of students reached the Basic level, while approximately one-quarter reached the Proficient level.

© Higher percentages of White and Asian students

reached the Basic and Proficient levels than did

Black and Hispanic students, at all three grades.

© At grades 4, 8, and 12, the percentages of male

students who reached the Proficient level were

higher than those of female students.

© Generally, the higher the level of parental education,

the greater the percentages of students reaching a

given achievement level.

© Similarly, higher percentages of students attending

nonpublic schools at all three grades reached the

Basic and Proficient levels than did those attending

public schools. At grade 8, a higher percentage of

students attending nonpublic schools also reached

the Advanced level than did their peers who were

attending public schools.
3 8
3 9

CHAPTER 4

Contexts in Which Students

Learn Geography

Geography learning takes many forms. Teachers of

geography employ a variety of teaching strategies and

use different geography tools, such as maps, globes, and

computers, to enhance geography learning. Outside of

the classroom, exposure to different media and home

support for schooling can also promote a rich geography

education.1

Previous chapters in this report have examined what

students know and can do in geography. In this chapter,

some of the contexts in which geography learning takes

place are examined, to provide a background for understanding student performance.

The Extent of Students’ Social

Studies and Geography Instruction

As part of the NAEP 1994 geography assessment,

students were asked a series of questions concerning the

amount of geography instruction they had received. In

addition, information concerning social studies or

geography instruction was collected from the teachers

of fourth-grade students participating in the

assessment.2

 The results illustrate the nature of

geography instruction in the nation’s schools.

Social Studies and Geography Instruction at Grade 4.

The NAEP 1994 geography framework that served as

the blueprint for the assessment stated that most fourth

graders will receive some geography education as part of

their social studies classes, instead of specific classes in

geography. Approximately three-quarters (72 percent) of

fourth graders reported having a social studies class at

least three times a week. Only 6 percent reported never

or hardly ever having such classes. Table 4.1 shows the

percentages of students and average scale scores

according to the frequency with which students

reported taking social studies classes.

The frequency of social studies classes is positively

related to fourth graders’ performance on the NAEP

geography assessment. Students who reported having

social studies class every day or three to four times a

TABLE 4.1 CARD

REPORT

THE NA ION’S T

1994
 Geography Assessment

How Often Do You Usually Have

Social Studies Class in School?

Almost Every Day 45 (1.9) 208 (1.6)

3-4 Times a Week 27 (1.1) 213 (2.1)

1-2 Times a Week 17 (1.0) 201 (1.9)

Less Than 1 Time a Week 5 (0.4) 189 (4.7)

Never or Hardly Ever 6 (0.7) 186 (4.4)

Differences between the groups may be partially explained by other factors not included in this table.

The standard errors of the estimated percentages and average scale scores appear in parenthesis. It can be

said with 95-percent certainty that, for each population of interest, the value for the whole population is

within plus or minus two standard errors of the estimate for the sample.

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

1994 Geography Assessment.

Average

Scale Score

Students’ Reports on

Social Studies Course Taking

Grade 4

week had higher average scores than those who reported

having such classes less frequently or never. In addition,

students who reported having classes once or twice a

week outperformed those who reported never or hardly

ever taking a social studies class.

Teachers of fourth graders were asked how much

time they spent on geography in their social studies

classes. Table 4.2 shows that teachers of 39 percent of

fourth-grade students reported spending 60 minutes or

more per week on geography, while teachers of 44

percent of fourth graders reported spending 30 minutes or

less per week on geography. No significant differences in

average scores were evident among students from

classes with different amounts of time spent on geography.

Percentage

TABLE 4.2 CARD

REPORT

THE NA ION’S T

1994
 Geography Assessment

Teachers’ Reports on Time Spent

 Per Week in Social Studies Class

on Geography Teaching

Grade 4

Average

Scale Score

90 Minutes or More 22 (2.1) 209 (2.8)

60 Minutes 17 (2.0) 206 (3.0)

45 Minutes 17 (1.6) 208 (3.3)

30 Minutes or Less 44 (2.6) 206 (1.9)

Differences between the groups may be partially explained by other factors not included in this table.

The standard errors of the estimated percentages and average scale scores appear in parenthesis. It can be

said with 95-percent certainty that, for each population of interest, the value for the whole population is

within plus or minus two standard errors of the estimate for the sample.

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

1994 Geography Assessment.

Percentage of

Students
4 0

Average

Scale Score

Grade 8

Currently Taking

a Geography Course

Yes 53 (1.1) 263 (0.8)

No 29 (1.0) 264 (1.2)

I don't know 18 (0.7) 247 (1.3)

Has Taken at Least

One Geography Course

Since the 6th Grade

Yes 69 (1.1) 266 (0.7)

No 18 (1.0) 250 (1.6)

I don't know 13 (0.6) 243 (1.5)

Taken an

Earth Science Course

Yes 73 (2.0) 263 (0.8)

No 27 (2.0) 252 (1.5)

Grade 12

Currently Taking

a Geography Course

Yes 15 (0.7) 277 (1.5)

No 79 (0.8) 288 (0.8)

I don't know 6 (0.4) 271 (1.9)

Has Taken at Least One

Geography Course

Since the 9th Grade

Yes 66 (1.7) 285 (0.8)

No 31 (1.6) 286 (1.4)

I don't know 3 (0.4) 268 (2.1)

Taken a Course in

World Geography

Yes 62 (1.7) 287 (0.9)

No 38 (1.7) 282 (1.3)

Taken a Course in

U.S. Geography

Yes 46 (1.2) 285 (1.0)

No 54 (1.2) 285 (0.9)

Differences between the groups may be partially explained by other factors not included in this table.

The standard errors of the estimated percentages and average scale scores appear in parenthesis. It can be

said with 95-percent certainty that, for each population of interest, the value for the whole population is

within plus or minus two standard errors of the estimate for the sample.

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

1994 Geography Assessment.

Examined together, the results of the NAEP

questions concerning fourth-grade students’ in-school

exposure to geography indicated:

© The majority of fourth graders reported taking

social studies classes.

© Frequent social studies classes are positively related

to scores on the NAEP geography assessment,

although teachers of 44 percent of fourth graders

reported spending 30 minutes or less per week on

geography.

Geography Course Taking at Grades 8 and 12. Eighth

and twelfth graders were asked whether they had

previously taken or were currently taking a geography

course. In addition, eighth graders were asked whether

they had taken an earth science course, and twelfth

graders whether they had taken courses in world

geography and United States geography.

Table 4.3 presents the results of these questions.

Fifty-three percent of eighth graders indicated that

they were currently taking a geography course, and

69 percent indicated that they had taken at least one

geography course since the sixth grade. Seventy-three

percent of eighth graders also reported that they had

taken an earth science course.

The relationship between course taking and

geography performance at grade 8 indicates that

students who reported taking at least one geography

course scored significantly higher than students who

reported not taking any geography courses. (Thirteen

percent of eighth graders reported not knowing whether

they had taken a geography course in the past.)

Furthermore, students who reported taking an earth

science course (which covers content similar to physical

geography) outperformed students who reported that

they had not taken such a course. (There was no

significant difference between eighth graders who reported

they were currently taking a geography course and those

who were not.)

The majority of twelfth graders (79 percent) reported

that they were not currently taking a geography course.

These students, on average, outperformed the 15 percent of

the twelfth graders who reported they were currently

enrolled in a geography course. (Again, some twelfth

graders reported not knowing whether they were currently

taking a geography course.) At the twelfth grade, the 66

percent of students who reported taking at least one

geography course since the ninth grade did not differ

significantly in performance from the 31 percent who

reported not taking geography.

TABLE 4.3 CARD

REPORT

THE NA ION’S T

1994
 Geography Assessment

Students’ Reports on Geography

Course Taking

Grades 8 and 12

Percentage
4 1

Percentage

One explanation for this the significant difference

between those who are currently enrolled in a geography course and those who are not is that students

enrolled in a geography course in the twelfth grade are

not following course-taking patterns typical of most of

their peers. This difference in course-taking patterns

may indicate other academic differences between the

two groups. However, twelfth graders who reported

taking a course in world geography outperformed those

students who had not. There were no significant differences between students who reported taking a course in

United States geography and those who had not.

Perhaps more consistent with the grade 12

performance for students who reported taking world

geography, Table 4.4 shows that a positive relationship

exists between the numbers of semesters of potential

geography-related course work completed by twelfth

graders and their average scale scores. The results show

that as the number of semesters of geography-related

course work increases, average scale scores also

increase.

Geography Course Taking Within Subgroups at

Grades 8 and 12. Chapter 2 discussed significant

differences at grades 8 and 12 among various subgroups,

including males and females, racial/ethnic groups, and

students attending public and nonpublic schools. One

possible explanation for such differences could be

variations in course-taking patterns that are measures

of exposure to geography instruction. Tables 4.5 and 4.6

present results for selected course-taking variables.

At grade 8, no significant differences in course

taking were observed between male and female students.

The percentage of White students who reported taking

at least one geography course since the sixth grade was

significantly higher than the percentages for Black and

Hispanic students (see Table 4.5). Also, the percentages

of students attending nonpublic schools who reported

taking at least one geography course and who reported

taking an earth science course were greater than the

percentages of their peers attending public schools.

CARD

REPORT

THE NA ION’S T

1994
 Geography Assessment

Percentage of Students Who Reported Taking . . .

At Least One Geography

Course Since the 6th Grade An Earth Science Course

Gender

Male 68 (1.2) 73 (2.2)

Female 70 (1.4) 73 (2.1)

Race/Ethnicity

White 72 (1.4) 75 (2.4)

Black 63 (2.0) 70 (2.6)

Hispanic 60 (3.3) 67 (2.5)

Asian 73 (5.1) 74 (4.8)

Pacific Islander 68 (3.4) ! 72 (6.1) !

American Indian 67 (3.4) ! 78 (4.1) !

Type of School

Public 69 (1.2) 72 (2.3)

Nonpublic 76 (2.1) 80 (2.2)

Differences between the groups may be partially explained by other factors not included in this table.

The standard errors of the estimated percentages appear in parenthesis. It can be said with 95-percent

certainty that, for each population of interest, the value for the whole population is within plus or minus two

standard errors of the estimate for the sample.

! Interpret with caution any comparisons involving this statistic. The nature of the sample does not allow for

accurate determination of the variability of this value.

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

1994 Geography Assessment.

Students’ Reports on Geography

Course Taking for Selected Subgroups

Grade 8

TABLE 4.5

TABLE 4.4 CARD

REPORT

THE NA ION’S T

1994
 Geography Assessment

Average

Scale Score

Students’ Reports on Number

of Semesters of History, Geography,

or Social Studies Taken

Grade 12

None 1 (0.1) ***

1 or 2 7 (0.6) 264 (1.7)

3 or 4 29 (1.1) 275 (1.2)

5 or 6 30 (1.2) 294 (1.1)

7 or More 34 (1.9) 298 (1.1)

Differences between the groups may be partially explained by other factors not included in this table.

The standard errors of the estimated percentages and average scale scores appear in parenthesis. It can be

said with 95-percent certainty that, for each population of interest, the value for the whole population is

within plus or minus two standard errors of the estimate for the sample.

Percentages of students in the subgroups may not total 100 due to rounding.

*** Sample size insufficient to permit a reliable estimate (see Appendix A).

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

1994 Geography Assessment.

Number of Semesters
4 2

Percentage of Students Who Reported Taking . . .

At Least One

Geography Course A Course in A Course in

Since 9th Grade World Geography U.S. Geography

Gender

Male 67 (1.7) 64 (1.7) 49 (1.2)

Female 64 (1.9) 60 (2.0) 42 (1.6)

Race/Ethnicity

White 66 (2.0) 64 (2.0) 47 (1.5)

Black 70 (2.6) 63 (2.8) 43 (2.1)

Hispanic 57 (3.2) 53 (2.7) 39 (2.7)

Asian 63 (4.0) 56 (4.1) 35 (4.7)

Pacific Islander 58 (4.5) ! 50 (5.1) ! 36 (4.8) !

American Indian *** *** ***

Type of School

Public 67 (1.8) 63 (1.8) 46 (1.3)

Nonpublic 58 (3.4) 59 (3.1) 47 (2.1)

Differences between the groups may be partially explained by other factors not included in this table.

The standard errors of the estimated percentages appear in parenthesis. It can be said with 95-percent

certainty that, for each population of interest, the value for the whole population is within plus or minus two

standard errors of the estimate for the sample.

! Interpret with caution any comparisons involving this statistic. The nature of the sample does not allow for

accurate determination of the variability of this value.

*** Sample size insufficient to permit a reliable estimate (see Appendix A).

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

1994 Geography Assessment.

At grade 12, the only significant difference between

male and female students was that more male students

than female students reported taking a United States

geography course. The percentage of Black students

who reported taking at least one geography course was

significantly higher than the percentage for Hispanic

students (see Table 4.6). Also, the percentage of White

students who reported taking a world geography course

was significantly higher than the percentage of Hispanic

students. The percentage of students attending public

schools who reported taking at least one geography

course in high school was larger than the percentage for

students attending nonpublic schools.

corresponding differences in course-taking behaviors

(e.g., gender differences at grades 8 and 12). Hence, the

reader is cautioned against making causal inferences in

regard to the relationship between course taking and

performance on the NAEP geography assessment.

Nevertheless, the breadth of the NAEP geography data

affords other researchers the opportunity to explore

these and other factors and their relationships to

geography achievement.

Teacher Background and Experience

Given the current interest (discussed in Chapter 1) in

making geography learning a substantive part of

educational curricula, it is useful to explore the

educational backgrounds and experiences that teachers

of students in grades 4 and 8 bring to their geography

lessons. As part of the NAEP assessment, teachers were

asked a series of questions about their educational

backgrounds. Teachers of assessed students in grades 4

and 8 were asked about their undergraduate and

graduate fields of study and about the kinds of

continuing education they had pursued. (Fourthand eighth-grade teachers were asked to indicate all

undergraduate and graduate majors that applied.

Therefore, some teachers indicated two or more majors,

so that the percentages in Tables 4.7 and 4.8 sum to

more than 100.)

CARD

REPORT

THE NA ION’S T

1994
 Geography Assessment

Grade 4 Grade 8

Percentage of Students Percentage of Students

Teachers’

Undergraduate Major

Geography 2 (0.5) 9 (1.5)

Education 80 (2.1) 46 (2.6)

History 10 (1.1) 47 (2.6)

Social Studies Education 8 (1.2) 42 (3.0)

Other 33 (2.4) 37 (3.2)

Differences between the groups may be partially explained by other factors not included in this table.

The standard errors of the estimated percentages and average scale scores appear in parenthesis. It can be

said with 95-percent certainty that, for each population of interest, the value for the whole population is

within plus or minus two standard errors of the estimate for the sample.

The percentages of students whose teachers reported particular undergraduate majors do not total 100 since

teachers were asked to indicate all appropriate majors. In addition, grade 4 teachers also were asked to

indicate English and Reading and/or Language Arts majors.

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

1994 Geography Assessment.

Teachers’ Reports on

Undergraduate Majors

Grades 4 and 8

TABLE 4.7

CARD

REPORT

THE NA ION’S T

1994
 Geography Assessment

Students’ Reports on Geography

Course Taking for Selected Subgroups

Grade 12

TABLE 4.6

Differences in course-taking behaviors is only

one possible explanation for differences in student

performance on the NAEP geography assessment.

Many other variables could explain the observed score

differences. Moreover, not all of the significant group

differences discussed in Chapter 2 were accompanied by
4 3

Similarly, at the graduate level (Table 4.8), teachers

of the majority (59 percent) of fourth graders reported

having a graduate degree in education, while few fourth

graders had teachers who reported having graduate

degrees in either geography, history, or social studies

education. Teachers of 47 percent of eighth-grade

students had degrees in education. Noticeably more

eighth graders had teachers who reported graduate

majors in history and/or social studies education. Again,

few students at either grade had teachers who reported a

graduate major in geography. (About 20 percent of both

fourth and eighth graders had teachers who reported

other graduate majors, and approximately another

20 percent reported no graduate study.)

Table 4.9 shows continuing education activities.

Results indicate that eighth graders had teachers who

attended somewhat more workshops or seminars than

did teachers of grade 4. At grade 4, teachers of

35 percent of students reported participating in no

continuing education activities in subjects related to

social studies, history, or geography compared with

18 percent at grade 8. Twenty-four percent of grade 4

students had teachers who reported spending at least

6 hours in workshops or seminars, compared with

54 percent at grade 8.

The results suggest that teachers of eighth graders

may have more subject-specific backgrounds, while

teachers of fourth graders are more likely to have

backgrounds specializing in education. It should be

noted that the organization of fourth- and eighth-grade

classes also differs. According to school administrators,

56 percent of fourth graders attend schools where the

fourth-grade classrooms are described as self-contained

(students have the same teacher for all academic

subjects). At grade 8, the majority of students

(85 percent) attend schools where the organization of

eighth-grade classes is described as departmentalized

(students having different teachers for most or all

academic subjects). The difference in classroom

organization may explain the differences in teachers’

educational backgrounds. Table 4.7 shows teachers of

most fourth-grade students (80 percent) reported

having majored in education at the undergraduate level,

while teachers of 46 percent of eighth graders reported a

major in education. However, teachers of approximately

half of eighth-grade students reported having an

undergraduate degree in either history or a social

studies education. Few students at either grade had

teachers who reported a major in geography (2 percent

at grade 4 and 9 percent at grade 8).

CARD

REPORT

THE NA ION’S T

1994
 Geography Assessment

Grade 4 Grade 8

Percentage of Students Percentage of Students

Amount of

Continuing Education

Reported by Teachers*

None 35 (2.4) 18 (2.6)

Less Than 6 Hours 41 (2.4) 29 (2.8)

6-15 Hours 16 (1.7) 28 (2.0)

16-35 Hours 4 (0.7) 15 (1.7)

More Than 35 Hours 4 (0.9) 11 (1.5)

Differences between the groups may be partially explained by other factors not included in this table.

The standard errors of the estimated percentages and average scale scores appear in parenthesis. It can be

said with 95-percent certainty that, for each population of interest, the value for the whole population is

within plus or minus two standard errors of the estimate for the sample.

*Total time spent in staff development workshops or seminars in social studies or the teaching of social

studies, U.S. history, or geography during the last year.

Percentage of students in the subgroups may not total 100 due to rounding.

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

1994 Geography Assessment.

Teachers’ Reports on

Continuing Education

Grades 4 and 8

TABLE 4.9 CARD

REPORT

THE NA ION’S T

1994
 Geography Assessment

Grade 4 Grade 8

Percentage of Students Percentage of Students

Teachers’ Graduate Major

Geography 1 (0.8) 4 (1.0)

Education 59 (2.5) 47 (2.5)

History 2 (0.7) 23 (2.1)

Social Studies Education 3 (1.1) 20 (2.5)

Other 19 (1.7) 23 (2.3)

No Graduate Study 22 (2.0) 18 (2.3)

Differences between the groups may be partially explained by other factors not included in this table.

The standard errors of the estimated percentages and average scale scores appear in parenthesis. It can be

said with 95-percent certainty that, for each population of interest, the value for the whole population is

within plus or minus two standard errors of the estimate for the sample.

The percentage of students whose teachers reported particular graduate majors do not total 100 since

teachers were asked to indicate all appropriate majors.

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

1994 Geography Assessment.

Teachers’ Reports on

Graduate Majors

Grades 4 and 8

TABLE 4.8
4 4

As presented in the following discussion, some

discrepancies exist between student- and teacherreported frequencies for some of the instructional

materials and practices examined. It is not possible to

offer conclusive reasons for these discrepancies or to

determine which report most accurately reflects fourthgrade classroom activities. The reports presented

represent students’ and teachers’ impressions of the

frequency of various activities in their classrooms.

Instructional materials and strategies may be

chosen for a variety of purposes. Consequently, the

relationships between frequency of use of various

materials and practices and scores on the NAEP

geography assessment cannot be interpreted in a causal

fashion. The design of the assessment does not allow for

the evaluation of the effectiveness of different strategies.

The initial ability of the students, the particular topics

being taught, and the complexity of the subject matter

all need to be controlled before cause-and-effect

statements can be made, and such experimental

methods were not possible in a large-scale assessment.

The Context for Learning Geography

at Grades 4 and 8

Activities in school, family support for students’

educational efforts, and student motivation create the

context in which academic learning takes place. Hence

this section contains contextual information related to

instructional activities in, home support for, and student

interest in geography learning. Because of the small

percentage of twelfth graders currently taking a

geography course (15 percent), grade 12 students’

reports of instructional activities related to geography

are not presented. (The small percentage of twelfth

graders who reported currently taking a geography

course may be due to school requirements for the

subject. Sixty-six percent of grade 12 students attended

schools that reported having no geography requirement

for graduation.3

) Teachers’ reports of instructional

activities for eighth graders are not presented because of

limitations of the data (see Endnote 2).

Instructional Materials and Practices

Teachers use a range of instructional materials and

practices in their classrooms. Studies have shown that

incorporating a variety of teaching methods and

materials can help engage students with different

learning styles.4

 Moreover, the many applications of

geographic knowledge, and the varieties of subject

matter included in geography learning, make the use of

different materials and teaching practices especially

important.5

 In addition to standard textbooks, teachers

may use maps and globes, special projects, and

computers as part of their instruction.
4 5

Grade 4 Grade 8

Percentage and Percentage and

Average Scale Score Average Scale Score

Almost Every Day 18 (0.9) 9 (0.6)

202 (2.1) 261 (1.7)

Once or Twice a Week 32 (0.8) 30 (0.9)

211 (1.5) 264 (1.1)

Once or Twice a Month 23 (0.8) 33 (0.9)

217 (1.7) 263 (1.1)

Never 27 (1.0) 28 (1.0)

201 (1.7) 253 (1.0)

Differences between the groups may be partially explained by other factors not included in this table.

The standard errors of the estimated percentages and average scale scores appear in parenthesis. It can be

said with 95-percent certainty that, for each population of interest, the value for the whole population is

within plus or minus two standard errors of the estimate for the sample.

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

1994 Geography Assessment.

As Table 4.11 shows, 50 percent of fourth graders

and 39 percent of eighth graders reported using maps

and globes at least once or twice a week. Twenty-seven

percent of fourth graders and 28 percent of eighth

graders reported never using maps and globes.

Students in grade 4 who reported using maps and

globes once or twice a month outperformed students

reporting use more frequently, and students reporting

use once or twice a week outperformed students

reporting use almost every day. Students reporting use

once or twice a week or once or twice a month outperformed students who reported never using maps

and globes at grade 4. Furthermore, at grade 8, students

who reported any use outperformed students reporting

no use.

CARD

REPORT

THE NA ION’S T

1994
 Geography Assessment

Students’ Reports on Use of

Maps and Globes

Grades 4 and 8

TABLE 4.11

The Use of Maps and Globes in Learning Geography.

Many of the geography skills that students are expected

to master involve the use of special tools and materials.6

Maps and globes are the primary tools of geography

because they assist in the visualization of space and can

be used to communicate complex social and physical

data.7

 As part of the NAEP 1994 geography assessment,

students in grades 4 and 8 and teachers of fourth-grade

students were asked about the frequency of using maps

and globes in school. Tables 4.10 and 4.11 present

teachers’ and students’ reports on the use of maps and

globes in geography instruction.

Table 4.10 shows that fourth-grade teachers

reported higher frequencies of use of maps and globes

than did their students. Teachers of 83 percent of fourth

graders reported use of these tools at least once or twice

a week. Teachers of only one percent of fourth graders

reported never using maps and globes in class. The

grade 4 students who had teachers reporting daily and

weekly use of maps and globes outperformed students

who had teachers reporting monthly use.

Teachers’ Reports on Use of

Maps and Globes

Grade 4

TABLE 4.10 CARD

REPORT

THE NA ION’S T

1994
 Geography Assessment

Grade 4

Percentage of Students Average Scale Score

Almost Every Day 29 (2.3) 210 (2.1)

Once or Twice a Week 54 (2.5) 209 (1.7)

Once or Twice a Month 17 (2.1) 199 (3.2)

Never 1 (0.3) ***

Differences between the groups may be partially explained by other factors not included in this table.

The standard errors of the estimated percentages and average scale scores appear in parenthesis. It can be

said with 95-percent certainty that, for each population of interest, the value for the whole population is

within plus or minus two standard errors of the estimate for the sample.

Percentages of students in the subgroups may not total 100 due to rounding.

*** Sample size insufficient to permit a reliable estimate (see Appendix A).

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

1994 Geography Assessment.
4 6

Often 8 (1.5) 214 (4.8)

Sometimes 74 (2.3) 206 (1.8)

Never 18 (2.2) 205 (2.4)

Differences between the groups may be partially explained by other factors not included in this table.

The standard errors of the estimated percentages and average scale scores appear in parenthesis. It can be

said with 95-percent certainty that, for each population of interest, the value for the whole population is

within plus or minus two standard errors of the estimate for the sample.

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

1994 Geography Assessment.

Grade 4 Grade 8

Percentage and Percentage and

Average Scale Score Average Scale Score

The Use of Projects in Learning Geography.

Geography projects can help students learn to acquire

information from primary and secondary sources and to

analyze, synthesize, and evaluate geographic information, all important skills discussed in the NAEP 1994

geography framework.

8

 Tables 4.12 and 4.13 show the

percentages and average scale scores for teachers’ and

students’ reports of doing projects related to geography

study. Table 4.12 shows that at the fourth grade, teacherreported frequencies of never using projects are relatively consistent with student-reported frequencies.

Teachers of 82 percent of fourth graders reported having

students do projects related to geography at least

sometimes. Teachers of 18 percent of fourth graders

reported never having students do such projects. There

were no significant differences in student performance

by frequency of using projects.

CARD

REPORT

THE NA ION’S T

1994
 Geography Assessment

Often 29 (1.1) 21 (0.8)

211 (1.7) 260 (1.1)

Sometimes 49 (0.9) 48 (0.8)

208 (1.6) 262 (0.9)

Never 23 (0.8) 31 (1.0)

198 (1.8) 257 (1.2)

Differences between the groups may be partially explained by other factors not included in this table.

The standard errors of the estimated percentages and average scale scores appear in parenthesis. It can be

said with 95-percent certainty that, for each population of interest, the value for the whole population is

within plus or minus two standard errors of the estimate for the sample.

Percentages of students in the subgroups may not total 100 due to rounding.

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

1994 Geography Assessment.

Students’ Reports on Doing

Geography Projects

Grades 4 and 8

TABLE 4.13

eighth-grade results presented in Table 4.13 are for all

eighth graders. Reports of geography-related projects by

students not currently enrolled in a geography class

may be associated with projects assigned in history or

social studies classes.) For those eighth-grade students

who reported they were currently taking a geography

course, the frequencies of doing geography-related

reports were similar to those reported by all eighth

graders (see Table 4.13). However, unlike the results for

all eighth graders that show some relationship between

doing geography reports and performance, no significant

differences were observed for the subset of students

currently taking a geography course.

Teachers’ Reports on

Use of Geography Projects

Grade 4

TABLE 4.12 CARD

REPORT

THE NA ION’S T

1994
 Geography Assessment

Grade 4

Percentage of Students Average Scale Score

CARD

REPORT

THE NA ION’S T

1994
 Geography Assessment

Grade 8

Percentage Average Scale Score

For Grade 8 Students Currently

Taking a Geography Course

Often 27 (1.1) 264 (1.2)

Sometimes 52 (1.0) 264 (1.1)

Never 21 (1.1) 260 (1.7)

Differences between the groups may be partially explained by other factors not included in this table.

The standard errors of the estimated percentages and average scale scores appear in parenthesis. It can be

said with 95-percent certainty that, for each population of interest, the value for the whole population is

within plus or minus two standard errors of the estimate for the sample.

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

1994 Geography Assessment.

Students’ Reports on Doing

Geography Projects for Students Currently

Enrolled in a Geography Course

Grade 8

As Table 4.13 indicates, 78 percent of fourth graders

and 69 percent of eight graders reported doing

geography projects at least sometimes. Twenty-three

percent of fourth graders and 31 percent of eighth

graders reported never doing such projects.

As with the use of maps and globes (see Table 4.11),

there was some relationship between students’ reports

of doing projects related to geography and geography

performance on the assessment. At grade 4, students

reporting doing such projects often or sometimes outperformed students who reported never doing such

projects; and at grade 8, students reporting doing projects

sometimes outperformed students who never did them.

When reported use of projects for the 53 percent of

eighth-graders currently enrolled in a geography course

is examined, the picture changes. Table 4.14 shows the

results for eighth graders’ reports of doing geography

projects only for those grade 8 students who reported

they were currently taking a geography class. (The

TABLE 4.14
4 7

As Table 4.16 indicate, about 30 percent of both

fourth- and eighth-grade students reported using

computers at least sometimes for geography study. More

than two-thirds of students at both grades reported not

using computers for geography: 68 percent at grade 4

and 70 percent at grade 8. Fourth-grade students

reporting using computers sometimes or never

outperformed students reporting using them often.

(Also, fourth graders who reported never using a

computer outperformed those who reported sometimes

using them.) There were no significant differences at

grade 8. Again, given the number of variables (such as

student ability levels and different uses of computers)

that the NAEP geography assessment cannot account

for, the reader is asked to avoid inferring simple causal

relationships from these results.

The Use of Computers in Learning Geography.

Computers can be an important classroom tool. In

geography learning, they have many uses, including

developing models of complex geographic relationships

and environmental and cultural processes.9

 Tables 4.15

and 4.16 present teachers’ and students’ reports on the

frequency of use of computers for studying geography.

Teacher-reported frequencies of computer use

were more or less consistent with student-reported

frequencies. Table 4.15 shows that teachers of 42 percent

of fourth graders reported using computers at least

sometimes. As with student-reported data, teachers of

the majority of fourth graders reported never using

computers in the teaching of geography.

There was a somewhat different relationship between

use of computers and student performance associated

with fourth-grade teachers’ reports than that associated

with student-reported data; grade 4 students who had

teachers reporting using computers sometimes outperformed students who had teachers reporting never

using computers. (Students whose teachers reported

using computers sometimes also outperformed those

whose teachers reported using computers often.)

CARD

REPORT

THE NA ION’S T

1994
 Geography Assessment

Grade 4 Grade 8

Percentage and Percentage and

Average Scale Score Average Scale Score

Students’ Reports on Use of

Computers for Geography

Grades 4 and 8

Often 6 (0.4) 4 (0.3)

186 (3.4) 256 (3.1)

Sometimes 26 (1.0) 26 (0.9)

198 (2.3) 262 (1.3)

Never 68 (1.1) 70 (1.1)

211 (1.2) 259 (0.8)

Differences between the groups may be partially explained by other factors not included in this table.

The standard errors of the estimated percentages and average scale scores appear in parenthesis. It can be

said with 95-percent certainty that, for each population of interest, the value for the whole population is

within plus or minus two standard errors of the estimate for the sample.

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

1994 Geography Assessment.

TABLE 4.16

Teachers’ Reports on

Use of Computers

Grade 4

TABLE 4.15 CARD

REPORT

THE NA ION’S T

1994
 Geography Assessment

Grade 4

Percentage of Students Average Scale Score

Often 3 (1.4) 194 (6.0)

Sometimes 39 (2.0) 212 (2.1)

Never 58 (2.1) 204 (1.6)

Differences between the groups may be partially explained by other factors not included in this table.

The standard errors of the estimated percentages and average scale scores appear in parenthesis. It can be

said with 95-percent certainty that, for each population of interest, the value for the whole population is

within plus or minus two standard errors of the estimate for the sample.

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

1994 Geography Assessment.
4 8

Grade 4 Grade 8

Percentage and Percentage and

Average Scale Score Average Scale Score

The Use of Films, Videos, or Filmstrips in Learning

Geography. Audiovisual material can communicate and

enhance many kinds of information important to the

study of geography. For example, major geographic

processes, such as ocean currents and vulcanism, can be

vividly illustrated with such materials, as can aspects of

life in different cultures and communities. Table 4.17

presents fourth-grade teachers’ reports about the

frequency of use of these materials for studying

geography, and Table 4.18 presents fourth- and eighthgrade students’ reports.

As Table 4.17 shows, teachers of most fourth graders

(79 percent) reported using films, videos, or filmstrips

at least sometimes. The average scale scores for students

whose teachers reported some use of these materials was

higher than that of students whose teachers reported never

using them.

Table 4.18 shows that 65 percent of fourth graders

and 69 percent of eighth graders who reported use of

audiovisual materials at least sometimes. Approximately

one-third of both fourth- and eighth-grade students

reported never using such materials, while teachers of

only 21 percent of fourth-grade students reported no use.

There was a positive relationship between average

scale scores and the use of films, videos, and filmstrips.

At both grades 4 and 8, students who reported that these

materials were used sometimes outperformed those

who reported that these materials were not used, and

at grade 8, students who reported that such materials

were used often also outperformed those reporting they

were not used.

CARD

REPORT

THE NA ION’S T

1994
 Geography Assessment

Students’ Reports on the Use of

Films, Videos, or Filmstrips

Grades 4 and 8

TABLE 4.18

CARD

REPORT

THE NA ION’S T

1994
 Geography Assessment

Grade 4

Percentage of Students Average Scale Score

Often 11 (1.6) 213 (3.5)

Sometimes 68 (1.8) 209 (1.8)

Never 21 (2.1) 198 (3.2)

Differences between the groups may be partially explained by other factors not included in this table.

The standard errors of the estimated percentages and average scale scores appear in parenthesis. It can be

said with 95-percent certainty that, for each population of interest, the value for the whole population is

within plus or minus two standard errors of the estimate for the sample.

SOURCE: National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 1994

Geography Assessment.

Teachers’ Reports on the Use of

Films, Videos, or Filmstrips

Grade 4

TABLE 4.17

Often 17 (0.8) 20 (1.0)

206 (1.8) 262 (1.3)

Sometimes 48 (1.0) 49 (1.0)

209 (1.7) 262 (0.8)

Never 35 (1.1) 31 (1.1)

203 (1.4) 255 (1.2)

Differences between the groups may be partially explained by other factors not included in this table.

The standard errors of the estimated percentages and average scale scores appear in parenthesis. It can be

said with 95-percent certainty that, for each population of interest, the value for the whole population is

within plus or minus two standard errors of the estimate for the sample.

SOURCE: National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 1994

Geography Assessment.
4 9

Don't Usually Have Any 13 (1.2) 7 (0.7) 14 (0.7)

211 (2.8) 249 (1.9) 270 (1.4)

Usually Don't Do It 4 (0.5) 8 (0.5) 9 (0.4)

182 (4.4) 243 (1.9) 281 (1.7)

1/2 Hour or Less 38 (1.2) 23 (0.8) 22 (0.6)

207 (1.4) 258 (1.4) 288 (0.7)

1 Hour 29 (0.9) 36 (0.8) 28 (0.7)

209 (1.7) 262 (0.9) 285 (1.1)

More Than 1 Hour 16 (0.8) 26 (1.1) 27 (0.8)

201 (1.9) 267 (1.1) 291 (1.3)

Differences between the groups may be partially explained by other factors not included in this table.

The standard errors of the estimated percentages and average scale scores appear in parenthesis. It can be said with 95-percent certainty that, for each population of interest, the value for the whole population is within plus or minus

two standard errors of the estimate for the sample.

SOURCE: National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 1994 Geography Assessment.

Grade 4 Grade 8 Grade 12

Percentage and Percentage and Percentage and

Average Scale Score Average Scale Score Average Scale Score

None 30 (1.3) 259 (1.4)

1/2 Hour 34 (1.2) 264 (1.3)

1 Hour 19 (0.8) 265 (1.3)

2 Hours 10 (0.6) 268 (2.0)

More Than 2 Hours 7 (0.6) 266 (2.7)

Differences between the groups may be partially explained by other factors not included in this table.

The standard errors of the estimated percentages and average scale scores appear in parenthesis. It can be

said with 95-percent certainty that, for each population of interest, the value for the whole population is

within plus or minus two standard errors of the estimate for the sample.

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

1994 Geography Assessment.

The Use of Homework in Learning Geography.

Teachers frequently reinforce the lessons taught in their

classrooms with homework. As part of the NAEP assessment, students at all three grades were asked to indicate

the amount of time they usually spend on homework

each day. This question was not restricted to social

studies or geography homework but referred to homework across all subject areas. Table 4.19 presents the

results for fourth, eighth, and twelfth graders. Overall,

a positive relationship existed between spending some

time on homework and average geography scale scores.

At all grades, between 7 and 14 percent of the

students indicated that they did not usually have any

homework assigned. For students who indicated that

they usually had homework assigned, those reporting

that they spent some time on homework significantly

outperformed those who reported they did not usually

do their homework. (At grade 12, the average scale

scores for student who usually don’t do homework and

those who spend an hour were not significantly

different.) At grade 4, the average score for students who

reported spending more than one hour on homework

each day was significantly less than that for those who

reported spending one hour. At grade 8, average scale

scores increased with each incremental increase in the

time spent on homework. At grade 12, the average scale

score for students who reported spending more than

one hour on homework each day was significantly

higher than that for students who reported spending

one hour.

Eighth graders were also asked about how much

geography homework they did each week. Table 4.20

presents the results for students who reported that

they were currently taking a geography class. Students

who reported spending 1 or 2 hours on geography

homework performed significantly better than those

reporting no time spent on geography homework.

TABLE 4.19 CARD

REPORT

THE NA ION’S T

1994
 Geography Assessment

Students’ Reports on

Time Spent on Homework Each Day

Grades 4, 8, and 12

TABLE 4.20 CARD

REPORT

THE NA ION’S T

1994
 Geography Assessment

Grade 8

Percentage Average Scale Score

For Grade 8 Students Currently

Taking a Geography Course

Students’ Reports on

Time Spent on

Geography Homework Each Week

Grade 8
5 0

Often 20 (0.7) 15 (0.6)

200 (1.9) 260 (1.4)

Sometimes 48 (0.9) 52 (0.8)

208 (1.4) 262 (0.9)

Never 33 (0.8) 32 (0.9)

208 (1.8) 257 (1.1)

Differences between the groups may be partially explained by other factors not included in this table.

The standard errors of the estimated percentages and average scale scores appear in parenthesis. It can be

said with 95-percent certainty that, for each population of interest, the value for the whole population is

within plus or minus two standard errors of the estimate for the sample.

Percentages of students in the subgroups may not total 100 due to rounding.

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

1994 Geography Assessment.

Grade 4 Grade 8

Percentage and Percentage and

Average Scale Score Average Scale Score

The Use of Newspapers, Magazines, or Journals in

Learning Geography. Articles in a range of periodicals

can supplement geography learning both inside and

outside the classroom.10 Students who indicated that

they do read such materials may be reading them both

in and out of school. In either case, for eighth-grade

students, there was a positive relationship between

reading these materials and geography performance.

Table 4.21 shows percentages of students reading

periodicals related to geography and their average

scale scores.

Approximately two-thirds of students at grades 4

and 8 reported reading such materials at least sometimes. At grade 8, students who reported reading these

materials sometimes outperformed students who

reported never reading them. However, at grade 4,

students who reported reading such periodicals sometimes or never outperformed those who reported

reading them more frequently.

Students’ Reports on Reading

Newspapers, Magazines,

or Journals Related to Geography

Grades 4 and 8

CARD

REPORT

THE NA ION’S T

1994
 Geography Assessment

TABLE 4.21
5 1

Grade 4 Grade 8 Grade 12

Percentage and Percentage and Percentage and

Average Scale Score Average Scale Score Average Scale Score

Students’ Home Support

The support students receive at home for learning is as

important in geography as it is for other subjects

surveyed in NAEP assessments. Variables related to

students’ home environment often show a strong

relationship to performance. The following section

presents information about home support for geography

learning.

Discussing Schoolwork at Home. A measure of the

importance of schoolwork for students and their

families is how often schoolwork is discussed at home.

When students discuss academic work at home, they

create an important link between home and school.

Recent studies have noted the positive relationship

between parental involvement in schooling and student

achievement.11 Supporting cooperation between parents

and schools is a major objective of many recent educational reform efforts, among them the National

Education Goals.

12

Students in the NAEP 1994 geography assessment

were asked how frequently they discussed their studies

at home. (This question was not restricted to discussing

social studies or geography studies at home but referred

to all subject areas.) Their responses are summarized

in Table 4.22. The majority of students across grades

reported discussing their studies at home at least

sometimes. Seventy-eight percent of fourth graders,

68 percent of eighth graders, and 62 percent of twelfth

graders reported discussing their studies at home at

least once or twice a week. However, approximately

one-fifth of fourth and eighth graders, and nearly onequarter of twelfth graders, reported never or hardly ever

discussing their studies at home.

At all three grades, students who reported never

or hardly ever discussing their studies at home were

outperformed by students who reported discussing

their studies on a regular basis. At grade 8, students

who reported daily discussions outperformed students

who reported discussions once or twice a week or

month, and students who reported discussions once or

twice a week outperformed those reporting discussions

once or twice a month. At grade 12, students who

reported daily or weekly discussions outperformed those

reporting discussions once or twice a month.

Almost Every Day 56 (0.8) 39 (0.9) 31 (0.8)

209 (1.4) 267 (0.9) 290 (1.0)

Once or Twice a Week 22 (0.6) 29 (0.7) 31 (0.7)

210 (1.6) 264 (1.2) 288 (0.9)

Once or Twice a Month 5 (0.4) 11 (0.5) 14 (0.6)

206 (3.2) 257 (2.3) 283 (1.3)

Never or Hardly Ever 17 (0.8) 21 (0.6) 24 (0.7)

191 (2.2) 251 (1.3) 277 (1.0)

Differences between the groups may be partially explained by other factors not included in this table.

The standard errors of the estimated percentages and average scale scores appear in parenthesis. It can be said with 95-percent certainty that, for each population of interest, the value for the whole population is within plus or minus

two standard errors of the estimate for the sample.

Percentages of students in the subgroups may not total 100 due to rounding.

*This question was not restricted to discussing social studies or geography studies but referred to all subject areas.

SOURCE: National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 1994 Geography Assessment.

Students’ Reports on the Frequency

with Which They Discuss Their Studies at Home*

Grades 4, 8, and 12

TABLE 4.22 CARD

REPORT

THE NA ION’S T

1994
 Geography Assessment
5 2

Grade 4 Grade 8 Grade 12

Percentage and Percentage and Percentage and

Average Scale Score Average Scale Score Average Scale Score

Literacy Materials in the Home. Students can learn

much about geography from written sources read

outside of school. Newspapers and magazines, for

example, can expand students’ knowledge of place

locations, as well as cultural, environmental, and

economic patterns relevant to today’s geography

curriculum. Moreover, parents who read regularly

model a pattern of curiosity and lifelong learning that

is important for their childrens’ academic success.13

As part of the NAEP assessments, students at all three

grades are asked whether their families have an

encyclopedia, receive a newspaper regularly, receive any

magazines regularly, or have more than 25 books in the

home. Table 4.23 presents the percentages of students

reporting that their families have all four types, only

three types, or two or fewer types of these literacy

materials.

As presented in the table, 38 percent of fourth graders,

51 percent of eighth graders, and 57 percent of twelfth

graders reported having all four kinds of literacy materials in the home. Across all three grades, the more types

of literacy materials reported in the home, the higher

the average geography scale scores.

4 Items 38 (1.0) 51 (0.7) 57 (0.9)

220 (1.6) 270 (0.8) 291 (0.8)

3 Items 33 (0.7) 28 (0.6) 27 (0.7)

206 (1.4) 257 (1.1) 282 (0.9)

2 or Fewer Items 29 (0.9) 22 (0.6) 16 (0.5)

189 (1.5) 240 (1.1) 270 (1.2)

Differences between the groups may be partially explained by other factors not included in this table.

The standard errors of the estimated percentages and average scale scores appear in parenthesis. It can be said with 95-percent certainty that, for each population of interest, the value for the whole population is within plus or minus

two standard errors of the estimate for the sample.

Percentages of students in the subgroups may not total 100 due to rounding.

SOURCE: National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 1994 Geography Assessment.

Students’ Reports on the Number of Different Types

of Literacy Materials in Their Home

Grades 4, 8, and 12

TABLE 4.23 CARD

REPORT

THE NA ION’S T

1994
 Geography Assessment
5 3

Grade 4 Grade 8 Grade 12

Percentage and Percentage and Percentage and

Average Scale Score Average Scale Score Average Scale Score

television per day. Twenty percent of fourth graders,

16 percent of eighth graders, and 7 percent of twelfth

graders reported watching six hours or more per day.

Generally, there was a negative relationship between

increased hours of television viewing and student

performance. At all three grades, students who reported

watching six or more hours of television per day scored

lower, on average, than students who reported less

frequent viewing. In addition, at grade 4, students who

reported watching two to three hours of television per

day outperformed those who watched four to five hours

per day. At grades 8 and 12, the less time spent watching

television, the higher the average geography score.

Television Viewing Habits. Past NAEP assessments

have highlighted the national concern over the amount

of time students spend watching television. For

example, the NAEP 1992 and 1994 reading assessments

found a negative relationship between the amount of

television watching and reading performance. A major

concern is the possibility that time spent watching

television may be consuming time that could be spent

on schoolwork or reading activities.

Table 4.24 presents students’ reports of their

television-viewing habits. Thirty-nine percent of fourth

graders, 44 percent of eighth graders, and 46 percent of

twelfth graders, reported watching two to three hours of

1 Hour or Less 19 (0.7) 13 (0.7) 29 (0.8)

209 (2.0) 270 (1.8) 292 (1.2)

2 - 3 Hours 39 (0.8) 44 (0.8) 46 (0.7)

214 (1.5) 266 (0.8) 286 (0.8)

4 -5 Hours 22 (0.7) 27 (0.9) 18 (0.5)

208 (1.7) 257 (1.0) 276 (1.0)

More than 6 Hours 20 (0.8) 16 (0.6) 7 (0.3)

185 (2.1) 240 (1.2) 267 (1.8)

Differences between the groups may be partially explained by other factors not included in this table.

The standard errors of the estimated percentages and average scale scores appear in parenthesis. It can be said with 95-percent certainty that, for each population of interest, the value for the whole population is within plus or minus

two standard errors of the estimate for the sample.

SOURCE: National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 1994 Geography Assessment.

Students’ Reports on the Amount of Time Spent

Watching Television Each Day

Grades 4, 8, and 12

TABLE 4.24 CARD

REPORT

THE NA ION’S T

1994
 Geography Assessment
5 4

Grade 4 Grade 8 Grade 12

Percentage and Percentage and Percentage and

Average Scale Score Average Scale Score Average Scale Score

As the table indicates, between 14 and 26 percent of

students reported that geography was their favorite

subject. Students across the three grades who did report

that geography was their favorite subject scored significantly higher than students who preferred other subjects.

Student Interest in Geography

A curiosity about and interest in geography may foster

learning of the subject at school or at home. The NAEP

1994 geography assessment asked students to indicate

whether geography is their favorite subject, whether

they like other subjects better, or whether they have

never studied geography. Table 4.25 shows studentreported degrees of interest in geography, and related

average scale scores.

Favorite Subject 26 (0.8) 19 (0.8) 14 (0.6)

214 (1.6) 274 (1.2) 297 (1.3)

Like Other Subjects Better 57 (0.8) 67 (0.9) 63 (1.1)

208 (1.4) 260 (0.7) 285 (0.8)

Never Studied 17 (0.7) 14 (0.6) 23 (1.2)

191 (1.8) 241 (1.9) 277 (1.3)

Differences between the groups may be partially explained by other factors not included in this table.

The standard errors of the estimated percentages and average scale scores appear in parenthesis. It can be said with 95-percent certainty that, for each population of interest, the value for the whole population is within plus or minus

two standard errors of the estimate for the sample.

SOURCE: National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 1994 Geography Assessment.

Students’ Reports on How Much

They Like Studying Geography

Grades 4, 8, and 12

TABLE 4.25 CARD

REPORT

THE NA ION’S T

1994
 Geography Assessment
5 5

Summary

The picture of geography education and student

performance gained from an examination of background

variables relating both to course work and classroom

practices is quite varied. Encouragingly, exposure to

geography at grade 8 and to social studies at grades 4

and 12 was associated with higher average scale scores.

While grade 12 students who indicated that they were

currently taking geography had lower scores, the more

semesters of potentially geography-related course work

done, the higher the scores. Moreover, grade 12 students

who indicated that they had taken a course in world

geography outperformed those who reported that they

had not.

Although some discrepancies exist between teacherand student-reported data about instructional materials

and practices, it is fair to say that the materials and

practices reviewed in this report all received at least

moderate use. For example, approximately one-third of

fourth and eighth graders reported using maps and

globes once or twice a week, while 79 percent of grade 8

students who were currently taking geography reported

doing geography-related projects at least sometimes.

Generally, some use of instructional materials, such

as films, videos, and filmstrips, was associated with

higher scale scores, although computer use was

negatively associated with scores. The relationships

between amounts of homework (across all subject areas)

and geography scale scores for students in grades 4, 8,

and 12 were positive. There was also a positive

relationship between amount of time spent on

geography homework and scale scores for grade 8

students who were currently taking geography.

Performance associated with home support variables

was consistent with educational research findings. Discussion of schoolwork at home and literacy materials in

the home were both associated with higher scores, while

frequent television watching was associated with lower

scores. (Given the number of factors the NAEP assessment cannot control for, the reader is again cautioned

against drawing causal inferences.)

Finally, students across the three grades who

reported that geography was their favorite subject

outperformed those who preferred other subjects.
5 6

Endnotes

1. Geography for Life: National Geography Standards

1994. Geography Education Standards Project.

Washington, DC: National Geographic Research and

Exploration.

2. Teachers of eighth-grade students participating in

the assessment were also asked to complete a

questionnaire. The questionnaire contained U.S.

history sections (for teachers with students taking

the NAEP 1994 U.S. history assessment) and

geography sections (for teachers with students

taking the NAEP 1994 geography assessment). The

U.S. history sections appeared first in the

questionnaire. Since many of the eighth-grade

teachers taught students in both assessments, a

large portion inadvertently completed the U.S.

history sections of the questionnaire instead of the

geography sections. Therefore, at the eighth grade,

students’ geography performance could not be

adequately matched to teachers’ reports of

instructional practices.

3. As part of the 1994 NAEP geography assessment,

school administrators were asked how many

semesters of geography their schools required for

student graduation from grade 12.

4. Boston, J. (1984). “Mapping, moving, modeling,

motivating — Meaningful geography in the elementary school.” Social Studies Review, 24(1), 43-45.

Ediger, M. (1991). “Interest, social studies, and the

emerging adolescent.” Opinion Papers (120). (ERIC

Document Reproduction Service No. ED3656601).

Svingen, B. E. (1994). “New technologies in the

geography classroom.” Journal of Geography, 93(4),

180-92.

5. Gutierrez, E. D. and Sanchez, Y. (1993). “Hilltop

geography for young children: Creating an outdoor

learning laboratory.” Journal of Geography, 92(4),

176-79.

Marran, J. F. (1992). “The world according to a grade

12 teacher — A reflection on what students of

geography should know and be able to do.” Journal

of Geography, 91(4), 139-42.

Stoltman, J. P. (1995). “The national geography

content standards.” Office of Educational Research

and Improvement, Washington, DC. (ERIC

Document Reproduction Service No. ED381480).

Trifonoff, K. M. (1995). “Going beyond location:

Thematic maps in the early elementary grades.”

Journal of Geography, 94(2), 368-74.

6. Geography for Life: National Geography Standards

1994. Geography Education Standards Project.

Washington, DC: National Geographic Research and

Exploration.

7. Ibid.

8. Geography Framework for the 1994 National

Assessment of Educational Progress. Washington,

DC: National Assessment Governing Board.

9. Ibid.

10. Geography for Life: National Geography Standards

1994. Geography Education Standards Project.

Washington, DC: National Geographic Research and

Exploration.

11. Christenson, S. L. (1992). “Family factors and

student achievement: An avenue to increase

students’ success.” School Psychology Quarterly,

7(3), 178-206.

Heller, L. R., and Fantuzzo, J. W. (1993). “Reciprocal

peer tutoring and parent partnership: Does parent

involvement make a difference?” School Psychology

Review, 22(3), 517-34.

12. The National Educational Goals Report: Building a

Nation of Learners. Report of the National

Education Goals Panels. Washington, DC: U.S.

Government Printing Office, 1994.

13. Rogoff, B. Apprenticeship in Thinking: Cognitive

Development in Social Context. New York: Oxford

University Press, 1990.
5 7

CHAPTER 5

What Students Know and

Can Do in Geography

This chapter provides additional perspective on what

students know and can do in geography by examining

the specific knowledge and skills demonstrated by

students at various points on the composite geography

scale, and the three subscales (the subscales correspond

to the three geography content areas, around which the

assessment was organized).

An overview of the geography knowledge and

abilities demonstrated by students within three performance ranges on the geography scale, and information

on their self-reported study habits, is included. Average

scale score results are presented for the nation and

for selected subgroups of students based on the three

subscales. Finally, selected illustrative questions are

displayed in item maps, which indicate the types of

questions that were likely to be answered successfully by

students scoring at particular levels on the content-area

subscales.

Overview of Students’ Performance on

the NAEP Geography Scale

The NAEP geography scale, ranging from 0 to 500,

summarizes the overall score results of students at the

fourth, eighth, and twelfth grades. The following

descriptions of students’ knowledge and abilities are

based on sets of questions that were answered successfully by students performing within three ranges on

the scale. These ranges represent lower, middle, and

higher performance based on percentile distributions.

The sets of questions identified in each of the three

ranges on the scale were analyzed by geography education experts to characterize the nature of students’

geography knowledge and abilities. (Appendix B contains

a description of the procedures used to generate this

portrait of students.)

Fourth-Grade Profile. Grade 4 students who were near

the 25th percentile (scale range 170 to 187) demonstrated success working with maps and diagrams. They

could read a simple map key and an elevation profile,

and they showed a rudimentary understanding of how to

construct a map from written directions. They demonstrated partial knowledge of the location of the equator,

the poles, and continents. These students could identify

a major ecosystem from visual clues and demonstrated

an initial understanding of human actions leading to

deforestation.

Fourth-grade students who were near the 50th

percentile (scale range 206 to 216) were able to extract

basic information from an atlas, maps, photographs, and

a bar graph. Given a number of options on a map,

students could locate Hawaii. They knew the approximate location of their home state or district and could

locate some of the countries in North America. They

showed a rudimentary understanding of how to construct

a weather map from written directions. Students at this

level were able to answer some uncomplicated questions

that did not rely on visual prompts, such as questions

relating to climate, diffusion of information, and environmental issues such as pollution.

Fourth-grade students who were near the 90th

percentile (scale range 249 to 269) demonstrated an

ability to use scale, measurement, and direction. They

could interpret and apply information from simple

thematic maps and graphics. Given outline maps of the

United States and Canada, these students could identify

bodies of water and a mountain range. They could also

identify Canada, the United States, and Mexico and

could locate Japan and Australia. Students were able to

construct a weather map and a map of a town from

written directions. They demonstrated understanding of

some physical geographic concepts such as Earth-Sun

relationships and soil erosion. They also demonstrated

knowledge of the relationship between climate and

economic activities and limited knowledge of reasons

for migration. These students knew some consequences

of how technology affects the environment, and they

had a rudimentary understanding of the consequences

of human activities, such as waste disposal.

Eighth-Grade Profile. Eighth-grade students who were

near the 25th percentile (scale range 230 to 243) could

read and extract data from visuals such as diagrams,

simple line graphs, and a bar graph and could make

uncomplicated inferences from photographs of desert

landscapes. They understood a basic coordinate system

and could identify their home state or district, South

America, and Antarctica. These students could locate

information on simple reference maps and, using an

atlas, could make simple inferences from information

contained in thematic maps.
5 8

Eighth-grade students who were near the 50th

percentile (scale range 258 to 267) could locate some

major rivers and lakes in North America and recognize

some simple landform and water features. They could

construct maps from written instructions with partial

accuracy that improved when a grid system was given.

They understood the function of a transit map and had

partial success mapping out a specified route. These

students demonstrated knowledge of what causes

earthquakes and were able to make connections between

climates and locations of cities and between climates

and types of crops. Students were able to recognize

relationships between topography and human settlement and could identify a reason for an urban land use

pattern. They demonstrated some understanding of

movement in relation to immigration and trade.

Those eighth-grade students who were near the

90th percentile (scale range 295 to 312) demonstrated

an ability to use a range of geographic tools such as

graphs, pie charts, population pyramids, climographs,

cross-sectional diagrams, and an isotherm map. They

could identify the largest ocean and knew which country

was located in the Alps. They could also find major

physical features on different types of maps at a variety

of scales. Students could infer geographic processes

from visual representations, and they could construct

maps from written instructions using a scale and legend

accurately when given a grid and with considerable

accuracy without a grid. These students understood the

influence of elevation on climate and of climate on

vegetation and had some understanding of the effect of

monsoon winds on climate and economy. Students at

this level demonstrated some understanding of the

dynamic interconnections between human systems and

physical systems and understood what contributes to air

pollution. They could apply uncomplicated concepts of

economic development, trade and transportation, and

economic interdependence and could relate geographic

concepts to historical knowledge.

Twelfth-Grade Profile. Students who were near the

25th percentile (scale range 259 to 270) could read and

interpret visual material in the form of single maps, (as

opposed to sets of maps or maps with accompanying

text). They demonstrated knowledge of basic physical

geography terms, could interpret a map to locate a

region, and showed some understanding of processes

relating to earthquakes and erosion. Students could

identify where Spanish is spoken on a world map. These

students demonstrated a rudimentary understanding of

relationships between topography and human settlement and of how relationships between and among

places are affected by factors such as accessibility,

proximity, and distance.

Twelfth-grade students who were near the 50th

percentile (scale range 283 to 291) were able to locate

some physical features such as United States deserts and

identify major world religious centers. They demonstrated knowledge of some fundamental geographic

skills such as the ability to read and interpret contour

maps, different map projections, and a time zone map.

Students were able to use atlases to answer fundamental

physical geography questions relating to climate,

natural vegetation, and growing seasons. They demonstrated understanding of how major processes such as

weathering and erosion shape patterns in the natural

environment and of the influence of natural systems on

human environments. Students displayed some ability

to translate narrative descriptions that include data into

maps. These students demonstrated knowledge of

physical reasons for land use patterns, understanding of

movements such as diffusion and migration, and some

understanding of reasons for trade.
5 9

Twelfth-grade students who were near the 90th

percentile (scale range 316 to 329) were able to compare

different kinds of maps, graphics, diagrams, tables, and

other visuals to draw conclusions and interpret

information. They were often able to apply some outside

knowledge to interpret maps and other visuals. These

students were able to transfer information from one

reporting form to another and could draw generally

accurate two-dimensional maps. They could locate and

label features such as the Mississippi River and the

Rockies on a cross-sectional diagram of the United

States, and could identify South America from its

elevation profile. Students could identify major deserts

on a world map. They were able to infer some physical

geomorphic processes from examining physical features

shown on a map. They also understood regional terms

such as “megalopolis” and “corn belt”, and concepts

relating to connections among places such as travel and

transportation.

Students at this level could recognize the economic

and political importance of places such as the Suez

Canal and demonstrated some understanding of how

political unrest can influence economies. They knew a

reason for the formation of the Organization of

Petroleum Exporting Countries and could identify the

countries that belong to this organization. Using a map

showing the languages of Africa, students could

interpret information about language patterns in Africa.

These students also demonstrated partial understanding

of causes and consequences of human migration and a

rudimentary ability to discuss different people’s

perspectives of the same environment at a variety of

scales, local to global.

Profiles of Students’ Geography

Knowledge, Abilities, and Study Habits

Figures 5.1, 5.2, and 5.3 show profiles of the lower-,

middle-, and higher-performing students. The profiles

link the knowledge and abilities of these students with

their self-reported study habits, and also summarize the

performance descriptions from the previous section.

The study habits presented in the figures are based on

students’ self-reports about three activities: number of

pages read per day in school, hours per day spent on

homework, and frequency of discussing studies at home.

By examining all three profiles, a common pattern

emerged at each grade. As the students’ geography

scores increased, the complexity and sophistication of

the geographic knowledge and skills they exhibited

increased. Moreover, students performing at the higher

range of the scale were more likely to read more pages

per day, spend more time on homework, and more

frequently discuss their studies at home.1
6 0

Figure 5.1 Profiles of Lower, Middle, and Higher Performing Fourth Graders: Geography Knowledge, Abilities, and Study Habits

25th Percentile

Study habits of fourth graders who

were near the 25th percentile:

© 48 percent read more than 10 pages each day

in school and for homework

© 44 percent spent one or more hours each day

on homework

© 73 percent discussed studies at home at least

once or twice a week

Fourth-grade students who were

near the 25th percentile could:

© read simple maps and diagrams

© show initial understanding of the relationship

between human and natural systems

© identify a major ecosystem from visual clues

90th Percentile

50th Percentile

Study habits of fourth graders who

were near the 50th percentile:

© 50 percent read more than 10 pages each day

in school and for homework

© 46 percent spent one or more hours each day

on homework

© 77 percent discussed studies at home at least

once or twice a week

Fourth-grade students who were

near the 50th percentile could:

© extract basic information from an atlas,

photographs, and other visuals

© label approximate location of home state

or district on a map

© grasp simple concepts, such as relationships

between geography and the diffusion of

information

SOURCE: National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 1994 Geography Assessment.

ATLAS

ATLAS

ATLAS

Fourth-grade students who were

near the 90th percentile could:

© use scale, measurement, and direction

© interpret and apply information from simple

thematic maps and graphics

© grasp some physical geographic concepts,

such as Earth/Sun relationships

Study habits of fourth graders who

were near the 90th percentile:

© 62 percent read more than 10 pages each day

in school and for homework

© 47 percent spent one or more hours each day

on homework

© 85 percent discussed studies at home at least

once or twice a week
6 1

Figure 5.2 Profiles of Lower, Middle, and Higher Performing Eighth Graders: Geography Knowledge, Abilities, and Study Habits

Eighth-grade students who were

near the 25th percentile could:

© read and extract data from visuals, such as

diagrams and simple line graphs

© make simple inferences from photographs

of a natural region

© read and interpret thematic maps in an atlas

Study habits of eighth graders who

were near the 50th percentile:

© 35 percent read more than 10 pages each day

in school and for homework

© 64 percent spent one or more hours each day

on homework

© 68 percent discussed studies at home at least

once or twice a week

Eighth-grade students who were

near the 50th percentile could:

© recognize a range of simple physical features

and patterns of the environment

© cite probable cause of a natural event

© grasp some interactions between natural and

human systems, such as relationships between

topography and human settlement

Eighth-grade students who were

near the 90th percentile could:

© use a range of tools, such as pie charts,

population pyramids, and climographs

© construct maps from written instructions using

scale and legend accurately

© apply simple concepts of economic

development and interdependence

Study habits of eighth graders who

were near the 90th percentile:

© 48 percent read more than 10 pages each day

in school and for homework

© 70 percent spent one or more hours each day

on homework

© 77 percent discussed studies at home at least

once or twice a week

SOURCE: National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 1994 Geography Assessment.

25th Percentile

90th Percentile

50th Percentile

ATLAS

ATLAS

ATLAS

Study habits of eighth graders who

were near the 25th percentile:

© 31 percent read more than 10 pages each day

in school and for homework

© 58 percent spent one or more hours each day

on homework

© 60 percent discussed studies at home at least

once or twice a week
6 2

Figure 5.3 Profiles of Lower, Middle, and Higher Performing Twelfth Graders: Geography Knowledge, Abilities, and Study Habits

Study habits of twelfth graders who

were near the 25th percentile:

© 29 percent read more than 10 pages each day

in school and for homework

© 52 percent spent one or more hours each day

on homework

© 55 percent discussed studies at home at least

once or twice a week

Twelfth-grade students who were

near the 25th percentile could:

© read and interpret visual material from a map

© recognize basic physical geography terms

© grasp some influences of proximity and

distance on relationships between and among

places

Study habits of twelfth graders who

were near the 90th percentile:

© 57 percent read more than 10 pages each day

in school and for homework

© 62 percent spent one or more hours each day

on homework

© 74 percent discussed studies at home at least

once or twice a week

Study habits of twelfth graders who

were near the 50th percentile:

© 40 percent read more than 10 pages each day

in school and for homework

© 53 percent spent one or more hours each day

on homework

© 59 percent discussed studies at home at least

once or twice a week

Twelfth-grade students who were

near the 50th percentile could:

© read and interpret contour maps, different

map projections, and a time zone map

© use atlases to answer fundamental physical

geography questions, such as those relating to

climate and vegetation

© show understanding of how major processes,

such as weathering and erosion, shape patterns

in the natural environment

© show knowledge of major processes of human

geography, such as migration and diffusion

SOURCE: National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 1994 Geography Assessment.

25th Percentile

90th Percentile

50th Percentile

ATLAS

ATLAS

ATLAS

Twelfth-grade students who were

near the 90th percentile could:

© compare different kinds of maps, graphics,

and other visuals to draw conclusions and

interpret information

© locate and label a range of features of the

physical and human environments on maps

and diagrams

© infer some physical geomorphic processes

from physical features shown on a map

© discuss in rudimentary terms different

people’s perspectives of the same

environment at a variety of scales,

local to global
6 3

Average Performance by Content Areas

As described in Chapter 1, the NAEP 1994 geography

assessment was organized around the following three

content areas:

© Space and Place. Knowledge of geography related

to particular places on Earth, to spatial patterns on

Earth’s surface, and to physical and human

processes that shape such patterns.

© Environment and Society. Knowledge of geography

related to the interactions between the environment

and society.

© Spatial Dynamics and Connections. Knowledge of

geography related to spatial variations and connections among people and places.

The three content areas were designed to ensure

coverage of the major branches of geography. They were

seen as broad areas that would sometimes overlap to

accomplish this coverage. (The geographic cognitive

areas presented in the NAEP geography framework cut

across all three content areas.) A look at the patterns of

student performance on the subscales can contribute to

a more precise understanding of composite scale scores,

although the patterns of performance among subgroups

on the composite scale were also generally evident for

the subscales.
6 4

Content Area 1 Content Area 2 Content Area 3

Spatial Dynamics and

Composite Space and Place Environment and Society Connections

Grade 4

Average Subscale Score 206 (1.2) 208 (1.3) 204 (1.3) 204 (1.2)

10th Percentile 146 (1.9) 148 (1.8) 138 (2.8) 147 (1.6)

25th Percentile 179 (1.4) 181 (1.4) 175 (1.3) 178 (2.2)

50th Percentile 211 (1.3) 213 (1.8) 210 (1.5) 209 (1.3)

75th Percentile 237 (1.2) 240 (1.8) 239 (1.8) 234 (1.3)

90th Percentile 257 (1.8) 261 (1.4) 261 (2.1) 254 (1.8)

Grade 8

Average Subscale Score 260 (0.7) 259 (0.8) 263 (0.7) 257 (0.9)

10th Percentile 213 (1.3) 209 (1.1) 218 (1.4) 211 (1.1)

25th Percentile 237 (0.9) 234 (0.9) 242 (0.9) 235 (1.2)

50th Percentile 263 (1.0) 262 (0.9) 266 (0.8) 261 (1.3)

75th Percentile 285 (0.9) 285 (1.1) 287 (0.7) 282 (1.0)

90th Percentile 303 (1.6) 305 (0.8) 304 (1.0) 300 (1.3)

Grade 12

Average Subscale Score 285 (0.7) 283 (0.8) 283 (0.7) 288 (0.8)

10th Percentile 244 (0.9) 237 (1.1) 247 (0.9) 248 (1.1)

25th Percentile 265 (0.9) 260 (1.0) 265 (1.3) 268 (0.9)

50th Percentile 287 (0.8) 286 (0.8) 285 (0.8) 291 (1.0)

75th Percentile 307 (0.9) 308 (0.8) 302 (1.0) 310 (0.9)

90th Percentile 321 (0.9) 326 (0.9) 315 (0.9) 325 (1.0)

The standard errors of the estimated scale scores appear in parenthesis. It can be said with 95-percent certainty that, for each population of interest, the value for the whole population is within plus or minus two standard errors of the

estimate for the sample.

SOURCE: National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 1994 Geography Assessment.

Performance on Geography Content Areas for the

Nation. Table 5.1 presents the 1994 average scores by

geography content areas for students at grades 4, 8, and

12. The subscales for the three areas were created

independently of one another and no attempt was made

to equate the subscales. Therefore, comparisons across

subscales (for example, fourth graders performed better

on Content Area 1 than Content Area 2) are not

necessarily meaningful. Appendix A contains a more

extensive discussion of the geography scaling

procedures.

Patterns of performance among subgroups on the

composite scale were also generally evident for the

content area subscales.

TABLE 5.1

Average Scale Scores at Various Percentiles by Geography Content Areas

Grades 4, 8, and 12

CARD

REPORT

THE NA ION’S T

1994
 Geography Assessment
6 5

Performance on Geography Content Areas by Region.

Table 5.2 presents the average scale scores and subscale

results by region. These results are fairly consistent with

the composite scale results found at each grade.

© At grade 4, for the composite scale and all three

subscales, students from the Central region outperformed students from the Southeast. Students

from the Central region also outperformed students

from the Northeast for Space and Place, and

students from the West for Spatial Dynamics

and Connections.

© At grade 8, students from the Northeast and Central

regions outperformed students from the Southeast

and the West for all three content areas.

© At grade 12, students from the Northeast outperformed students from the Southeast for Space

and Place and Spatial Dynamics and Connections.

Central region students outperformed students from

the Northeast for Space and Place and students

from the Southeast for all three content areas.

Finally, students from the West outperformed those

from the Southeast for all content areas.

TABLE 5.2

Average Scale Scores in Geography Content Areas by Region

Grades 4, 8, and 12

Grade 4

Total 206 (1.2) 208 (1.3) 204 (1.3) 204 (1.2)

Region

Northeast 203 (2.7) 204 (2.8) 201 (2.9) 203 (2.7)

Southeast 200 (2.5) 201 (2.5) 199 (3.0) 199 (2.5)

Central 215 (3.2) 217 (3.3) 214 (3.9) 213 (2.9)

West 205 (1.7) 209 (2.1) 202 (2.0) 202 (1.9)

Grade 8

Total 260 (0.7) 259 (0.8) 263 (0.7) 257 (0.9)

Region

Northeast 266 (1.9) 265 (2.2) 268 (1.7) 264 (2.1)

Southeast 252 (1.6) 249 (1.8) 257 (1.5) 251 (1.8)

Central 268 (1.6) 269 (1.7) 270 (1.7) 266 (1.7)

West 255 (1.8) 254 (2.0) 260 (1.7) 253 (1.8)

Grade 12

Total 285 (0.7) 283 (0.8) 283 (0.7) 288 (0.8)

Region

Northeast 284 (1.6) 282 (1.7) 282 (1.4) 288 (1.8)

Southeast 278 (1.1) 276 (1.3) 278 (0.9) 281 (1.1)

Central 289 (1.8) 289 (2.0) 285 (1.7) 292 (1.8)

West 286 (1.9) 285 (2.1) 285 (1.7) 290 (1.9)

Differences between the groups may be partially explained by other factors not included in this table.

The standard errors of the estimated scale scores appear in parenthesis. It can be said with 95-percent certainty that, for each population of interest, the value for the whole population is within plus or minus two standard errors of the

estimate for the sample.

SOURCE: National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 1994 Geography Assessment.

CARD

REPORT

THE NA ION’S T

1994
 Geography Assessment

Content Area 1 Content Area 2 Content Area 3

Spatial Dynamics and

Composite Space and Place Environment and Society Connections
6 6

Grade 4

Total 206 (1.2) 208 (1.3) 204 (1.3) 204 (1.2)

Race/Ethnicity

White 218 (1.5) 220 (1.7) 218 (1.7) 215 (1.5)

Black 168 (2.5) 169 (2.8) 162 (2.9) 171 (2.2)

Hispanic 183 (2.5) 187 (2.6) 180 (2.9) 181 (2.8)

Asian 218 (5.0) 224 (5.2) 210 (6.6) 219 (4.8)

Pacific Islander 205 (5.3) 207 (5.9) 203 (8.0) 204 (6.0)

American Indian 193 (3.6) 196 (3.5) 191 (4.3) 190 (3.5)

Grade 8

Total 260 (0.7) 259 (0.8) 263 (0.7) 257 (0.9)

Race/Ethnicity

White 270 (0.8) 270 (0.9) 273 (0.8) 267 (1.1)

Black 229 (1.7) 225 (1.8) 235 (1.8) 230 (1.7)

Hispanic 239 (1.9) 237 (2.2) 244 (1.7) 236 (2.0)

Asian 271 (2.7) 273 (2.8) 274 (2.5) 266 (3.6)

Pacific Islander 252 (8.5) ! 249 (8.5) ! 256 (9.2) ! 252 (8.3) !

American Indian 248 (3.4) ! 246 (4.0) ! 253 (3.3) ! 246 (3.3) !

Grade 12

Total 285 (0.7) 283 (0.8) 283 (0.7) 288 (0.8)

Race/Ethnicity

White 291 (0.8) 291 (0.9) 288 (0.7) 294 (0.8)

Black 258 (1.4) 252 (1.7) 261 (1.2) 264 (1.5)

Hispanic 268 (1.5) 264 (1.8) 267 (1.5) 273 (1.6)

Asian 287 (3.2) 285 (3.5) 283 (3.0) 293 (3.6)

Pacific Islander 282 (3.1) ! 281 (3.3) ! 279 (3.2) ! 285 (3.7) !

American Indian *** *** *** ***

Differences between the groups may be partially explained by other factors not included in this table.

The standard errors of the estimated scale scores appear in parenthesis. It can be said with 95-percent certainty that, for each population of interest, the value for the whole population is within plus or minus two standard errors of the

estimate for the sample.

! Interpret with caution any comparisons involving this statistic. The nature of the sample does not allow for accurate determination of the variability of this value.

*** Sample size insufficient to permit a reliable estimate (see Appendix A).

SOURCE: National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 1994 Geography Assessment.

Performance on Geography Content Areas by Race/

Ethnicity. Table 5.3 reports the subscale results and the

overall average scale scores for racial/ethnic subgroups.

With some exceptions, White and Asian students outperformed Black and Hispanic students, and Hispanic

students outperformed Black students, as on the composite scale. (Racial/ethnic classifications are based on

self-reported information provided by students.)

For the Pacific Islander and American Indian student

samples at grades 8 and 12, the nature of the samples

does not allow accurate determination of the standard

errors. For this reason, differences among these samples

and other racial/ethnic subgroups are not discussed for

those two grades.

© At grade 4, for each content area, White students

had a significantly higher average score than Black,

Hispanic, and American Indian students, and

American Indian students had a significantly higher

average score than Black students. Hispanic students outperformed Black students for Space and

Place and Environment and Society, but not for

Spatial Dynamics and Connections (an exception to

the pattern for the composite scale). Asian students

TABLE 5.3

CARD

REPORT

THE NA ION’S T

1994
 Geography Assessment

Content Area 1 Content Area 2 Content Area 3

Spatial Dynamics and

Composite Space and Place Environment and Society Connections

Average Scale Scores in Geography Content Areas by Race/Ethnicity

Grades 4, 8, and 12
6 7

Performance on Geography Content Areas by Gender.

Table 5.4 presents male and female students’ performance on the three geography content areas. As

reported in Chapter 2, males did demonstrate average

scale scores significantly higher than those for females

at all three grade levels on the composite scale. There

were some deviations from this pattern when

performance was examined at the subscale level.

© At grade 4, male students outperformed female

students for the content area Space and Place, but

there were no significant differences for the other

two content areas.

© At grade 8, male students outperformed female

students for Space and Place and Environment and

Society, but not for Spatial Dynamics and

Connections.

© At grade 12, as on the composite scale, male

students outperformed female students in all three

geography content areas.

outperformed Black and Hispanic students on all

subscales and American Indian students for Space

and Place and Spatial Dynamics and Connections.

Pacific Islander students outperformed Black and

Hispanic students for Space and Place and Spatial

Dynamics and Connections and Black students for

Environment and Society.

© At grade 8, for each content area, White and Asian

students had significantly higher average scores than

Black and Hispanic students. Hispanic students

outperformed Black students for Space and Place

and Environment and Society, but not for Spatial

Dynamics and Connections (again, an exception to

Hispanic students’ performance on the composite

scale).

© At grade 12, for each content area, Hispanic students demonstrated a higher average score

than Black students, and Asian students demonstrated a higher average score than Black and

Hispanic students. White students had significantly

higher average scores than Black and Hispanic

students in all content areas.

Grade 4

Total 206 (1.2) 208 (1.3) 204 (1.3) 204 (1.2)

Gender

Male 208 (1.4) 212 (1.6) 206 (1.4) 206 (1.5)

Female 203 (1.4) 204 (1.5) 203 (1.7) 202 (1.4)

Grade 8

Total 260 (0.7) 259 (0.8) 263 (0.7) 257 (0.9)

Gender

Male 262 (0.9) 262 (1.0) 265 (0.9) 258 (1.1)

Female 258 (0.8) 255 (0.9) 262 (0.7) 257 (1.0)

Grade 12

Total 285 (0.7) 283 (0.8) 283 (0.7) 288 (0.8)

Gender

Male 288 (0.8) 288 (1.0) 285 (0.8) 290 (0.9)

Female 281 (0.9) 278 (1.0) 280 (0.8) 286 (1.1)

Differences between the groups may be partially explained by other factors not included in this table.

The standard errors of the estimated scale scores appear in parenthesis. It can be said with 95-percent certainty that, for each population of interest, the value for the whole population is within plus or minus two standard errors of the

estimate for the sample.

SOURCE: National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 1994 Geography Assessment.

Content Area 1 Content Area 2 Content Area 3

Spatial Dynamics and

Composite Space and Place Environment and Society Connections

TABLE 5.4

CARD

REPORT

THE NA ION’S T

1994
 Geography Assessment

Average Scale Scores in Geography Content Areas by Gender

Grades 4, 8, and 12
6 8

Content Area 1 Content Area 2 Content Area 3

Spatial Dynamics and

Composite Space and Place Environment and Society Connections

Average Scale Scores in Geography Content Areas

by Parents’ Highest Level of Education

Grades 4, 8, and 12

Performance on Geography Content Areas by Parents’

Highest Level of Education. Table 5.5 presents performance by student-reported parental education level for

the three content area subscales. The positive relationship between parental level of education and performance

noted with the composite scale was also evident for each

of the three subscales. Generally, as the level of parental

education increased, average subscale scores increased.

© At grade 4, average subscale scores, for the most

part, increased with increasing levels of reported

parental education. However, across subscales, there

were no significant score differences between

students who reported that at least one parent had

graduated from college and those who reported that

at least one parent had some education after high

school (consistent with the exception for the composite scale), and between students who reported

that at least one parent had graduated from high

school and those who reported that neither parent

finished high school.

© At grade 8, for all three subscales, average subscale

scores increased with increasing levels of parental

education.

© Similarly, at grade 12, for all three subscales,

average scores increased with increasing levels of

parental education.

Grade 4

Total 206 (1.2) 208 (1.3) 204 (1.3) 204 (1.2)

Parents’ Education Level

Graduated College 216 (1.6) 218 (1.8) 215 (1.8) 215 (1.5)

Some Education After High School 216 (2.5) 218 (2.6) 214 (3.5) 215 (2.8)

Graduated High School 197 (2.5) 199 (2.7) 197 (3.3) 195 (2.2)

Did Not Finish High School 186 (3.7) 189 (4.0) 184 (5.6) 184 (4.0)

I Don’t Know 197 (1.4) 200 (1.6) 194 (1.6) 195 (1.5)

Grade 8

Total 260 (0.7) 259 (0.8) 263 (0.7) 257 (0.9)

Parents’ Education Level

Graduated College 272 (1.0) 272 (1.2) 275 (0.9) 270 (1.2)

Some Education After High School 265 (1.0) 264 (1.3) 269 (0.9) 262 (1.4)

Graduated High School 250 (1.2) 248 (1.5) 254 (1.3) 248 (1.3)

Did Not Finish High School 238 (1.7) 236 (2.0) 242 (1.8) 238 (2.2)

I Don’t Know 234 (1.5) 233 (1.8) 240 (1.5) 231 (1.7)

Grade 12

Total 285 (0.7) 283 (0.8) 283 (0.7) 288 (0.8)

Parents’ Education Level

Graduated College 294 (0.9) 294 (1.0) 291 (0.8) 298 (0.9)

Some Education After High School 286 (1.0) 285 (1.2) 284 (1.0) 289 (1.0)

Graduated High School 274 (1.1) 271 (1.5) 273 (1.0) 278 (1.2)

Did Not Finish High School 263 (1.2) 259 (1.6) 264 (1.3) 267 (1.3)

I Don’t Know 257 (2.8) 252 (3.2) 261 (2.6) 261 (3.4)

Differences between the groups may be partially explained by other factors not included in this table.

The standard errors of the estimated scale scores appear in parenthesis. It can be said with 95-percent certainty that, for each population of interest, the value for the whole population is within plus or minus two standard errors of the

estimate for the sample.

SOURCE: National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 1994 Geography Assessment.

TABLE 5.5

CARD

REPORT

THE NA ION’S T

1994
 Geography Assessment
6 9

Performance on Geography Content Areas by Type of

Location. Table 5.6 presents the performance of students

attending schools in the three types of locations,

according to the geography content areas. With one

exception, performances on the three content area

subscales mirrored performance on the composite scale.

© At grade 4, for all three subscales, students

attending schools in urban fringe/large town and

rural/small town locations outperformed students

attending schools in central city locations.

© At grade 8, for Space and Place, students attending

schools in urban fringe/large town locations outperformed students attending schools in central

city locations. (On the composite scale, students

attending schools in urban fringe/large town and

rural/small town locations outperformed students

attending schools in central city locations.) For the

other two subscales, student performance mirrored

that of the composite scale.

© At grade 12, for all three subscales, students

attending urban fringe/large town schools

outperformed students attending both central city

and rural/small town schools.

Grade 4

Total 206 (1.2) 208 (1.3) 204 (1.3) 204 (1.2)

Type of Location

Central City 196 (2.2) 198 (2.3) 194 (2.5) 195 (2.0)

Urban Fringe/Large Town 213 (1.9) 216 (2.1) 211 (2.2) 211 (1.9)

Rural/Small Town 207 (2.4) 209 (2.7) 207 (2.8) 205 (2.6)

Grade 8

Total 260 (0.7) 259 (0.8) 263 (0.7) 257 (0.9)

Type of Location

Central City 255 (1.6) 253 (1.7) 258 (1.5) 253 (1.7)

Urban Fringe/Large Town 264 (1.3) 263 (1.6) 267 (1.2) 261 (1.4)

Rural/Small Town 261 (1.9) 260 (2.2) 265 (1.8) 259 (2.0)

Grade 12

Total 285 (0.7) 283 (0.8) 283 (0.7) 288 (0.8)

Type of Location

Central City 282 (1.4) 281 (1.5) 281 (1.2) 286 (1.4)

Urban Fringe/Large Town 288 (1.4) 287 (1.5) 285 (1.2) 292 (1.4)

Rural/Small Town 282 (1.1) 281 (1.3) 280 (1.1) 286 (1.2)

Differences between the groups may be partially explained by other factors not included in this table.

The standard errors of the estimated scale scores appear in parenthesis. It can be said with 95-percent certainty that, for each population of interest, the value for the whole population is within plus or minus two standard errors of the

estimate for the sample.

SOURCE: National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 1994 Geography Assessment.

TABLE 5.6

CARD

REPORT

THE NA ION’S T

1994
 Geography Assessment

Content Area 1 Content Area 2 Content Area 3

Spatial Dynamics and

Composite Space and Place Environment and Society Connections

Average Scale Scores in Geography Content Areas by Type of Location

Grades 4, 8, and 12
7 0

Performance on Geography Content Areas by Type of

School. Table 5.7 presents the performance of students

attending public and nonpublic schools in the three

geography content areas. Again, performances on the

three content area subscales mirrored performance on

the composite scale. At grades 4, 8, and 12, students

attending nonpublic schools had significantly higher

average scores than those attending public schools

across all three geography content areas.

TABLE 5.7

Grade 4

Total 206 (1.2) 208 (1.3) 204 (1.3) 204 (1.2)

Type of School

Public Schools 204 (1.4) 206 (1.5) 202 (1.5) 203 (1.3)

Nonpublic Schools 221 (2.2) 222 (2.5) 223 (2.5) 218 (2.3)

Catholic Schools 222 (2.6) 223 (2.7) 223 (3.2) 220 (2.8)

Other Nonpublic Schools 220 (3.8) 221 (4.3) 222 (4.1) 215 (3.7)

Grade 8

Total 260 (0.7) 259 (0.8) 263 (0.7) 257 (0.9)

Type of School

Public Schools 258 (0.8) 257 (0.9) 262 (0.8) 255 (1.0)

Nonpublic Schools 276 (1.3) 275 (1.4) 278 (1.4) 275 (1.4)

Catholic Schools 276 (1.6) 275 (1.7) 279 (1.9) 276 (1.5)

Other Nonpublic Schools 276 (2.6) 276 (2.9) 277 (2.6) 274 (2.9)

Grade 12

Total 285 (0.7) 283 (0.8) 283 (0.7) 288 (0.8)

Type of School

Public Schools 283 (0.8) 282 (0.9) 282 (0.8) 287 (0.8)

Nonpublic Schools 294 (1.6) 293 (1.9) 291 (1.6) 298 (1.7)

Catholic Schools 291 (3.0) 289 (3.3) 289 (2.7) 296 (2.9)

Other Nonpublic Schools 298 (2.0) 299 (2.3) 294 (1.8) 300 (2.6)

Differences between the groups may be partially explained by other factors not included in this table.

The standard errors of the estimated scale scores appear in parenthesis. It can be said with 95-percent certainty that, for each population of interest, the value for the whole population is within plus or minus two standard errors of the

estimate for the sample.

SOURCE: National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 1994 Geography Assessment.

CARD

REPORT

THE NA ION’S T

1994
 Geography Assessment

Content Area 1 Content Area 2 Content Area 3

Spatial Dynamics and

Composite Space and Place Environment and Society Connections

Average Scale Scores in Geography Content Areas by Type of School

Grades 4, 8, and 12
7 1

Profiling Students’ Performance on

the Three Geography Content Areas

To illustrate the range of assessment tasks that students

were asked to perform, this section provides a visual

representation of each geography content area subscale,

called an “item map.” The item map shows a set of tasks

in the order of their difficulty for the population

assessed. Each task is identified by a brief description.

Not all the tasks in the assessment could be presented

in these figures. Instead, sample tasks were selected to

illustrate the range of abilities across the subscales and

to demonstrate the types of tasks that students with

different subscale scores could typically perform correctly.

The item maps (Figures 5.4, 5.5, and 5.6) identify

the points, on each content area subscale at which

individual tasks were answered correctly by

approximately two-thirds (65 percent) of the students.

(The criterion was set at 74 percent for multiple-choice

questions to adjust for the possibility of students’

answering correctly by guessing.) The point on the

subscale item map at which a task is positioned

represents the subscale score attained by students who

had a 65-percent probability of successfully performing

the task. Thus, for each task and its corresponding

subscale score, it can be said that at least 65 percent of

students at or above that point on the subscale have

adequately performed that task.

For example, the fourth-grade Space and Place item

map (Figure 5.4), indicates that at least 65 percent of

fourth graders with a score of 216 or better on the

Space and Place geography content subscale were able

to locate physical features on a map of North America.

Fourth graders who scored higher than 216 on this

subscale were even more likely to demonstrate this

ability, while students who scored lower on the subscale

were less likely to do so. In interpreting item map

information, it should be kept in mind that students at

different grades demonstrated these geography abilities

with grade-appropriate materials.
7 2

500

350

325

300

275

250

225

200

0

NAEP

Scale

NOTE: In this graphic illustration, the locations of scale points are necessarily approximate for

questions clustered closely together.

SOURCE: National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational

Progress (NAEP), 1994 Geography Assessment.

Figure 5.4 Map of Selected Items on the Geography

Content Area Subscales for Grade 4

Each geography question was mapped onto the

NAEP geography content area subscale on the

basis of students’ performance. The point on the

subscale at which a question is positioned on the

map represents the subscale score attained by

students who had a 65-percent probability of

successfully answering the question.

Thus, it can be said for each question and its

corresponding subscale score that students with

scores above that point on the subscale have a

greater than 65-percent chance of successfully

answering the question, while those below that

point on the subscale have a less than 65-percent

chance. (The probability was set at 74 percent for

multiple-choice questions.)

The item map presented in this figure contains

selected questions to illustrate the assessment. In

interpreting the item map information, it should

be kept in mind that students at different grades

demonstrated these abilities with grade-appropriate

materials.

(235) Recognize religion of majority of people in U.S.

(233) Estimate size of South American region from

map of growing seasons

(230) Locate and label major countries of North

America

(313) Identify units of measurement used on world map

(292) Develop map from list of area’s geographic

features

(291) Identify major physical feature of Switzerland

90th

Percentile

(261) ©

(268) Locate highest feature on cross-section

diagram of South America

(260) Use map to identify four countries on equator

(257) Use map legend to identify region of highest

elevation in Africa

(253) Draw oceanic route between North America and

Europe and label ocean

(249) Create weather map and legend based on list of

characteristics of South America

(216) Locate physical feature on map of North

America

(210) Locate Hawaii on map

50th

Percentile

(213) ©

(198) Use graph to determine time of least rainfall in

Oregon

(183) Identify country with lowest average elevation

on profile map

25th

Percentile

(181) ©

CONTENT AREA 1

Space and Place
7 3

500

350

325

300

275

250

225

200

0

NAEP

Scale

500

350

325

300

275

250

225

200

0

NAEP

Scale

90th

Percentile

(254) ©

25th

Percentile

(178) ©

(312) Use map data to identify and explain settlement

patterns in China

(309) Interpret physical resource map to identify likely

location of large city

(291) Interpret physical resource map to explain which

country produces steel

50th

Percentile

(209) ©

25th

Percentile

(175) ©

50th

Percentile

(210) ©

90th

Percentile

(261) ©

(318) Describe two effects of oil spills on environment

(299) Explain and compare White and Native

American views of land use

(282) Explain impact on physical environment of

cutting down forest

(279) Analyze consequences of waste disposal on

environment

(260) Understand impact on environment of enlarging

airport

(257) Interpret diagram of seasons to identify

reason for summer

(231) Understand soil erosion controls

(226) Recognize technology used to predict weather

(225) Interpret map to infer impact of blocked bridge

on transportation route

(215) Infer location from description of conventional

clothing

(203) Identify environment modified for human use

from photographs

(190) Understand sources of air and water pollution

(185) Identify water cycle from picture

(152) Recognize characteristics of rain forest

environment

(289) Interpret bar graph to compare and discuss U.S.

energy production and consumption

(285) Use several maps to explain highway locations

in Canada

(272) Interpret physical resource map to identify

countries most in conflict over resources

(257) Infer trade patterns from export charts

(251) Draw road route on map, create road symbol,

and explain chosen location

(250) Identify and draw on transit map the most direct

route between two locations

(237) Use map to identify continent with most industry

(234) Understand climate’s relationship to trade patterns

in the United States

(233) Place locations in size order from largest to smallest

(228) Understand kinds of information represented on

four different maps

(207) Recognize cause of global diffusion of

information

CONTENT AREA 2

Environment and Society

CONTENT AREA 3

Spatial Dynamics and Connections
7 4

500

350

325

300

275

250

225

200

0

NAEP

Scale

NOTE: In this graphic illustration, the locations of scale points are necessarily approximate for

questions clustered closely together.

SOURCE: National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational

Progress (NAEP), 1994 Geography Assessment.

25th

Percentile

(234) ©

90th

Percentile

(305) ©

(317) Interpret climate graphs to identify climatic

characteristics of given location

(309) Locate two areas on world map with particular

climatic characteristics

(294) Infer reason for alteration of landscape shown in

photograph

(289) Convert precipitation data from table into pie chart

50th

Percentile

(262) ©

(237) Identify scale used to measure earthquake

intensity

(209) Locate home state on map

(202) Understand where to locate information in atlas

(277) Infer vegetation characteristic of given area of

Brazil from climate map

(269) Recognize world’s largest ocean

(263) Understand U.S. trade balance represented on

map

(259) Infer location of earthquake epicenter from map

(252) Identify landform that constitutes Florida

Figure 5.5 Map of Selected Items on the Geography

Content Area Subscales for Grade 8

Each geography question was mapped onto the

NAEP geography content area subscale on the

basis of students’ performance. The point on the

subscale at which a question is positioned on the

map represents the subscale score attained by

students who had a 65-percent probability of

successfully answering the question.

Thus, it can be said for each question and its

corresponding subscale score that students with

scores above that point on the subscale have a

greater than 65-percent chance of successfully

answering the question, while those below that

point on the subscale have a less than 65-percent

chance. (The probability was set at 74 percent for

multiple-choice questions.)

The item map presented in this figure contains

selected questions to illustrate the assessment. In

interpreting the item map information, it should

be kept in mind that students at different grades

demonstrated these abilities with grade-appropriate

materials.

CONTENT AREA 1

Space and Place

(356) Understand vocabulary and process of water

cycle

(334) Draw map of region including isthmus based on

description of area

(331) Interpret physical features formed by glaciation
7 5

500

350

325

300

275

250

225

200

0

NAEP

Scale

500

350

325

300

275

250

225

200

0

NAEP

Scale

90th

Percentile

(300) ©

50th

Percentile

(261) ©

(306) Recognize reason for formation of OPEC

(295) Use map to evaluate expense of building rail

route between two locations

(288) Explain why U.S. imports certain products

(282) Understand why countries join international

organizations

(276) Recognize communications technology that

enabled rapid spread of ideas

(275) Infer from map factors that can contribute to

international conflicts over mineral resources

(263) Understand why immigrants congregate in

New York City

(246) Recognize reason why skyscrapers are built in 25th American cities

Percentile

(235) ©

90th

Percentile

(304) ©

25th

Percentile

(242) ©

(275) Interpret data displayed on maps to determine

rainfall pattern in South America

50th

Percentile

(266) ©

(257) Recognize relationship between topography

and location of built environments

(217) Recognize what method would enable crop

production in desert environment

(430) Infer and describe desert climate from

photographic clues

(395) Recognize features in photograph of village

that indicate a hot, dry climate (360) Identify two reasons for changes in rural and

urban populations represented on graph

(343) Explain historical reasons for language

patterns represented on map

(333) Interpret graph and explain travel trends

between the United States and Europe

(331) Explain reasons for international trade pattern

represented on map

(325) Explain changes in the United States population

centers represented on map

(341) Explain pros and cons of developing nuclear

energy

(331) Use map to identify and explain settlement

patterns in Egypt

(329) Explain why tundra is difficult to settle

(321) Interpret table and understand human

contribution to climatic changes

(311) Recognize what natural processes form fossil

fuels

(300) Use map to explain why early civilizations

flourished in Tigris/Euphrates valley

(294) Understand effects of ocean currents on

Peruvian ecosystem

(291) Interpret diagram to explain stage in water cycle

(283) Understand relationship between natural

features shown on map and population size

CONTENT AREA 3

Spatial Dynamics and Connections

CONTENT AREA 2

Environment and Society
7 6

500

350

325

300

275

250

225

200

0

NAEP

Scale

NOTE: In this graphic illustration, the locations of scale points are necessarily approximate for

questions clustered closely together.

SOURCE: National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational

Progress (NAEP), 1994 Geography Assessment.

90th

Percentile

(326) ©

50th

Percentile

(286) ©

(307) Infer trends in urban and rural population

patterns from tabled data

(294) Identify highest point on contour map

(287) Compare map projections to determine which

shows accurate shape and area of major

landmasses

(280) Draw map without grid and create legend based

on description of island

(277) Use two maps to determine North American

regional vegetation

(272) Use atlas to compare climates of different

regions

(264) Identify flat area using contour map

(249) Use atlas to identify physical barrier to

European travel

(231) Use map to identify area of earthquake activity

25th

Percentile

(260) ©

Figure 5.6 Map of Selected Items on the Geography

Content Area Subscales for Grade 12

Each geography question was mapped onto the

NAEP geography content area subscale on the

basis of students’ performance. The point on the

subscale at which a question is positioned on the

map represents the subscale score attained by

students who had a 65-percent probability of

successfully answering the question.

Thus, it can be said for each question and its

corresponding subscale score that students with

scores above that point on the subscale have a

greater than 65-percent chance of successfully

answering the question, while those below that

point on the subscale have a less than 65-percent

chance. (The probability was set at 74 percent for

multiple-choice questions.)

The item map presented in this figure contains

selected questions to illustrate the assessment. In

interpreting the item map information, it should

be kept in mind that students at different grades

demonstrated these abilities with grade-appropriate

materials.

(364) Infer cause of landscape formation from model

(358) Locate major physical features on outline map

(352) Explain origins of rock deposits found in

specific region

(350) Use atlas data to draw graph of areas of

continents and to create scale

(349) Draw cross-section graph of South America

from written directions

(340) Use atlas to explain location pattern of Chinese

industry

CONTENT AREA 1

Space and Place

(326) Recognize major location of fjords

(317) Graph elevation of landform using contour map
7 7

500

350

325

300

275

250

225

200

0

NAEP

Scale

500

350

325

300

275

250

225

200

0

NAEP

Scale

90th

Percentile

(325) ©

(276) Identify characteristic of urban business district

(270) Use graph to infer source of Hispanic migration

to the United States

(258) Locate Spanish-speaking areas on world map

25th

Percentile

(268) ©

90th

Percentile

(315) ©

50th

Percentile

(285) ©

25th

Percentile

(265) ©

(280) Identify natural boundaries of Chile

(277) Use atlas to identify pattern of land use in

Ireland

(271) Discuss pro and con of locating cities by rivers

(379) Use map to defend choice of site for town

shopping center

(357) Use map to describe urban growth pattern

(349) Explain causes of migration to Mexico City

(345) Compare and explain data from two population

pyramids

(323) Infer U.S. trade pattern from pie charts

(320) Understand impact of technology on suburban

development

(314) Understand impact of slavery on Caribbean

demographics

(310) Recognize economic characteristic of developing countries

(307) Interpret map to infer cause of African language

pattern

(297) Infer characteristics of developed nation from

statistical table

(291) Recognize regional characteristics

(391) Interpret tabled data on hydrocarbons in atmosphere and explain pattern shown

(360) Choose professionals for U.N. committee on

desertification and justify choices

(359) Analyze different perspectives on global warming

shown in cartoon

(355) Explain causes of South American village climate

based on description

(346) Explain differences between two countries’

population densities

(332) Explain reasons for tropical deforestation

(321) Describe effect of Amazonian deforestation on

North America

(308) Use contour map to explain formation of and

what features of landform obstruct human

settlement

(299) Recognize cause of greenhouse gases in

atmosphere

CONTENT AREA 2

Environment and Society

CONTENT AREA 3

Spatial Dynamics and Connections

50th

Percentile

(291) ©
Summary

Examining specific knowledge and skills demonstrated

by students at various points on the geography composite scale reveals a variety of patterns in student performance. Generally, students across grades in the higher

percentiles exhibited greater abilities to work with a

range of geographic tools, create maps based on tabular

or narrative data, grasp processes and relationships,

bring outside knowledge to bear on answering questions,

and analyze data. Perhaps predictably, these students

were more likely to read more pages per day in school,

spend more time on their homework, and more frequently discuss their studies at home than their lower

performing peers. (See Endnote 1.)

When student performance on specific tasks is

illustrated on item maps for each subscale, the percentiles

for each subscale help to place these performances in

perspective. Clearly, students found the assessment

challenging. For each subscale across grades, a number

of tasks fell at or above the 90th percentile. The NAEP

1994 geography assessment was rigorous; many tasks

demanded the ability to analyze and interpret visual,

tabular, and textual material. On the other hand (with

some variation across grades and subscales), some tasks

also fell at or just above the 50th percentiles, suggesting

that half the student population was able to answer a

reasonable portion of assessment questions.

Patterns of student subgroup performance on

the three geography content areas for the most part

reflected those shown on the composite scale. For

example, across the three content areas, a positive

relationship existed between increasing levels of parental

education and student scores, and students attending

nonpublic schools outperformed students attending

public schools. In addition, with only a few exceptions,

males outperformed females across content areas.

Endnotes

1. Results for pages read in school and time spent on

homework are based on collapsed data. The data do

not necessarily imply a direct, positive linear

relationship between student performance on the

NAEP geography assessment and students’ reports of

pages read in school and time spent on homework.

7 8
7 9

than did Black and Hispanic students. In addition,

students whose parents had higher levels of education

outperformed their peers who reported lower levels of

parental education, and students in nonpublic schools

outperformed those in public schools. On the other

hand, while male students outperformed female students only at grade 12 in the U.S. history assessment,

male students outperformed female students at all grades

in the NAEP 1994 geography assessment.

Subscale performances for geography generally

mirrored performances on the composite scale, with

some interesting variations. For example, at grade 4

males outperformed females on tasks assessing the

geography content area Space and Place, while there

were no significant performance differences in the other

two content areas.

Performance associated with home support and

other background variables also was consistent with

that found in other NAEP assessments. Frequent television watching was associated with lower scale scores,

while literacy materials in the home and discussing

studies at home were associated with higher scale scores.

It is encouraging that exposure to geography at grade 8

and to social studies at grade 4 were associated with

higher average geography scores, and the more semesters of potentially geography-related course work done

by twelfth graders, the better their performances.

While the NAEP results presented in this report

cannot be used to draw causal inferences, they do point

out interesting characteristics and patterns of student

performance. Future research and other projects and

analyses can use NAEP data to shed more light on

relationships between performance and background data,

which in turn can be used by policymakers, educators,

and citizens to bring change to the United States

educational system.

CONCLUSION

The NAEP 1994 geography assessment required students

to analyze data in a variety of formats, explain complex

geographic phenomena and processes, and show knowledge of relationships among human problems and

events and geographic phenomena. A variety of stimuli,

such as maps, photographs, tables, and charts, were used.

In addition, a large percentage of assessment time was

devoted to constructed-response questions, for which

students had to write their own answers and create

maps and tables.

Many students found the assessment difficult. For

the nation as a whole, approximately one-quarter

reached the Proficient achievement level, representing

solid academic performance. Furthermore, when

student performance on specific tasks is illustrated on item

maps for each NAEP content area subscale, a number of

tasks fell at and above the 90th percentiles for each

subscale, indicating that only top-performing students

could fully respond to these questions. On the other

hand, approximately 70 percent of students were able to

reach the Basic achievement level, which denotes partial

mastery of knowledge and skills fundamental for proficient grade-level work. And (with some variation across

grades and subscales), some tasks also fell near the 50th

percentile on the subscale item maps, suggesting that

half of the students sampled were able to answer a

reasonable portion of assessment questions.

Some of the patterns in performance are characteristic of patterns seen in other NAEP assessments, such

as reading and U.S. history. For example, White and

Asian students generally had higher average scale scores

8 1

NAEP’s Geography Assessment

Framework

The framework underlying the NAEP 1994 geography

assessment reflects current consensus among educators

and researchers about the study of geography.

The framework’s purpose was to provide a view of

geography on which to base the NAEP assessment.

Developing this framework and the specifications that

guided development of the assessment involved the

critical input of hundreds of individuals across the

country, including representatives of national education

organizations, teachers, parents, policymakers, business

leaders, and the interested general public. This

consensus process was managed by the Council of Chief

State School Officers for the National Assessment

Governing Board.

The framework sets forth a broad content matrix

that describes geography in terms of content areas and

cognitive dimensions. Figure A.1 illustrates this content

matrix.

Figure A.1 NAEP 1994 Geography Assessment Framework Elements

Spatial Dynamics

and Connections

What factors stimulate

human migrations?

Explain the motivations

of modern-day Mexicans

and Cubans for immigrating to the United States.

Compare current settlement and employment

patterns of Cuban and

Mexican immigrants in

the United States.

Environment

and Society

What mineral resources are

often extracted by strip

mining?

Explain the effects of strip

mining and shaft mining on

the landscape.

How can both economic and

environmental interests be

reconciled in an area of strip

mining?

Space

and Place

Where is the world’s largest

tropical rain forest?

Why are tropical rain forests

located near the equator?

Support the conclusion that

tropical rain forests

promote wide species

variation.

Content Dimension

Cognitive

Dimension

Knowing

Understanding

Applying*

Note: Example questions are illustrative only, and are not meant to represent the full array of assessment content.

* Applying refers to a range of higher-order thinking skills.

SOURCE: Geography Framework for the 1994 National Assessment of Educational Progress (1994), NAGB.

APPENDIX A

Overview of Procedures

Used in the NAEP 1994

Geography Assessment

Introduction

The conduct of a large-scale assessment of educational

progress entails the successful coordination of a

multitude of projects, committees, procedures, and

tasks. This appendix provides an overview of the NAEP

1994 geography assessment’s primary components:

framework, development, administration, scoring, and

analysis. A more extensive review of procedures and

methods used in the assessment will be included

in a subsequent technical report: The NAEP 1994

Technical Report.
8 2

Grade 4 Grade 8 Grade 12

Content Areas Target Actual Target Actual Target Actual

Space and Place 40% 42% 40% 39% 40% 42%

Environment and Society 30% 28% 30% 30% 30% 30%

Spatial Dynamics and Connections 30% 31% 30% 32% 30% 29%

Actual percentages do not sum to 100 due to rounding.

SOURCE: National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 1994 Geography Assessment.

The assessment framework specified the aspects of

geography to be measured and the percentage of

assessment time that should be devoted to each. Table

A.1 presents the target percentage distributions of

content areas as specified in the framework, along with

the actual percentage distributions in the assessment.

The actual content of the assessment was consistent with

the targeted distribution.

The Assessment Design

Each student in the assessment received an assessment

booklet containing general background questions,

geography questions, a set of background questions

specific to social studies or geography, and a set of

questions that determined students’ motivation and

familiarity with the assessment tasks. The geography

questions and their stimulus material were arranged

into blocks. Students were given either two 25-minute

blocks or one 50-minute block. At the fourth grade, only

25-minute blocks were used.

The grade 4 assessment consisted of six 25-minute

blocks, two of which were also administered to eighthgrade students. Each block contained single questions

and sets, a variety of stimulus material, and a combination of multiple-choice and constructed-response

questions. One or two of the constructed-response

questions in each block required an extended response.

A total of 59 multiple-choice questions, 23 short constructed-response questions, and 8 extended constructedresponse questions were administered at grade 4.

The grade 8 assessment consisted of six 25-minute

blocks and one 50-minute block. The six 25-minute

blocks include two also administered at grade 4 (total of

31 questions) and two also administered at grade 12

(total of 34 questions). The 25-minute blocks followed

the same pattern as those for grade 4. The 50-minute

block included questions all focused on a particular theme

and contained two extended constructed-response

questions. A total of 84 multiple-choice questions, 32

short constructed-response questions, and 9 extended

constructed-response questions were administered

at grade 8.

The grade 12 assessment consisted of six 25-minute

blocks (including two also administered at grade 8)

and one 50-minute block. These blocks followed the

same pattern as those for grades 4 and 8, except that

all blocks (with the exception of one block for both

grades 8 and 12 that included one extended constructedresponse question) included two extended constructedresponse questions. The 50-minute block included

questions all focusing on a particular theme and

contained two extended constructed-response questions.

A total of 85 multiple-choice questions, 25 short constructed-response questions, and 13 extended constructedresponse questions were administered at grade 12.

The assessment design allowed for maximum

coverage of the domain of geography at each grade,

while minimizing the time burden for any one student.

This was accomplished through the use of matrix

sampling, in which a representative sample of students

took each portion of the assessment. Individual students

were required to take only a small part; however, the

aggregate results across the entire assessment allow for

TABLE A.1 Target and Actual Distribution of Assessment Time by

Grade and Content Area

Grades 4, 8, and 12

CARD

REPORT

THE NA ION’S T

1994
 Geography Assessment
8 3

education, the structure and nature of their classroom

instruction, and the types of materials and approaches

they use in teaching geography.

Because the sampling of teachers for the teacher

questionnaires was based on participating students, the

teachers’ questionnaire responses do not necessarily

represent all fourth- and eighth-grade teachers

in the nation. Rather, they represent teachers of the

representative sample of students in the assessment.

Consequently, these findings portray the nature of

students’ instructional experiences and the background

of their teachers.

It is important to note that in this report, as in all

NAEP reports, the student is the unit of analysis —

even when information from teacher or school

questionnaires is being reported. Using the student as

the unit of analysis makes it possible to link students’

performance with their instructional and background

experiences, thus providing a rich source of relevant

information for educators and researchers. Although

this approach may provide a different perspective from

other studies that simply report information about

teachers or schools, it is consistent with NAEP’s goal of

providing information about the educational context

and performance of students.

Some students selected for the assessment were

judged by school authorities to be incapable of

meaningful participation in the assessment because they

had limited English-language proficiency, were mentally

challenged, or were functionally disabled. (See the

Limited English Proficient and Individualized Education

Plan section in this appendix.) For each student

excluded from the assessment, schools were required to

complete a questionnaire about the characteristics of

that student and the reason for exclusion.

broad reporting of geography abilities for the targeted

population.

In addition to matrix sampling, the assessment

design used a procedure for distributing booklets that

controlled for position and balance effects. Students

received different blocks of questions in their booklets

according to a specific design. Balanced incomplete

block (BIB) spiraling was used to assign blocks of

questions in a manner that balanced the positioning

of blocks across booklets and balanced the pairing of

blocks within booklets. The spiraling aspect of this

procedure cycles the booklets for administration so that

typically only a few students in any assessment session

receive the same booklet.

Teacher and School Questionnaires

One of the most important parts of NAEP’s efforts to

document the nature of students’ achievement is the

collection of contextual information regarding students’

school experiences. As a part of the 1994 geography

assessment, NAEP administered a questionnaire to

teachers responsible for teaching social studies or

geography to students who participated in the fourth- or

eighth-grade assessments. In addition, the principals or

other administrators of sampled schools at all grades

were asked to complete a school questionnaire. These

questionnaires were developed in consultation with an

expert panel. These instruments focused on five areas:

instructional content, instructional practices and

experiences, teacher characteristics, school conditions

and contexts, and conditions outside the school (i.e.,

home support, out-of-school activities, and attitudes).

The fourth- and eighth-grade social studies and

geography teacher questionnaires were composed of two

sections each. One section contained questions about

teachers’ background, education, and resources. The

other section contained questions about teachers’ recent

exposure to training in various areas of geography
8 4

NAEP Geography Samples

The results presented in this report are based on

nationally representative probability samples of fourth-,

eighth-, and twelfth-grade students. The samples were

selected using a complex multistage sampling design

involving the sampling of students from selected schools

within selected geographic areas across the country. The

sample design had the following stages:

1) selection of primary sampling units (PSUs) —

geographic areas defined as counties or groups of

counties);

2) selection of schools (both public and nonpublic)

within the selected areas; and

3) selection of students within selected schools.

Each selected school that participated in the

assessment, and each student assessed, represents a

portion of the population of interest. To make valid

inferences from the student samples to the respective

populations from which they were drawn, sampling

weights are needed. Sampling weights account for

disproportionate representation due to oversampling of

nonpublic schools and of students attending schools

with high concentrations of Black or Hispanic students

or both. Lower sampling rates for very small schools

must also be accounted for with the sampling weights.

Table A.2 provides a summary of the weighted and

unweighted student sample sizes for the geography

assessment. The numbers reported include both public

and nonpublic school students.

Unweighted and Weighted Sample Sizes by Grade and Region

Public and Nonpublic Schools

Grades 4, 8, and 12

CARD

REPORT

THE NA ION’S T

1994
 Geography Assessment

Unweighted Sample Size (and Percent of Total)

Grade 4 Grade 8 Grade 12

Nation 5,507 (100.0%) 6,878 (100.0%) 6,234 (100.0%)

Region

Northeast 1,362 ( 24.7%) 1,289 ( 18.7%) 1,407 ( 22.6%)

Southeast 1,445 ( 26.2%) 2,075 ( 30.2%) 1,729 ( 27.7%)

Central 1,216 ( 22.1%) 1,444 ( 21.0%) 1,275 ( 20.5%)

West 1,484 ( 26.9%) 2,070 ( 30.1%) 1,823 ( 29.2%)

Weighted Sample Size (and Percent of Total)

Grade 4 Grade 8 Grade 12

Nation 3,530,816 (100.0%) 3,447,145 (100.0%) 2,542,314 (100.0%)

Region

Northeast 767,700 ( 21.8%) 694,286 ( 20.1%) 543,540 ( 21.4%)

Southeast 813,351 ( 23.0%) 865,529 ( 25.1%) 572,658 ( 22.5%)

Central 899,746 ( 25.5%) 830,366 ( 24.1%) 700,601 ( 27.6%)

West 1,050,018 ( 29.7%) 1,056,963 ( 30.7%) 725,515 ( 28.5%)

Percentages may not total 100 percent due to rounding.

SOURCE: National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 1994 Geography Assessment.

TABLE A.2
8 5

Limited English Proficiency (LEP)

and Individualized Education Plan

(IEP) Students

It is NAEP’s intent to assess all selected students.

Therefore, every effort is made to ensure that all

selected students who are capable of participating in the

assessment are assessed. However, some students

sampled for participation in NAEP can be excused from

the sample according to carefully defined criteria.

Specifically, some students identified as having Limited

English Proficiency (LEP) or having an Individualized

Education Plan (IEP) may be incapable of participating

meaningfully in the assessment. These students are

identified as follows:

Students classified as LEP may be excluded from the

assessment if

© the student is a native speaker of a language other

than English; AND

© the student has been enrolled in an Englishspeaking school less than two years; AND

© the school staff most familiar with the student have

judged the student to be incapable of taking part in

the assessment.

Students classified as IEP may be excluded if

© the student is mainstreamed less than 50 percent of

the time in academic subjects and is judged to be

incapable of taking part in the assessment, OR

© the IEP team has determined that the student is

incapable of taking part meaningfully in the

assessment.

When there is doubt, the student is included in

the assessment.

For each student excused from the assessment,

school personnel complete a questionnaire about the

characteristics of that student and the reason for

exclusion.

Data Collection

The NAEP 1994 geography assessment was conducted

from January through March 1994, with some make-up

sessions in early April. As with all NAEP assessments,

data collection for the 1994 assessment was conducted

by trained field staff. For the geography assessment, this

was accomplished by Westat, Inc., staff.

Scoring

Materials from the 1994 assessment were shipped to

National Computer Systems in Iowa City for processing.

Receipt and quality control were managed through a

sophisticated bar-coding and tracking system. After all

appropriate materials were received from a school, they

were forwarded to the professional scoring area where

the responses to the constructed-response questions

were evaluated by trained staff using guidelines

prepared by NAEP. Each constructed-response question

had a unique scoring guide that defined the criteria to

be used in evaluating students’ responses. The extendedresponse questions were evaluated with four-level

rubrics. Many of the short constructed-response

questions were rated according to three-level rubrics

that permitted partial credit to be given.

For the NAEP 1994 geography assessment,

approximately 375,000 student responses were scored.

This figure includes a 25-percent rescore to monitor

interrater reliability. Comparable to the NAEP 1994

reading and U.S. history assessments, the overall

percentages of agreement between scorers for the 1994

geography reliability samples were 93 percent at grade 4,

93 percent at grade 8, and 90 percent at grade 12.

Data Analysis and IRT Scaling

Subsequent to the professional scoring, all information

was transcribed to the NAEP database at Educational

Testing Service. Each processing activity was conducted

with rigorous quality control. After the assessment

information had been compiled in the database, the data

were weighted according to the population structure.

The weighting for the samples reflected the probability

of selection for each student as a result of the sampling

design, adjusted for nonresponse. Through stratification,

the weighting ensured that the representation of certain

subpopulations corresponded to figures from the U.S.

Bureau of the Census and the Current Population

Survey.1

Analyses were then conducted to determine the

percentages of students who gave various responses to

each geography and background question. In

determining these percentages for the geography

questions, a distinction was made between missing

responses at the end of a block (i.e., missing responses

subsequent to the last question the student answered)

and missing responses prior to the last observed

response. Missing responses before the last observed
8 6

response were considered intentional omissions.

Missing responses at the end of the block were

considered “not reached” and treated as if the questions

had not been presented to the student. In calculating

response percentages for each question, only students

classified as having been presented the question were

included in the denominator of the statistic.

It is standard ETS practice to treat all nonrespondents

to the last question in a block as if they had not reached

the question. For multiple-choice and short constructedresponse questions, this practice produces a reasonable

pattern of results in that the proportion reaching the

last question is not dramatically smaller than the

proportion reaching the next-to-last question. However,

for blocks that ended with extended constructedresponse questions, the standard ETS practice would

result in extremely large drops in the proportion of

students attempting the final question. A drop of such

magnitude seemed somewhat implausible. Therefore,

for blocks ending with an extended constructed-response

question, students who answered the next-to-last question

but did not respond to the extended constructedresponse question were classified as having intentionally

omitted the last question.

Item response theory (IRT) was used to estimate

average geography scale scores for the nation and for

various subgroups of interest within the nation. IRT

models the probability of answering a question in a

certain way as a mathematical function of skill. The

main purpose of IRT analysis is to provide a common

scale on which performance can be compared across

groups such as those defined by grades and characteristics,

including race/ethnicity and gender.

Because of the BIB-spiraling design used by NAEP,

students do not receive enough questions about a

specific topic to provide reliable information about

individual performance. Traditional test scores for

individual students, even those based on IRT, would lead

to misleading estimates of population characteristics,

such as subgroup means and percentages of students at

or above a certain achievement level. Consequently,

NAEP constructs sets of plausible values designed to

represent the distribution of scores in the population.

A plausible value for an individual is not a scale score for

that individual but may be regarded as a representative

value from the distribution of potential scale scores for

all students in the population with similar characteristics and identical patterns of item response. Statistics

describing performance on the NAEP geography scale

are based on the plausible values. They estimate values

that would have been obtained had individual

performances been observed — that is, had each student

responded to a sufficient number of cognitive questions

so that performance could be precisely estimated.2

For the NAEP 1994 geography assessment, withingrade scales were created to report performance for

each subscale (i.e., content area). Similar scaling

procedures were used to establish each of the three

subscales. Specifically, three within-grade subscales

(one for each grade) were established for each of the

geography content areas. The within-grade subscales for

grades 4 and 12 were then linked to the grade 8 subscale

to form a common reporting metric. This common

reporting metric, which runs from 0 to 500 for each of

the subscales, was established so that the mean scores

across all three grades is 250 and the standard deviation

of the scores is 50.

The composite NAEP geography scale was produced

as a weighted average of the subscales, the weights

being given by the target percentages shown in Table A.1.

The reporting metric of the composite scale, which also

runs from 0 to 500, was again established so that the

mean score across all three grades is 250. No constraints

were imposed on the standard deviation of the crossgrade composite scores.

It may be helpful here to provide some guidance to

the reader of this report about the types of cross-grade

and cross-scale inferences that are appropriate. The use

of a common cross-grade metric for the subscales and

the composite scale was motivated primarily by issues

of convenience in the reporting of results. In producing

the subscales, IRT parameters for questions common

across the grades were not constrained to be equal. As

a result of this scaling convention, cross-grade comparisons of scale score averages, both at the subscale

level as well as for the composite scale, may not be

meaningful. Similarly, scale score differences (e.g.,

between subscale or composite scale averages for males

and females) should probably not be compared across

grades. The reader is best served by focusing on withingrade group comparisons and inferences.
8 7

The use of a common scaling procedure for each

of the subscales does provide for some within-grade

normative meanings across subscales. For example, at

grade 4, a score of 200 is one cross-grade standard

deviation unit below the cross-grade average for each of

the geography subscales. Similarly, a score of 210 is

four-fifths of a cross-grade standard deviation below the

cross-grade average for each of the scales. A group,

for example males, scoring 200 on the Space and Place

subscale and 210 on the Environment and Society

subscale did indeed perform “better” on the latter than

on the former in a cross-grade normative sense.

However, other inferences about relative performance

in, say, a percent-correct metric do not necessarily

follow. For example, a score of 200 on the Space and

Place subscale may imply a higher expected percentcorrect score on the collection of assessment exercises

that define that scale than is implied by a score of 210

on the Environment and Society subscale. Thus,

continuing with the current example, performance on

the Space and Place subscale was better in the percentcorrect sense than performance on the Environment

and Society subscale.

In Chapter 5, performance across subscales is

compared by examining patterns of subgroup differences

(i.e., patterns of statistical significance between subgroups

across the three subscales). These patterns are discussed

separately for each of the three grades. Within-grade

inferences based on such comparisons are defensible

given the limited degree of comparability that exists in

the subscale reporting metrics. As noted above, other

types of inferences (e.g., inferences involving subscale

score differences) may be less defensible.

The subscales summarize student performance

across all three question types in the assessment

(multiple-choice, short constructed-response, and

extended constructed-response). In producing these

subscales, two IRT models were used. Multiple-choice

questions were scaled using the three-parameter logistic

(3PL) model; and short constructed-response questions

rated according to a three-level rubric, as well as

extended constructed-response questions rated on a

four-level rubric, were scaled using a generalized

partial-credit (GPC) model.3

 Developed by ETS and first

used in 1992, the GPC model permits the scaling of

questions scored according to multipoint rating

schemes. The model takes full advantage of the

information available from each of the student response

categories used for these more complex constructedresponse questions.

The geography scale is composed of two types of

questions: multiple-choice and constructed-response

(scored according to a partial-credit model). One natural

question about the scale concerns the amount of

information contributed by each type of question.

Unfortunately, this question has no simple answer

for the NAEP geography assessment, due to the complex

procedures used to form the composite geography scale.

The information provided by a given question is

determined by the IRT model used to scale the question

and is a function of proficiencies.4

 Thus, the answer to

the query “How much information do the different types

of questions provide?” will differ for each level of

geography proficiency. When considering the composite

geography scale, the answer is even more complicated.

The geography data are scaled separately by the

geography content areas. As discussed on the previous

page, the composite scale is a weighted combination of

these subscales. IRT information functions are only

strictly comparable when they are linked on a common

scale. Because the composite scale is based on three

separate calibrations, without any common item linking,

there is no direct way to compare the information

provided by the questions on the composite scale.

NAEP Reporting Groups

Findings from the NAEP 1994 geography assessment are

presented for groups of students defined by shared

characteristics. Data are reported for subgroups only

where sufficient numbers of students and adequate

school representation are present. There must be at

least 62 students in a particular subgroup, and these

students must come from at least six different PSUs (see

description of sampling design on page 84). Data for all

students, regardless of whether their subgroup was

reported separately, were included in computing overall

national and regional results.

The reporting subgroups presented in this report

include: region, race/ethnicity, gender, parents’ highest

level of education, type of school, and type of location.

Definitions of these subgroups are provided on the

following page.
8 8

SOUTHEAST

Alabama

Arkansas

Florida

Georgia

Kentucky

Louisiana

Mississippi

North Carolina

South Carolina

Tennessee

Virginia*

West Virginia

Region. Results are reported for four regions of the

nation: Northeast, Southeast, Central and West. States

included in each region are shown in Figure A.2. All

50 states and the District of Columbia are listed. U.S.

territories were not assigned to a region.

Race/Ethnicity. The race/ethnicity variable is an

imputed definition of race/ethnicity, derived from up to

three sources of information. This variable is used for

race/ethnicity subgroup comparisons. Two questions

from the student demographics questionnaire were used

in the determination of derived race/ethnicity:

If you are Hispanic, what is your Hispanic

background?

j I am not Hispanic.

j Mexican, Mexican American, or Chicano

j Puerto Rican

j Cuban

j Other Spanish or Hispanic background

Students who responded to this question by filling

in the second, third, fourth, or fifth oval were

considered Hispanic. For students who filled in the first

oval, did not respond to the question, or provided

information that was illegible or could not be classified,

responses to the following question were examined in an

effort to determine race/ethnicity.

Which best describes you?

j White (not Hispanic)

j Black (not Hispanic)

j Hispanic (“Hispanic” means someone who is

Mexican, Mexican American, Chicano,

Puerto Rican, Cuban, or other Spanish or

Hispanic background.)

j Asian (“Asian” means someone who is Chinese,

Japanese, Korean, Vietnamese, or other Asian

background.)

j Pacific Islander (“Pacific Islander” means

someone who is from a Filipino, Hawaiian, or

other Pacific Island background.)

j American Indian or Alaskan Native (“American

Indian or Alaskan Native” means someone who is

from one of the American Indian tribes, or one of

the original people of Alaska.)

j Other

Students’ race/ethnicity was then assigned to correspond with their selection. For students who filled in the

seventh oval (“Other”), provided illegible information or

information that could not be classified, or did not

respond at all, race/ethnicity as provided from school

records was used.

Derived race/ethnicity could not be determined

for students who did not respond to either of the

demographic questions and for whom race/ethnicity was

not provided by the school.

Figure A.2 States Included in the Four Regions

*Note that the part of Virginia that is included in the Washington, DC, metropolitan area is

included in the Northeast region; the remainder of the state is included in the Southeast region.

NORTHEAST

Connecticut

Delaware

District of Columbia

Maine

Maryland

Massachusetts

New Hampshire

New Jersey

New York

Pennsylvania

Rhode Island

Vermont

Virginia*

CENTRAL

Illinois

Indiana

Iowa

Kansas

Michigan

Minnesota

Missouri

Nebraska

North Dakota

Ohio

South Dakota

Wisconsin

WEST

Alaska

Arizona

California

Colorado

Hawaii

Idaho

Montana

Nevada

New Mexico

Oklahoma

Oregon

Texas

Utah

Washington

Wyoming
8 9

Grade 8

Father’s Education 0.84 0.67 0.75

Mother’s Education 0.79 0.62 0.65

Grade 12

Father’s Education 0.90 0.80 0.85

Mother’s Education 0.87 0.78 0.74

SOURCE: For grade 8 – P. Kaufman and R.A. Rasinski, Quality of Responses of Eighth-Grade Students in

NELS: 88, Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics, NCES 91-487; For grade 12 – W. F. Fetters,

P.S. Stowe, and J.A. Owings, Quality of Responses of High School Students to Questionnaire Items, Washington,

DC: National Center for Education Statistics, NCES 84-342.

Gender. Results are reported separately for males

and females.

Parents’ Highest Level Education Level. The parents’

education level variable is derived from responses to two

questions in the student demographic questionnaire.

Students were asked to indicate the extent of their

mother’s education (How far in school did your mother

go?) by choosing one of the following:

j She did not finish high school.

j She graduated from high school.

j She had some education after high school.

j She graduated from college.

j I don’t know.

Students were asked to provide the same information

about the extent of their father’s education (How far in

school did your father go?) by choosing one of the

following:

j He did not finish high school.

j He graduated from high school.

j He had some education after high school.

j He graduated from college.

j I don’t know.

The information was combined into one parental

education reporting category as follows: if a student

indicated the extent of education for only one parent,

that level was included in the data. If a student indicated

the extent of education for both parents, the higher of

the two levels was included in the data. For students

who did not know the level of education for both parents

or did not know the level of education for one parent

and did not respond for the other, the parental

education level was classified as unknown. If the student

did not respond for both parents, the student was

recorded as having provided no response.

It should be noted that approximately one-third of

fourth graders and one-tenth of eighth graders reported

not knowing the education level of either of their

parents. The percentages of students who reported not

knowing their parents’ education level were larger for

fourth-grade Hispanic students and for eighth-grade

Black and Hispanic students compared to their White

counterparts. (See Table A.3)

In addition, evidence from other surveys by the

National Center for Education Statistics that gather data

from students and parents indicates larger discrepancies

CARD

REPORT

THE NA ION’S T

1994
 Geography Assessment

Percentage of Students Who

Reported Not Knowing

Their Parents’ Highest Level of

Education, by Race/Ethnicity

Grades 4, 8, and 12

1994 Geography Assessment

TABLE A.3

Total White Black Hispanic

Grade 4 34 (0.9) 33 (1.2) 36 (1.7) 41 (2.6)

Grade 8 10 (0.5) 7 (0.4) 14 (1.2) 18 (1.9)

Grade 12 3 (0.2) 1 (0.2) 5 (0.7) 8 (1.1)

The standard errors of the percentages appear in parenthesis. It can be said with 95 percent certainty that for

each population of interest, the value for the whole population is within plus or minus two standard errors of

the estimate for the sample.

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

1994 Geography Assessment.

TABLE A.4

Correlations Between Students’ and

Parents’ Reports of Parents’ Education Level,

 by Race/Ethnicity

Grades 8 and 12

White Black Hispanic

Type of School. Results are reported by the type of

school that the student attends: public or nonpublic.

Nonpublic schools include Catholic and other nonpublic

schools. Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) schools and

domestic Department of Defense (DoD) schools are not

included in either the public or nonpublic categories

but are included in the overall national results.

between students’ and parents’ reports for Black and

Hispanic students as compared to White students.

These differences between racial/ethnic groups are

most evident at grade 8. As shown in Table A.4, the

correlations between students’ and parents’ reports of

parental education were lower for Black and Hispanic

students than for White students at both grades 8 and 12,

although all correlations were higher in twelfth grade.
9 0

Type of Location. Results are reported for students

attending schools in three mutually exclusive location

types: central city, urban fringe/large town, and rural/

small town:

Central City: This category includes central cities of

all Standard Metropolitan Statistical Areas

(SMSAs).5

 Central City is a geographic term and is

not synonymous with “inner city.”

Urban Fringe/Large Town: The urban fringe category

includes all densely settled places and areas within

SMSAs that are classified as urban by the U.S. Bureau

of the Census. A Large Town is defined as a place

outside a SMSA with a population greater than or

equal to 25,000.

Rural/Small Town: Rural includes all places and

areas with populations of less than 2,500 that are

classified as rural by the U.S. Bureau of the Census.

A Small Town is defined as a place outside a SMSA

with a population of less than 25,000 but greater

than or equal to 2,500.

As described earlier, the NAEP geography scale

makes it possible to examine relationships between

students’ performance and a variety of background

factors measured by NAEP. However, the fact that a

relationship exists between achievement and another

variable does not reveal the underlying cause of the

relationship, which may be influenced by a number of

other variables. Similarly, the assessment does not

capture the influence of unmeasured variables. The

results are most useful when they are considered in

combination with other knowledge about the student

population and the educational system, such as trends

in instruction, changes in the school-age population,

and societal demands and expectations.

Estimating Variability

Because the statistics presented in this report are

estimates of group and subgroup performance based on

samples of students, rather than the values that could be

calculated if every student in the nation answered every

question, it is important to account for the degree of

uncertainty associated with the estimates. Two components

of uncertainty are accounted for in the variability of

statistics based on scale scores: 1) the uncertainty due to

sampling only a relatively small number of students,

and 2) the uncertainty due to sampling only a relatively

small number of questions. The variability associated

with the estimated percentages of students with certain

background characteristics or who answered a certain

cognitive question correctly is accounted for by the first

component alone.

In addition to providing estimates of percentages of

students and their average scores, this report provides

information about the uncertainty of each statistic.

Because NAEP uses complex sampling procedures,

conventional formulas for estimating sampling

variability that assume simple random sampling are

inappropriate. NAEP uses a jackknife replication

procedure to estimate standard errors. The jackknife

standard error provides a reasonable measure of

uncertainty for any information about students that can

be observed without error. However, each student

typically responds to so few questions within any

content area that the score measurement for any single

student would be imprecise. In this case, using plausiblevalues technology makes it possible to describe the

performance of groups and subgroups of students, but

the underlying imprecision that makes this step

necessary adds an additional component of variability to

statistics based on NAEP scale scores.6

The reader is reminded that, like findings from all

surveys, NAEP results are also subject to other kinds of

errors including the effects of imperfect adjustment for

student and school nonresponse, and other unknowable

effects associated with the particular instrumentation

and data collection methods. Nonsampling errors can be

attributed to a number of sources: inability to obtain

complete information about all selected schools in the

sample (some students or schools refused to participate,

or students participated but answered only certain

questions); ambiguous definitions; differences in interpreting questions; inability or unwillingness to give

correct information; mistakes in recording, coding, or

scoring data; and other errors of collecting, processing,

sampling, and estimating missing data. The extent of

nonsampling error is difficult to estimate. By their

nature, the impact of such errors cannot be reflected in

the data-based estimates of uncertainty provided in

NAEP reports.
9 1

Drawing Inferences from the Results

The use of confidence intervals, based on the standard

errors, provides a way to make inferences about the

population means and percentages in a manner that

reflects the uncertainty associated with the sample

estimates.

An estimated sample mean ± 2 standard errors

represents an approximate 95-percent confidence

interval for the corresponding population quantity. This

means that with approximately 95-percent certainty, the

average scale score for the entire population of interest

is within ± 2 standard errors of the sample mean.

As an example, suppose that the average score of

students in a particular group was 256, with a standard

error of 1.2. A 95-percent confidence interval for the

population quantity would be as follows:

Mean ± 2 standard errors

256 ± 2 3 1.2

256 ± 2.4

253.6, 258.4

Thus, one can conclude with 95-percent certainty

that the average scale score for the entire population of

students in that group is between 253.6 and 258.4.

Similar confidence intervals can be constructed for

percentages, provided that the percentages are not

extremely large (greater than 90) or extremely small

(less than 10). For extreme percentages, confidence

intervals constructed in the above manner may not be

appropriate. However, procedures for obtaining accurate

confidence intervals are quite complicated. Thus,

comparisons involving extreme percentages should be

interpreted with this in mind.

To determine whether there is a real difference

between the mean score (or percentage of a certain

attribute) for two groups in the population, one needs

to obtain an estimate of the degree of uncertainty

associated with the difference between the means or

percentages of these groups for the sample. When

comparing two independent estimates, this estimate of

the degree of uncertainty — called the standard error of

the difference between the groups — is obtained by

taking the square of each group’s standard error,

summing these squared standard errors, and then

taking the square root of this sum.

SE SE SE AB A B = + 2 2

In a manner similar to that in which the standard

error for an individual group mean or percentage is

used, the standard error of the difference can be used to

help determine whether differences between groups in

the population are real. The difference between the

mean scale score or percentage of the two groups ± 2

standard errors of the difference represents an

approximate 95-percent confidence interval. If the

resulting interval includes zero, there is insufficient

evidence to claim a real difference between groups in

the population. If the interval does not contain zero, the

difference between groups is statistically significant

(different) at the .05 level.

The procedures described in this section, and the

certainty ascribed to intervals (e.g., a 95-percent confidence interval) are based on statistical theory that

assumes that only one confidence interval or test of

statistical significance is being performed. When one

considers sets of confidence intervals, statistical theory

indicates that the certainty associated with the entire set

of intervals is less than that attributable to each individual

comparison from the set. If one wants to hold the

certainty level for a specific set of comparisons at a

particular level (e.g., 95 percent), adjustments (called

multiple-comparisons procedures) need to be made. A

more complete discussion of the multiple-comparisons

procedures is presented in the NAEP 1994 Technical

Report.

The standard errors for means and percentages

reported by NAEP are statistics and are subject to a

certain degree of uncertainty. In certain cases, typically

when the standard error is based on a small number of

students (or when the group of students is enrolled in a

small number of schools), the amount of uncertainty

associated with the standard errors may be quite large.

Throughout this report, estimates of standard errors

subject to a large degree of uncertainty are designated

by the symbol “!”. In such cases, the standard errors —

and any confidence intervals or significance tests involving

these standard errors — should be interpreted cautiously.
9 2

Endnotes

1. For additional information about the use of weighting

procedures in NAEP, see Johnson, E. G. (1989).

“Considerations and techniques for the analysis of

NAEP data.” Journal of Educational Statistics,

14(4), 303-34.

2. For theoretical and empirical justification of the

procedures employed, see Mislevy, R. J. (1988).

“Randomization-based inferences about latent

variables from complex samples.” Pyschometrika,

56(2), 177-96.

For computational details, see Mislevy, R. J. (1990).

“Scaling procedures.” In E.G. Johnson & R. Zwick, in

collaboration with N. Allen, et al. Focusing the new

design: The NAEP 1988 Technical Report. Princeton,

NJ: National Assessment of Educational Progress,

Educational Testing Service. See also Mislevy, R. J.

(1992). “Scaling procedures.” In E.G. Johnson &

N. Allen, The 1990 NAEP Technical Report. Washington,

DC: National Center for Education Statistics.

3. Muraki, E. (1992). “A generalized partial credit

model: Application of an EM algorithm.” Applied

Psychological Measurement, 16(2), 159-76.

4. Donoghue, J. R. (1994). “An empirical examination of

the IRT information of polytomously scored reading

items under the generalized partial credit model.”

Journal of Educational Measurement, 31(4), 295-311.

Muraki, E. (1993). “Information functions of the

generalized partial credit model.” Applied

Psychological Measurement, 17(4), 351-63.

5. Standard Metropolitan Statistical Area (SMSA) as

defined by the Office of Management and Budget.

6. For further details, see Johnson, E. G., & Rust, K. F.

(1992). “Population inferences and variance estimation

for NAEP data.” Journal of Educational Statistics,

17(2), 175-90.
9 3

“Partial or better,” “Essential or better,” and “Complete.”

These distinct score levels were then analyzed in the

same manner as questions scored dichotomously, as

either correct or incorrect. Thus, for example, an

extended constructed-response question might anchor

at the 50th percentile for “Partial or better” responses

and at the 90th percentile for “Essential or better”

responses.

A committee of geography education experts,

including teachers for the grades involved, college

professors, state curriculum supervisors, and researchers,

was assembled to review the sets of questions identified

for each percentile band. The committee was divided

into three groups, one for each grade. Each group

examined and analyzed questions that anchored at the

25th, 50th, and 90th percentiles to determine the

specific geography knowledge and abilities associated

with each question.

Committee members were also given the sets of

questions at each grade that “did not anchor” to inform

their decisions about what students could do by seeing

examples of what they could not do. Drawing on their

knowledge of geography, committee members were

asked to summarize student performance by describing

the knowledge, skills, and abilities demonstrated by

students in each of the score bands.

The performance descriptions are cumulative (that

is, the abilities described for the lower-performing

students are considered to be among the abilities of

students performing at higher points on the scale).

Therefore, the full description of students’ geography

knowledge and abilities in the middle-scale band would

include those abilities described at the lower band.

Similarly, the abilities of students performing at the

higher scale band include the geography abilities

described for students at the middle and lower bands.

Profiling Students’ Study Habits

Using the scale bands defined for the anchoring process

described above, the profiling of students’ study habits

was accomplished by examining the responses of

students within those bands to selected background

questions. Tables B.1, B.2, and B.3 contain a complete

presentation of students’ responses to the three

background questions highlighted in Chapter 5. The

percentages that appear in the tables are conditional

on the anchor scale point. That is, they are percentages

of students who scored within a five percentile point

range on either side of the specified scale point.

APPENDIX B

Describing Students’

Geography Performance

This appendix contains detailed information about

the procedures used for describing students’ geography

knowledge and abilities and profiling students’ study

habits. Chapter 5 presents the results of these

procedures.

Performance Descriptions Based on

the Geography Composite Scale

A procedure known as scale anchoring was used to

develop descriptions of student performance at selected

points on the NAEP geography composite scale. The

scale points selected for anchoring reflect three levels of

geography knowledge and abilities corresponding to

lower, middle, and higher performing students. These

levels correspond to the 25th, 50th, and 90th percentile

points on the composite scale as established by the

performance of students in 1994 — the first assessment

administered under NAEP’s current geography

framework.

Around each percentile point, a band was built to

define a range of scale scores. Students described as

being at a particular level were within a range of five

percentile points on either side of the specified scale

point. For example, the 50th percentile was defined as

the region between the 45th and 55th percentile points

on the scale. A question was identified as anchoring

at a percentile point on the scale if at least 65 percent of

the students within that percentile band answered the

question successfully. (The criterion was set at 74

percent for multiple-choice questions to correct for the

possibility of answering correctly by guessing.)

After defining the bands of the scale to be anchored,

the next step in the process was to identify: (1) questions

answered correctly for dichotomously scored questions

and (2) questions answered at a particular score level for

partial credit constructed-response questions. Because

the extended constructed-response questions were

scored according to four levels of performance, each

extended constructed-response question was treated as

three distinct questions corresponding to scores of
9 4

25th Percentile 50th Percentile 90th Percentile

Scale Range 170-187 Scale Range 206-216 Scale Range 249-269

Time Spent Each Day on Homework

More Than 1 Hour 16 (2.1) 16 (2.0) 14 (3.1)

One Hour 28 (3.5) 31 (2.5) 33 (3.1)

One Half Hour or Less 39 (2.4) 37 (2.9) 37 (3.6)

Assigned/Don’t Usually Do 5 (2.2) 4 (1.3) 1 (0.6)

Not Usually Assigned 13 (2.5) 13 (2.5) 14 (3.4)

Discuss Studies at Home

Daily/Almost Daily 53 (3.6) 57 (3.4) 61 (3.6)

Once/Twice a Week 20 (3.6) 20 (2.8) 24 (2.6)

Once/Twice a Month 5 (1.3) 6 (1.7) 6 (2.1)

Never/Hardly Ever 22 (2.2) 17 (2.1) 9 (1.7)

Pages Read Each Day in School

and for Homework

More Than 20 21 (2.1) 21 (2.5) 24 (3.3)

16 to 20 13 (2.3) 14 (3.1) 19 (2.9)

11 to 15 13 (1.6) 15 (1.9) 19 (2.6)

6 to 10 23 (3.1) 25 (3.1) 25 (2.8)

5 or Fewer 30 (2.7) 25 (2.1) 13 (2.1)

Differences between the groups may be partially explained by other factors not included in this table.

The standard errors of the estimated percentages appear in parenthesis. It can be said with 95-percent certainty that, for each population of interest, the value for the whole population is within plus or minus

two standard errors of the estimate for the sample.

Percentages of students in the subgroups may not total 100 due to rounding.

SOURCE: National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 1994 Geography Assessment.

Responses of Students Near Selected Percentile Points

to General Study Habit Questions

Grade 4

TABLE B.1

CARD

REPORT

THE NA ION’S T

1994
 Geography Assessment
9 5

TABLE B.2 Responses of Students Near Selected Percentile Points

to General Study Habit Questions

Grade 8

25th Percentile 50th Percentile 90th Percentile

Scale Range 230-243 Scale Range 258-267 Scale Range 295-312

Time Spent Each Day on Homework

More Than 1 Hour 23 (2.4) 27 (2.6) 33 (2.7)

One Hour 35 (3.5) 38 (2.5) 37 (2.6)

One Half Hour or Less 23 (3.5) 22 (3.3) 21 (1.8)

Assigned/Don’t Usually Do 10 (1.7) 7 (1.3) 4 (1.1)

Not Usually Assigned 9 (1.6) 7 (1.6) 5 (1.1)

Discuss Studies at Home

Daily/Almost Daily 33 (3.0) 37 (3.9) 49 (2.8)

Once/Twice a Week 26 (3.4) 31 (2.9) 28 (3.4)

Once/Twice a Month 13 (2.2) 12 (2.4) 10 (1.7)

Never/Hardly Ever 28 (3.0) 20 (2.1) 13 (1.9)

Pages Read Each Day for School

and Homework

More Than 20 9 (1.9) 10 (2.3) 17 (2.4)

16 to 20 9 (1.4) 10 (2.3) 13 (2.1)

11 to 15 14 (2.0) 15 (2.2) 18 (2.0)

6 to 10 28 (2.3) 31 (2.5) 30 (2.2)

5 or Fewer 41 (3.1) 35 (2.8) 23 (2.7)

Differences between the groups may be partially explained by other factors not included in this table.

The standard errors of the estimated percentages appear in parenthesis. It can be said with 95-percent certainty that, for each population of interest, the value for the whole population is within plus or minus

two standard errors of the estimate for the sample.

Percentages of students in the subgroups may not total 100 due to rounding.

SOURCE: National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 1994 Geography Assessment.

CARD

REPORT

THE NA ION’S T

1994
 Geography Assessment
9 6

25th Percentile 50th Percentile 90th Percentile

Scale Range 259-270 Scale Range 283-291 Scale Range 216-329

Time Spent Each Day on Homework

More Than 1 Hour 22 (2.4) 24 (2.2) 38 (2.4)

One Hour 30 (2.9) 29 (2.7) 24 (2.6)

One Half Hour or Less 19 (1.6) 25 (2.3) 26 (2.6)

Assigned/Don’t Usually Do 10 (1.6) 8 (1.3) 8 (1.5)

Not Usually Assigned 19 (3.1) 14 (1.9) 4 (1.3)

Discuss Studies at Home

Daily/Almost Daily 27 (2.3) 30 (3.2) 38 (2.6)

Once/Twice a Week 28 (2.8) 29 (2.7) 36 (2.7)

Once/Twice a Month 15 (1.7) 16 (2.4) 11 (1.3)

Never/Hardly Ever 30 (3.2) 25 (2.2) 15 (2.4)

Pages Read Each Day for School

and Homework

More Than 20 9 (1.5) 13 (1.6) 26 (2.6)

16 to 20 8 (1.6) 12 (2.1) 15 (2.1)

11 to 15 12 (2.5) 16 (2.1) 16 (2.5)

6 to 10 27 (2.5) 23 (3.1) 19 (2.8)

5 or Fewer 44 (2.9) 37 (2.9) 23 (3.2)

Differences between the groups may be partially explained by other factors not included in this table.

The standard errors of the estimated percentages appear in parenthesis. It can be said with 95-percent certainty that, for each population of interest, the value for the whole population is within plus or minus

two standard errors of the estimate for the sample.

Percentages of students in the subgroups may not total 100 due to rounding.

SOURCE: National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 1994 Geography Assessment.

Responses of Students Near Selected Percentile Points

to General Study Habit Questions

Grade 12

TABLE B.3

CARD

REPORT

THE NA ION’S T

1994
 Geography Assessment
9 7

Item-Mapping Procedures

To map questions to particular points on the NAEP

geography subscales, a response probability convention

had to be adopted that would divide those who had a

higher probability of success from those who had a

lower probability. Establishing a response probability

convention has an impact on the mapping of assessment

questions onto the geography subscales. A lower

boundary convention maps the geography questions at

lower points along the geography scales, and a higher

boundary convention maps the same questions at higher

points along the scales. The underlying distribution of

geography skills in the population does not change, but

the choice of a response probability convention does have

an impact on the proportion of the student population

that is reported as “able to do” the questions on the

geography scales.

No point along the probability scale is clearly

superior to any other point. If the convention were set

with a boundary at 50 percent, those above the

boundary would be more likely to get a question right

than to get it wrong, while those below that boundary

would be more likely to get the question wrong than

right. While this convention has some intuitive appeal,

it was rejected on the grounds that having a 50/50

chance of getting the question right shows an

insufficient degree of mastery. If the convention were set

with a boundary at 80 percent, students above the

criterion would have a high probability of success with a

question. However, many of the students below this

criterion show some level of geography ability that such

a stringent criterion would ignore. In particular, those

in the range between 50 and 80 percent correct would

be more likely to get the question right than wrong, yet

would not be in the group described as “able to do” the

question.

In a compromise between the 50-percent and the

80-percent conventions, NAEP has adopted two related

response probability conventions: (1) 74 percent for

multiple-choice questions (to correct for the possibility

of answering correctly by guessing); and (2) 65 percent

for constructed-response questions (where guessing is

not a factor). These probability conventions were established, in part, based on an intuitive judgment that they

would provide the best picture of students’ geography

knowledge and skills.

Some additional support for the dual conventions

adopted by NAEP was provided by Huynh (1994).1

 He

examined the IRT information provided by questions,

according to the IRT model used in scaling NAEP

questions. (“Information” is used here in a technical

sense. See the NAEP 1994 Technical Report for details.)

Following Bock (1972),2

 Huynh decomposed the item

information into that provided by a correct response

[P (u) *I (u)] and that provided by an incorrect response

[(1-P (u)) *I (u)]. Huynh showed that the item information provided by a correct response to a constructedresponse question is maximized at the point along the

geography scale at which two-thirds of the students get

the question correct (for multiple-choice questions,

information is maximized at the point at which 74

percent get the question correct). However, maximizing

the item information I (u), rather than the information

provided by a correct response [P (u) *I (u)], would

imply an item mapping criterion closer to 50 percent.

Endnotes

1. Huynh, H. (1994, October). Some technical aspects

of standard setting. Paper presented at the Joint

Conference on Standard Setting for Large-Scale

Assessment, Washington, DC.

2. Bock, R. D. (1972). “Estimating item parameters and

latent ability when responses are scored in two or

more latent categories.” Psychometrika, 37, 29-51.
9 8
9 9

For multiple-choice questions, the correct answer is

marked (©). For constructed-response questions, an

abbreviated scoring rubic is provided. The sample

student responses have been reproduced from

assessment booklets and represent typical student

performance.

The table accompanying each sample question

presents two types of percentages: (1) the overall percentage of students within a grade who answered the

question successfully and (2) the percentages of students within each of the achievement level intervals —

Basic, Proficient, and Advanced — who answered the

question successfully. For grades 4 and 12, the percentages for students within the Advanced achievement level

interval are not presented, however, because of the small

sample sizes. The table also includes the percentages of

students below Basic who successfully answered the

questions. (Sample size criteria for reporting results are

described in Appendix A.)

APPENDIX C

Sample Questions

from the NAEP 1994

Geography Assessment

This appendix presents additional sample questions and

student responses selected for each grade to exemplify

the range of exercises included in the NAEP 1994

geography assessment.(A different set of sample

questions and student responses are presented in

Chapter 1, and entire sample blocks of questions can

be found in the NAEP 1994 Geography: A First Look

report, pages 27 to 67.) For each question, the

geography content area being addressed is indicated.
100
101

What would be the best title for this picture?

A The Tides

©B The Water Cycle

C The Seasons

D Ocean Currents

Geography Content Area: Environment and Society

*NAEP geography composite scale range. *** Sample size insufficient to permit a reliable estimate (see Appendix A).

The standard errors of the estimated percentages appear in parenthesis. It can be said with 95-percent certainty that, for each

population of interest, the value for the whole population is within plus or minus two standard errors of the estimate for the sample.

GRADE 4

Percentage Correct Within

Grade 4 Achievement Level Intervals

Overall Percentage Below Basic Basic Proficient Advanced

 Correct 186 and below* 187-239* 240-275* 276 and above*

79 (1.4) 52 (3.0) 86 (1.7) 98 (1.4) ***

Sample Questions and

Student Responses
102

Describe two important effects that a major oil spill in an ocean can have on the

environment or on people’s lives.

____________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________

Geography Content Area: Environment and Society

*NAEP geography composite scale range. *** Sample size insufficient to permit a reliable estimate.

The standard errors of the estimated percentages appear in parenthesis. It can be said with 95-percent certainty that, for each

population of interest, the value for the whole population is within plus or minus two standard errors of the estimate for the sample.

Sample Response (Score of 3):

Describe two important effects that a major oil spill in an ocean can have on the

environment or on people’s lives.

A Complete response (score of 3) describes two effects of an oil spill in a distant place. Effects

described may be environmental (for example, pollutes beaches, pollutes air, kills living

organisms), economic (for example, ruins fishing industry, ruins tourist industry), or political

(for example, causes disputes over who is responsible for cleanup).

Percentage Correct Within

Grade 4 Achievement Level Intervals

Overall Percentage Below Basic Basic Proficient Advanced

 Complete 186 and below* 187-239* 240-275* 276 and above*

13 (1.0) 3 (1.4) 12 (1.7) 28 (3.3) ***
103

The map shows that one part of the country has more major highways than the

other part of the country. Why is this?

©A There are more people and cities in the eastern part of the country.

 B It is easier to build highways in the eastern part of the country.

 C Cars are not an important form of transportation in the western part of the country.

 D States are larger in the western part of the country.

Geography Content Area: Spatial Dynamics and Connections

*NAEP geography composite scale range. *** Sample size insufficient to permit a reliable estimate (see Appendix A).

The standard errors of the estimated percentages appear in parenthesis. It can be said with 95-percent certainty that, for each

population of interest, the value for the whole population is within plus or minus two standard errors of the estimate for the sample.

Percentage Correct Within

Grade 4 Achievement Level Intervals

Overall Percentage Below Basic Basic Proficient Advanced

 Correct 186 and below* 187-239* 240-275* 276 and above*

59 (1.5) 41 (3.0) 62 (1.9) 77 (3.0) ***
104

1) In the box below, draw a map of an island.

2) On the island, put in the following details:

• Mountains along the west coast

• A lake in the north

• Houses along the east coast

• Forests in the south

Be sure to use the symbols shown in the key below.

Use your colored pencils to help you draw the map.

Geography Content Area: Space and Place

*NAEP geography composite scale range. *** Sample size insufficient to permit a reliable estimate (see Appendix A).

The standard errors of the estimated percentages appear in parenthesis. It can be said with 95-percent certainty that, for each

population of interest, the value for the whole population is within plus or minus two standard errors of the estimate for the sample.

Percentage “Essential” or “Complete” Within

Grade 4 Achievement Level Intervals

Overall Percentage Below Basic Basic Proficient Advanced

Essential or Complete 186 and below* 187-239* 240-275* 276 and above*

70 (1.5) 37 (3.0) 76 (2.0) 93 (2.1) ***
105

Sample Response (Score of 3):

An Essential response (score of 3) correctly indicates three or four of the elements.

Sample Response (Score of 4):

A Complete response (score of 4) correctly indicates all the elements.
106
107

If you wanted to find out which page in the atlas had a map that showed the city

of Dakar, where would you look?

A The World Map Projections pages

©B The Index

C The World Facts page

D The Earth Notes page

Geography Content Area: Space and Place

*NAEP geography composite scale range. *** Sample size insufficient to permit a reliable estimate (see Appendix A).

The standard errors of the estimated percentages appear in parenthesis. It can be said with 95-percent certainty that, for each

population of interest, the value for the whole population is within plus or minus two standard errors of the estimate for the sample.

GRADE 8 Sample Questions and

Student Responses

Percentage Correct Within

Grade 8 Achievement Level Intervals

Overall Percentage Below Basic Basic Proficient Advanced

 Correct 241 and below* 242-281* 282-314* 315 and above*

90 (0.7) 78 (2.1) 95 (1.0) 97 (1.2) ***
108

Latitude on this map is represented by

©A circles

B shaded areas

C straight lines

D convergent lines

Geography Content Area: Space and Place

*NAEP geography composite scale range. *** Sample size insufficient to permit a reliable estimate (see Appendix A).

The standard errors of the estimated percentages appear in parenthesis. It can be said with 95-percent certainty that, for each

population of interest, the value for the whole population is within plus or minus two standard errors of the estimate for the sample.

Percentage Correct Within

Grade 8 Achievement Level Intervals

Overall Percentage Below Basic Basic Proficient Advanced

 Correct 241 and below* 242-281* 282-314* 315 and above*

48 (1.4) 35 (2.7) 44 (2.0) 65 (2.7) ***
109

People from many different countries live in New York City. Children speaking

many different languages attend its public schools. This is mainly because New

York City

A has an efficient transportation system

B has a higher wage rate than other United States cities

©C is a port of entry for people from other parts of the world

D is the site of the United Nations headquarters

Geography Content Area: Spacial Dynamics and Connections

*NAEP geography composite scale range.

The standard errors of the estimated percentages appear in parenthesis. It can be said with 95-percent certainty that, for each

population of interest, the value for the whole population is within plus or minus two standard errors of the estimate for the sample.

Percentage Correct Within

Grade 8 Achievement Level Intervals

Overall Percentage Below Basic Basic Proficient Advanced

 Correct 241 and below* 242-281* 282-314* 315 and above*

70 (1.4) 46 (2.6) 74 (2.9) 87 (3.2) 99 (1.4)
110

Look at the map above, which shows three possible routes for a railroad line

that will be built to connect Red City with Bluetown.

Which route would be the least expensive to construct?

____________________________________________________________

Give two reasons why the route you chose would be the least expensive.

1 ____________________________________________________________

2 ____________________________________________________________

Geography Content Area: Spacial Dynamics and Connections

*NAEP geography composite scale range.

The standard errors of the estimated percentages appear in parenthesis. It can be said with 95-percent certainty that, for each

population of interest, the value for the whole population is within plus or minus two standard errors of the estimate for the sample.

Percentage “Complete” Within

Grade 8 Achievement Level Intervals

Overall Percentage Below Basic Basic Proficient Advanced

Complete 241 and below* 242-281* 282-314* 315 and above*

36 (1.5) 10 (1.6) 36 (2.3) 62 (3.3) 80 (7.9)
111

Sample Response (Score of 3):

A Complete response (score of 3) indicates that C is the least expensive route to construct. It

gives two reasons why that may relate to A and B.
112

After we anchored our ships in the ocean and went ashore to explore, we marched

west. The forest was so thick we could only travel three miles in the first two

days. Then we came to the mountains and climbed to the top. A rushing river

flowed west out of the mountains. We continued to march two miles west and

came down out of the mountains. Two miles further we came to the coast. It

was obvious that the area we were exploring was an isthmus.

In the box below, draw a map of the region described above. Be sure to include

all of the geographical elements mentioned in the description. Include a scale

to indicate distances.

 

Geography Content Area: Space and Place

*NAEP geography composite scale range.

The standard errors of the estimated percentages appear in parenthesis. It can be said with 95-percent certainty that, for each

population of interest, the value for the whole population is within plus or minus two standard errors of the estimate for the sample.

Percentage “Essential” or “Complete” Within

Grade 8 Achievement Level Intervals

Overall Percentage Below Basic Basic Proficient Advanced

Essential or Complete 241 and below* 242-281* 282-314* 315 and above*

41 (1.3) 9 (2.0) 39 (2.4) 78 (3.4) 92 (4.8)
113

Sample Response (Score of 3):

An Essential response (score of 3) includes a map in which three elements are correctly placed.

The response may be a peninsula or an island.

Sample Response (Score of 4):

A Complete response (score of 4) includes an accurate map in which at least four elements are

correctly placed. The response must be an isthmus and have direction of travel and river correctly

indicated.
114
115

GRADE 12 Sample Questions and

Student Responses

Between 1961 and 1967, the area that had the most earthquakes was the

A Mediterranean basin

B mid-Atlantic Ocean

C Caribbean Sea

©D Pacific Ocean rim

Geography Content Area: Space and Place

*NAEP geography composite scale range. *** Sample size insufficient to permit a reliable estimate (see Appendix A).

The standard errors of the estimated percentages appear in parenthesis. It can be said with 95-percent certainty that, for each

population of interest, the value for the whole population is within plus or minus two standard errors of the estimate for the sample.

Percentage Correct Within

Grade 12 Achievement Level Intervals

Overall Percentage Below Basic Basic Proficient Advanced

 Correct 269 and below* 270-304* 305-338* 339 and above*

91 (0.9) 78 (2.7) 95 (1.0) 99 (0.5) ***
116

Environmental issues are viewed differently by people in different circumstances.

Explain how the artist makes this point in the cartoon.

____________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________

Geography Content Area: Environment and Society

*NAEP geography composite scale range. *** Sample size insufficient to permit a reliable estimate (see Appendix A).

The standard errors of the estimated percentages appear in parenthesis. It can be said with 95-percent certainty that, for each

population of interest, the value for the whole population is within plus or minus two standard errors of the estimate for the sample.

Percentage “Essential” or “Complete” Within

Grade 12 Achievement Level Intervals

Overall Percentage Below Basic Basic Proficient Advanced

 Essential or Complete 269 and below* 270-304* 305-338* 339 and above*

40 (1.7) 7 (1.6) 40 (2.4) 71 (3.6) ***
117

Sample Response (Score of 3):

A Complete response (score of 3) mentions two different views (developed versus developing)

and refers to trees and car pollution. An appreciation of tension may or may not be present.

Or, the response implies or states the hypocrisy that exists and talks about the tree or the car.

Sample Response (Score of 4):

An Essential response (score of 4) discusses the environmental issues, tension (implied or

stated between the two worlds), hypocrisy (not absolutely necessary if tension is clearly

discussed), and two different viewpoints (developed versus developing). The discussion must

be at the national level.
118

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

the United States?

 A Japan

 B Great Britain

©C Canada

 D Germany

Geography Content Area: Spacial Dynamics and Connections

*NAEP geography composite scale range. *** Sample size insufficient to permit a reliable estimate (see Appendix A).

The standard errors of the estimated percentages appear in parenthesis. It can be said with 95-percent certainty that, for each

population of interest, the value for the whole population is within plus or minus two standard errors of the estimate for the sample.

Percentage Correct Within

Grade 12 Achievement Level Intervals

Overall Percentage Below Basic Basic Proficient Advanced

 Correct 269 and below* 270-304* 305-338* 339 and above*

10 (1.0) 11 (1.7) 9 (1.6) 9 (2.3) ***
119

AVERAGE ANNUAL PRECIPITATION FOR LAKESIDE

Season Average Inches Percent of Total

Spring 5.0 25

Summer 7.0 35

Fall 4.0 20

Winter 4.0 20

Total 20.0 100

Use the information in the table above to construct a pie chart on the figure

below. Be sure to label all information. You may use your ruler to draw the

chart.

Geography Content Area: Space and Place

*NAEP geography composite scale range. *** Sample size insufficient to permit a reliable estimate (see Appendix A).

The standard errors of the estimated percentages appear in parenthesis. It can be said with 95-percent certainty that, for each

population of interest, the value for the whole population is within plus or minus two standard errors of the estimate for the sample.

Percentage Correct Within

Grade 12 Achievement Level Intervals

Overall Percentage Below Basic Basic Proficient Advanced

 Correct 269 and below* 270-304* 305-338* 339 and above*

66 (1.6) 32 (2.9) 69 (2.0) 89 (1.9) ***
120

Sample Response (Score of 3):

Use the information in the table above to construct a pie chart on the figure

below. Be sure to label all information. You may use your ruler to draw the

chart.

A Complete response (score of 3) correctly charts the percentage of rainfall of the four seasons

on the circle and correctly labels the segments (the minimum correct labels are the four

seasons).
The NAEP 1994 geography assessment was a

collaborative effort among staff from the National

Center for Education Statistics (NCES), the National

Assessment Governing Board (NAGB), Educational

Testing Service (ETS), Westat, and National Computer

Systems (NCS). The program benefited from the

contributions of hundreds of individuals at the state and

local levels — governors, chief state school officers,

state and district test directors, state coordinators, and

district administrators — who tirelessly provided their

wisdom, experience, and hard work. Most importantly,

NAEP is grateful to students and school staff who made

the assessment possible.

The assessment was funded through NCES, in the

Office of Educational Research and Improvement of

the U.S. Department of Education. The NCES staff —

particularly Jeanne Griffith, Gary Phillips, Steve

Gorman, Susan Ahmed, Peggy Carr, Sharif Shakrani,

Arnold Goldstein, Sahar Akhtar, and Maureen Treacy —

worked closely and collegially with ETS, Westat, and

NCS staff and played a crucial role in all aspects of the

program. The NAEP 1994 assessments and reports also

benefitted from the consistent support and guidance of

Emerson Elliott, past commissioner of NCES. The

members of the National Assessment Governing Board

(NAGB) and the NAGB staff provided invaluable advice

and guidance throughout. NAEP also owes a debt of

gratitude to the numerous panelists and consultants

who provided their expertise and worked so

conscientiously on developing the assessment.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The NAEP project at ETS is directed by Paul

Williams and resides in the Center for the Assessment of

Educational Progress (CAEP), managed by Archie

Lapointe and Paul Williams. Steve Lazer managed test

development activities, and Hilary Persky worked with

the Geography Item Development committee to develop

the assessment instruments. Jules Goodison managed

the operational aspects together with John Olson, and

sampling and data collection activities were carried out

by Westat under the direction of Rene Slobasky, Nancy

Caldwell, and Keith Rust. Printing, distribution,

scoring, and processing activities were conducted by

NCS, under the supervision of Judy Moyer, Brad Thayer,

Mathilde Kennel, Linda Reynolds, and Barbara Price.

Statistical and psychometric activities for the

assessments were led by Frank Jenkins under the

direction of Eugene Johnson, John Mazzeo, and Jim

Carlson. Edward Kulick performed the geography

analyses. Karen Miller and John Mazzeo contributed

substantially to report design activities. Mary Michaels

and Sharon Davis-Johnson oversaw the production

aspects, and Loretta Casalaina, James Rura, and

Roderick Rudder provided further design and

composition assistance.

Many thanks are due to the numerous reviewers,

both internal and external to ETS and NCES. The

comments and critical feedback provided by the

following reviewers are reflected in the final version of

this report: Roger Downs, Robert Duly, James Marran,

Mary Lyn Bourque, Larry Feinberg, Mary Frase, Gary

Phillips, Sharif Shakrani, Shi-Chang Wu, Andrew

Kolstad, Susan Ahmed, Edward Kulick, Karen Miller,

Nada Ballator, Steve Lazer, and John Mazzeo. Beverly

Cisney and Alice Kass provided the excellent desktop

publishing skills essential to the project.
UNITED STATES

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

WASHINGTON, DC 20208-5653

OFFICIAL BUSINESS

PENALTY FOR PRIVATE USE, $300