NATIONAL CENTER FOR EDUCATION STATISTICS

NATIONAL ASSESSMENT OF EDUCATIONAL PROGRESS

SUPPORTING STATEMENT PART A

Request for System Clearance for 

NAEP Assessments for 2014-2016 

OMB# 1850-0790 v.36

November 1, 2012
Table of Contents

A. JUSTIFICATION............................................................................................................................................... 1

1a. Circumstances making the collection of information necessary......................................................................... 1

1b. Overview of NAEP assessments ........................................................................................................................ 2

1c. Overview of 2014–2016 NAEP assessments ..................................................................................................... 4

1d. Rationale for OMB System Clearance ............................................................................................................... 7

2. How, by whom, and for what purpose the data will be used .............................................................................. 8

3. Use of techniques to reduce burden.................................................................................................................... 9

4. Efforts to identify duplication........................................................................................................................... 10

5. Burden on small businesses or other small entities .......................................................................................... 11

6. Consequences of collecting information less frequently .................................................................................. 11

7. Consistency with 5 CFR 1320.5....................................................................................................................... 11

8. Consultations outside the agency ..................................................................................................................... 11

9. Payments or gifts to respondents...................................................................................................................... 13

10. Assurance of confidentiality............................................................................................................................. 13

11. Sensitive questions ........................................................................................................................................... 16

12. Estimation of respondent reporting burden (2014–2016)................................................................................. 16

13. Cost to respondents........................................................................................................................................... 21

14. Estimates of cost to the federal government..................................................................................................... 21

15. Reasons for changes in burden (from last System Clearance submittal).......................................................... 22

16. Time schedule for data collection..................................................................................................................... 22

17. Approval for not displaying OMB approval expiration date ............................................................................ 22

18. Exceptions to Certification Statement .............................................................................................................. 22

B. COLLECTIONS OF INFORMATION EMPLOYING STATISTICAL METHODS ....................................... 1

Appendix A Statute Authorizing NAEP ..................................................................................................................A-1

Appendix B External Consultants

NAEP Design and Analysis Committee ........................................................................................................B-1

NAEP Validity Studies Panel.........................................................................................................................B-2

NAEP Quality Assurance Technical Panel.....................................................................................................B-3

NAEP Socio-Economic Status Panel .............................................................................................................B-4

NAEP National Indian Education Study Technical Review Panel.................................................................B-5

NAEP Civics Standing Committee.................................................................................................................B-6

NAEP Economics Standing Committee ........................................................................................................B-7

NAEP Geography Standing Committee ........................................................................................................B-8

NAEP Mathematics Standing Committee .....................................................................................................B-9

NAEP Reading Standing Committee ...........................................................................................................B-10

NAEP Science Standing Committee ...........................................................................................................B-11

NAEP Technology and Engineering Literacy Standing Committee ...........................................................B-12

NAEP U.S. History Standing Committee ....................................................................................................B-13 

NAEP Writing Standing Committee ............................................................................................................B-14

Appendix C Example of Sample Design Document (2013 Assessment).................................................................C-1
NAEP 2014-2016 System Clearance: Supporting Statement Part A page-1 

A. JUSTIFICATION

1a. Circumstances making the collection of information necessary

The National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) is a federally authorized survey of student 

achievement at grades 4, 8, and 121in various subject areas, such as mathematics, reading, writing, 

science, U.S. history, civics, geography, economics, technology and engineering literacy (TEL), and the 

arts. In the current legislation that reauthorized NAEP, the National Assessment of Educational Progress 

Authorization Act (Public Law 107-279 Title III, section 303), Congress mandates the collection of 

national education survey data through a national assessment program. The National Assessment of 

Educational Progress Authorization Act also requires the assessment to collect data on specified student 

groups and characteristics, including information organized by race/ethnicity, gender, socio-economic 

status, disability, and limited English proficiency. It requires fair and accurate presentation of 

achievement data and permits the collection of background, noncognitive, or descriptive information that 

is related to academic achievement and aids in fair reporting of results. The intent of the law is to provide 

representative sample data on student achievement for the nation, the states, and subpopulations of 

students and to monitor progress over time. 

NAEP is administered by the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) in the Institute for 

Education Sciences of the U.S. Department of Education. The National Assessment Governing Board 

(henceforth referred to as the Governing Board) sets policy for NAEP and determines the content 

framework for each assessment. As a result of the National Assessment of Educational Progress 

Authorization Act, the Governing Board has final authority on the appropriateness of all cognitive and 

noncognitive assessment items. The NAEP assessments are conducted by an alliance of organizations 

under contract with the U.S. Department of Education.

2 These assessments contain different kinds of 

items — “cognitive” assessment items, which measure student knowledge of an academic subject, and

“noncognitive” or “background” items, which gather factual information such as demographic variables, 

as well as construct-related information, such as courses taken.

A copy of the current statute is included in appendix A.

 

1 As described in section 1b, main NAEP assesses students in grades 4, 8, and 12, and long-term trend NAEP assesses students 

at ages 9, 13, and 17.

2 The current contract expires on March 26, 2013. A new contract will be awarded prior to that date.
NAEP 2014-2016 System Clearance: Supporting Statement Part A page-2 

1b. Overview of NAEP assessments

The following provides a broad overview of NAEP assessments. Please note that the Governing Board 

determines NAEP policy and assessment schedule,

3

and future Governing Board decisions may result in 

changes to some aspects of an assessment (e.g., which subjects are assessed in which years). However, the 

overall methodology and assessment process will remain consistent.

NAEP consists of two assessment programs: the NAEP long-term trend (LTT) assessment and the main 

NAEP assessment. The LTT assessments are designed to give information on the changes in academic 

performance and have been administered for over 40 years. They are administered nationally every four 

years (but are not reported at state or district level) and report student performance at ages 9, 13, and 17 in 

mathematics and reading. 

The main NAEP assessments report current achievement levels and short-term trends in student 

achievement at grades 4, 8, and 12 for the nation and, for certain assessments, states and select urban 

districts. These assessments follow subject-area frameworks developed by the Governing Board and use 

the latest advances in assessment methodology. The subject-area frameworks evolve to match 

instructional practices. NCES is responsible for developing the cognitive items and for selecting the final 

set of items.

In addition to reporting overall results of student performance and achievement, NAEP also reports 

student performance results for various subgroups of students and on various educational factors. 

Guidance for what is asked in the questionnaires is set by the Governing Board. NCES is responsible for 

developing the noncognitive items and for selecting the final set of items. The items are designed to (a) 

provide the information for disaggregating data according to categories specified in the legislation, (b) 

provide contextual information that is subject-specific (e.g. reading, mathematics) and has an impact and 

known relationship to achievement, and (c) provide policy relevant information specified by the 

Governing Board.

Questionnaires are generally administered to students at grades 4, 8, and 12; to teachers at grades 4 and 8 

(and at grade 12 for economics); and to school administrators at grades 4, 8, and 12. Students with 

disabilities (SD) and English language learners (ELL) worksheets are completed by teachers or 

 

3 The Governing Board assessment schedule can be found at http://www.nagb.org/naep/assessment-schedule.htm.
NAEP 2014-2016 System Clearance: Supporting Statement Part A page-3 

administrators of students identified as SD or as ELL, in order to determine if individual students can 

meaningfully participate and, if so, which accommodation(s) they should receive. 

Assessment types listed in this document are described as follows:

Operational

An assessment whose results will be used for NAEP reporting 

purposes.

Pilot

An assessment that contains a pretest of items and possible assessment 

conditions to obtain information regarding clarity, difficulty levels, 

timing, and feasibility of items and conditions.

Special Study

A study to investigate topics such as content issues, delivery options, 

accommodations, linking to other surveys, or reporting variables. 

All three types of activities may simultaneously be in the field during any given data collection effort. 

Each is described in more detail below:

1) Operational assessments: “Operational” NAEP administrations, unlike pilot administrations, 

collect data to publicly report on the educational achievement of students. The NAEP results 

are reported in the Nation’s Report Card, which is used by policymakers, state and local 

educators, principals, teachers, and parents to inform educational policy decisions.

2) Pilot testing: Pilot testing of cognitive and noncognitive items is carried out in all subject 

areas. In addition to ensuring that items measure what is intended, the data collected from pilot 

tests serve as the basis for selecting the most effective items and data collection procedures for 

the subsequent operational assessments. Pilot testing is a cost-effective means for revising and 

selecting items prior to an operational data collection because, while fewer numbers of 

students participate, the items are administered to a nationally representative sample of 

students and data are gathered about performance that crosses the spectrum of student 

achievement. Items that do not work well can be dropped or modified before the operational 

administration. For example, when pilot data indicate very low response percentages in some 

response categories, the number of response categories provided can be reduced.
NAEP 2014-2016 System Clearance: Supporting Statement Part A page-4 

Prior to pilot testing, many new items are pre-tested with small groups of sample 

participants (cleared under the NCES pretesting generic clearance agreement; OMB #1850-

0803). All noncognitive items undergo one-on-one cognitive interviews, which is useful for 

identifying questionnaire and procedural problems before larger scale pilot testing is 

undertaken. Select cognitive items also undergo pre-pilot testing, such as item tryouts or 

cognitive interviews, in order to test out new item types or formats or challenging content. 

3) Special studies: Special studies are an opportunity for NAEP to investigate particular aspects 

without impacting the reporting of NAEP results. Previous special studies have focused on 

linking NAEP to other assessments or linking across NAEP frameworks, investigating 

alternative sets of items for particular samples, evaluating specific accommodations, 

investigating administration modes (such as computer-delivered assessment alternatives), and 

providing targeted data on specific student populations.

In addition to the overarching goal of NAEP to provide data about student achievement at 

the national, state, and district levels, NAEP also provides specially targeted data on an asneeded basis. At times, this may only mean that a special analysis of the existing data is 

necessary. At other times the targeting may include the addition of a short add-on 

questionnaire targeted at specified groups. For example, in the past, additional student, teacher, 

and school questionnaires were developed and administered as part of the National Indian 

Education Study (NIES) that NCES conducted on behalf of the Office of Indian Education. 

Through such targeted questionnaires, important information about the achievement of a 

specific group is gathered at minimal additional burden. These types of special studies are 

intentionally kept to a minimum and are designed to avoid jeopardizing the main purpose of 

the program.

1c. Overview of 2014–2016 NAEP assessments

The basic methodology and procedures described under this system clearance will be employed for the 

2014, 2015, and 2016 NAEP assessments. Subsequent clearance packages submitted for the specific 

assessment years will describe the scope of the assessment, including additional studies, school and 

student samples, estimated burden, and items requiring clearance. 

The 2014 data collection consists of the following:
NAEP 2014-2016 System Clearance: Supporting Statement Part A page-5 

 Operational national assessments for U.S. history, civics, and geography at grades 4, 8, and 12;

 Operational national assessment for TEL4at grade 8;

 Pilot assessments for 2015 science, including interactive computer tasks (ICTs)4and hands-on

tasks (HOTs), at grades 4, 8, and 12; and

 Pilot assessments for 2015 reading and mathematics at grade 12.

The 2015 data collection consists of the following:

 Operational national and state assessments in reading, mathematics, and science at grades 4 and 8;

 Operational national, plus 15 states, assessments in reading and mathematics at grade 12;

 Operational national assessments in science ICTs

4

and HOTs at grades 4, 8 and 12;

 Operational Puerto Rico mathematics assessment at grades 4 and 8; and

 Pilot assessments for 2017 reading, mathematics, and writing4at grades 4, 8, and 12.

The 2016 data collection consists of the following:

 Operational national arts assessment at grade 8; 

 Operational national LTT assessments in reading and mathematics for ages 9, 13, and 17; 

 Pilot assessments for 2020 LTT reading and mathematics for ages 9, 13, and 17;

 Pilot assessments for 2018 U.S. history, geography, and civics for grades 4, 8, and 12; and

 Pilot assessment for 2018 economics at grade 12.

Special Studies

Special studies are conducted in accordance with the assessment development, research, or additional 

reporting needs of NAEP. For example, over recent assessment cycles the following special studies were 

conducted:

 NAEP–Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) Linking Study;

 Reading Accessible Blocks Study; 

 

4 TEL, Science ICT, and writing will be administered by computer. All other assessments are currently planned as a paper-andpencil administration.
NAEP 2014-2016 System Clearance: Supporting Statement Part A page-6 

 Knowledge and Skills Appropriate (KaSA) Study (Mathematics);

 NAEP–Lexile©Study (Reading);

 NAEP–Program for International Student Assessment (PISA) Linking Study (Mathematics); and

 NAEP–High School Longitudinal Study (HSLS) Study.

Over the course of the 2014–2016 NAEP assessments, special studies will be conducted. The specifics of 

future studies will be included in the subsequent OMB submittals. Though an exhaustive list of special 

studies cannot be provided given the real-time nature of these projects, two special studies are currently

being considered:

 High School Transcript Study (HSTS) – The NAEP HSTS, planned for 2015, periodically surveys 

the curricula being followed in our nation’s high schools and the course-taking patterns of high 

school students through a collection of transcripts. The HSTS information is provided by a sample 

of the public and private schools and the sample of students is representative of the U.S. 

population of graduating seniors. The transcript study includes only those students whose 

transcripts indicate that they graduated the year that the study was conducted. Most of the students 

sampled in the transcript study are in schools that participated in NAEP. The data collected from 

those students that participated in NAEP make it possible to link course-taking patterns to

academic performance, as measured by NAEP.

 National Indian Education Survey (NIES) – NIES is planned as part of the 2015 assessments in 

reading and mathematics. The national sample includes students from both public and nonpublic 

schools that have both large and small American Indian/Alaska Native (AI/AN) student 

populations. The administration of the NAEP assessment will be followed with the administration 

of a questionnaire specifically designed for the NIES study. Questionnaire data will be linked to 

NAEP performance data.

In addition, NAEP is in the process of transitioning assessments from paper-and-pencil to computerdelivered assessments. Therefore, the NAEP program will most likely undertake some special studies to 

explore aspects associated with the transition to computer-delivered assessments, such as item types, 

hardware, system performance, and comparability across assessment modes.
NAEP 2014-2016 System Clearance: Supporting Statement Part A page-7 

1d. Rationale for OMB System Clearance

NCES is requesting system clearance for the NAEP assessments to be administered in the 2014–2016

timeframe, similar to the system clearance approval that was granted for the 2011–2013 and 2008–2010 

NAEP administrations (OMB 1850-0790). The primary reason for the system clearance request is that it 

enables NAEP to meet its large and complex assessment reporting schedules and deliverables through a 

more efficient clearance process. 

Since the passage of the No Child Left Behind Act in 2001 (P.L. 107-110), the numbers of assessments, 

volumes of participants, and complexity of the development and production processes have all increased 

dramatically. Because of the National Assessment of Educational Progress Authorization Act 

requirements, every state participates in the reading and mathematics assessments at grades 4 and 8 and 

most states participate in the state-level writing and science assessments.

These state-level assessments require that samples be selected to permit reporting of results for each state 

as well as for the nation, resulting in a much larger sample size than would otherwise be necessary. In 

addition, because of the complex matrix sampling plan used by NAEP, upwards of 1,000 distinct 

assessment booklets or forms may need to be printed or assembled for one assessment year alone. 

Given the cyclical nature of the NAEP assessments and their complexity and scope, there is a relatively

short and fixed time period in which production can occur. Prior to the finalization of the content, many

activities must be conducted, including quality reviews, analysis of any prior data, assembly of forms, and 

approval by the Governing Board and OMB. To meet these demanding timelines, NCES is requesting a 

waiver of the 60-day federal register notice for clearances of the NAEP assessments and studies described 

in this system clearance package. 

Parts A and B of this system clearance package contain supporting information for the assessments to be 

given in 2014–2016. This submittal does not contain any volume II (specific questionnaire) material. 

Specific yearly questionnaires will be submitted as they are developed over the course of the system 

clearance period. Clearance of three years duration (beginning April 1, 2013) is requested for the 2014–

2016 assessments. At the end of this system clearance period (i.e., prior to March 31, 2016), NCES will

submit a new request for system clearance to cover future NAEP administrations.
NAEP 2014-2016 System Clearance: Supporting Statement Part A page-8 

2. How, by whom, and for what purpose the data will be used 

Under this request for system clearance, NCES is asking for approval of the planned assessments, 

including the various questionnaires (e.g., student, teacher, and school) and data collection efforts that 

will be part of the NAEP 2014–2016 national, state, and district assessments, as well as any special 

studies that are planned to be conducted in the 2014–2016 timeframe. Results will be reported on the 

2014 operational assessments in U.S. history, civics, geography, and TEL; the 2015 operational 

assessments in reading, mathematics, and science, including ICTs and HOTs; and the 2016 operational 

arts assessment and long-term trend assessments in reading and mathematics. The schedule for subjects to 

be assessed has been established by the Governing Board; however, it is subject to modification. 

Therefore, NCES is requesting some leeway with regard to the specific subject assessments that will be 

administered, while holding the methodology and general procedures constant. 

NAEP uses the results from the pilot tests and some special studies to inform future assessments and 

procedures. Items are evaluated for their effectiveness and appropriateness to be used in an operational 

assessment. 

Results from the operational assessments and some special studies are released to the public. The NAEP 

results are reported in the Nation’s Report Card, which is used by policymakers, state and local educators, 

principals, teachers, and parents to help inform educational policy decisions. The NAEP Report Cards 

provide national results, trends for different student groups, results on scale scores and achievement 

levels, and sample items. In reports with state or urban district results, there are sections that provide 

overview information on the performance of these jurisdictions. NAEP does not provide scores for 

individual students or schools. 

In addition to the Report Card, more information is available online (http://nationsreportcard.gov/) and in 

one-page summary reports, called snapshots, for each participating state or urban district. Additional data 

tools are available online for those interested in:

 analyzing NAEP data and creating tables and graphics 

(http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/naepdata/);

 comparing state performance by various demographic groups

(http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/statecomparisons/);

 comparing districts (http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/districts/);
NAEP 2014-2016 System Clearance: Supporting Statement Part A page-9 

 seeing the knowledge and skills demonstrated by students performing at different scale scores

(http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/itemmaps/);

 seeing NAEP performance results and student demographics for each state 

(http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/states/); and

 searching, sorting, and providing data for sample NAEP items 

(http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/itmrlsx/).

In addition to contributing to the reporting tools mentioned above, data from the questionnaires are used 

as part of the marginal estimation procedures that produce the student achievement results. In addition, 

questionnaire data is used to perform quality control checks on school-reported data and in special reports, 

such as the Black–White Achievement Gap report.

Finally, there are numerous opportunities for secondary data analysis because of NAEP’s large scale, the 

regularity of its administrations, and its stringent quality control processes for data collection and 

analysis. NAEP data are used by researchers and educators who have diverse interests and varying levels 

of analytical experience. 

3. Use of techniques to reduce burden

For all operational and pilot assessments, NAEP will continue to take advantage of proven, modern 

measurement techniques, which greatly enhance the power and value of the NAEP data collected. 

Through the use of a partial balanced incomplete block (BIB) spiraling variant of matrix sampling, a 

variety of analyses are feasible because the data are not booklet bound. Covariances are computed among 

all items in a subject area, so that

 composites of items can be appraised empirically for coherence and construct validity;

 the dimensional structure of each subject area can be determined analytically as reflected in 

student performance consistencies; 

 item response theory (IRT) scaling can be applied to unidimensional sets of items or tasks,

regardless of which booklet they appear in;

 IRT scales can be developed having common meaning across exercises, population subgroups, age 

levels, and time periods;

 powerful trend analyses can be undertaken by means of these common scales;
NAEP 2014-2016 System Clearance: Supporting Statement Part A page-10 

 performance scales can be correlated with background, attitudinal, and program variables to 

address a rich variety of educational and policy issues; and

 public-use electronic files can be made much more useful because secondary analyses are also not 

booklet-bound.

To minimize the burden for participating schools and students, the following procedures will be used:

 No student takes the complete assessment and, given that NAEP results are reported for groups of 

students, using a BIB spiral allows the program to administer a lengthy overall assessment without 

overburdening any one student. 

 Trained administrators will conduct the assessments at all grades.

 Assessment administrations will be limited, whenever possible, to approximately 90 minutes to 

facilitate school scheduling (note, computer-delivered assessments may be scheduled for up to 120 

minutes). 

The various questionnaires (student, teacher, and school) are constructed to minimize respondent burden 

using the information gathered from pilot testing. Based on pilot test data, items that do not yield useful 

information or that produce redundant information can be eliminated. Also, to reduce respondent burden, 

NAEP may employ some or all of the following techniques:

 maintaining items across administrations rather than piloting new ones;

 rotating some non-required items across assessments;

 spiraling items across respondents to provide a broader range of content coverage while 

minimizing individual respondent burden; and

 reducing the number of new items piloted for existing frameworks.

Another technique for improving the response process consists of pre-testing items using cognitive 

interviews, item tryouts, and usability studies on a smaller number of students to maximize the success of 

items. These techniques allow items to be refined before they go to larger groups of students.

4. Efforts to identify duplication

The proposed assessments, including the questionnaires, do not exist in the same format or combination in 

the U.S. Department of Education or elsewhere. The noncognitive data gathered by NAEP comprise the 
NAEP 2014-2016 System Clearance: Supporting Statement Part A page-11 

only comprehensive cross-sectional survey performed regularly on a large-scale basis that can be related 

to extensive achievement data in the United States. No other federally funded studies have been designed 

to collect data for the purpose of regularly assessing trends in educational progress and comparing these 

trends across states. None of the major non-federal studies of educational achievement were designed to 

measure changes in national achievement. In short, no existing data source in the public or private sector 

duplicates NAEP.

5. Burden on small businesses or other small entities

The school samples for NAEP contain small-, medium-, and large-size schools, including private schools.

Schools are included in the sample proportional to their representation in the population, or as necessary

to meet reporting goals. It is necessary to include small and private schools so that the students attending 

such schools are represented in the data collection and in the reports. 

6. Consequences of collecting information less frequently

Under the National Assessment of Educational Progress Authorization Act, Congress has mandated the 

on-going collection of NAEP data. Failure to collect the 2014–2016 assessment data on the current 

schedule would affect the quality and schedule of the NAEP assessments, and would result in assessments 

that would not fulfill the mandate of the legislation. 

7. Consistency with 5 CFR 1320.5

No special circumstances are involved. This data collection observes all requirements of 5 CFR 1320.5.

8. Consultations outside the agency

In addition to the contractors responsible for the development and administration of the NAEP 

assessments, the program involves many consultants and is also reviewed by specialists serving on 

various technical review panels. These consultants and special reviewers bring expertise concerning 

students of different ages, ethnic backgrounds, geographic regions, learning abilities, and socioeconomic 

levels; the specific subject areas being assessed; the analysis methodologies employed; and large-scale 

assessment design and practices. Contractor staff and consultants have reviewed all items for bias and 

sensitivity issues, grade appropriateness, and appropriateness of content across states.
NAEP 2014-2016 System Clearance: Supporting Statement Part A page-12 

In particular, subject area standing committees play a central role in the development of NAEP 

assessment instruments and have been essential in helping create assessment content that is appropriate 

for the targeted populations, and that meets the expectations outlined in the Governing Board frameworks. 

One of the most important functions of the committees is to contribute to the validation of the 

assessments. Through detailed reviews of items, scoring guides, tasks, constructed-response item training 

sets for scorers, and other materials, the committees help establish that the assessments are accurate, 

accessible, fair, relevant, and grade-level appropriate and that each item measures the knowledge and 

skills it was designed to measure. When appropriate, members of subject area standing committees will 

also review the questionnaires with regards to appropriateness with existing curricular and instructional 

practices.

The following examples of outside personnel, based on current membership, are provided in appendix B: 

 NAEP Design and Analysis Committee

 NAEP Validity Studies Panel

 NAEP Quality Assurance Technical Panel

 NAEP Socio-Economic Status Panel

 NAEP National Indian Education Study Technical Review Panel

 NAEP Civics Standing Committee

 NAEP Economics Standing Committee

 NAEP Geography Standing Committee

 NAEP Mathematics Standing Committee

 NAEP Reading Standing Committee

 NAEP Science Standing Committee

 NAEP Technology and Engineering Literacy Standing Committee

 NAEP U.S. History Standing Committee

 NAEP Writing Standing Committee

As has been the practice for the past few years, OMB representatives will be invited to attend the 

technical review panel meetings that are most informative for OMB purposes.
NAEP 2014-2016 System Clearance: Supporting Statement Part A page-13 

9. Payments or gifts to respondents

In general, there will be no gifts or payments to respondents, although students do get to keep the NAEP 

pencils or earbuds used in the paper-and-pencil and computer-delivered assessments, respectively. On 

occasion, NAEP will leave educational materials behind at schools for their use (e.g., science kits from 

the science HOTs assessments). Schools participating in the High School Transcript Study are paid the 

established fee for providing student transcripts. Given that the study pays schools the prevailing rate to 

perform a standard service, estimates of school-level burden for that function are not included in this 

volume. Special studies (i.e., cognitive lab studies and background item studies) sometimes include 

remuneration for respondents and will be explicated in the specific-year clearance package submittals. 

Some schools also offer recognition parties with pizza or other perks for students who participate; 

however, these are not reimbursed by NCES or the contractor. If any incentives are proposed as part of a 

future special study, they would be justified as part of that future clearance package. In addition, as 

appropriate, the amounts would be consistent with amounts approved in other studies with similar 

conditions. 

10. Assurance of confidentiality

NAEP has policies and procedures that ensure privacy, security, and confidentiality, in compliance with 

the legislation (Confidential Information Protection provisions of Title V, Subtitle A, Public Law 107-347 

and the National Assessment of Educational Progress Authorization Act). Specifically for the NAEP 

project, this ensures that privacy, security, and confidentiality policies and procedures are in compliance 

with the Privacy Act of 1974 and its amendments, NCES Confidentiality Procedures, and the Department 

of Education ADP Security manual. The National Assessment of Educational Progress Authorization Act

requires the confidentiality of personally identifiable information [20 U.S.C. §9622 (c) (3)]: 

(A) IN GENERAL.-- The Commissioner for Education Statistics shall ensure that all 

personally identifiable information about students, their academic achievement, and their 

families, and that information with respect to individual schools, remains confidential, in 

accordance with section 552a of title 5, United States Code.

(B) PROHIBITION.-- The Assessment Board, the Commissioner for Education Statistics, and 

any contractor or subcontractor shall not maintain any system of records containing a student’s 

name, birth information, Social Security number, or parents’ name or names, or any other 

personally identifiable information.
NAEP 2014-2016 System Clearance: Supporting Statement Part A page-14 

Each contractor develops a Data Security Plan and NCES ensures that all current contractor policies and 

procedures are in compliance with all NAEP security and confidentiality requirements. In addition, all 

NAEP contractor staff with access to confidential NAEP information are required to sign an affidavit of 

nondisclosure that affirms, under severe penalty for unlawful action, that they will protect NAEP 

information from non-authorized access or disclosure. The affidavits are in keeping with the NCES 

Standard for Maintaining Confidentiality (Standard 4-2). All contractors must also comply with directive 

OM: 5-101, which requires that all staff with access to data protected by the Privacy Act and/or access to 

U.S. Department of Education systems and who will work on the contract for 30 days or more go through 

the security screening procedures.

An important privacy and confidentiality issue is the protection of the identity of assessed students, their 

teachers, and their schools. To assure this protection, NAEP has established security procedures, 

described below, that closely control access to potentially identifying information.

Students’ names are submitted to the Sampling and Data Collection contractor for selecting the student 

sample. This list also includes the month/year of birth, race/ethnicity, gender, and a status code for 

students with disabilities, English language learners, and participation in the National School Lunch 

Program. The student sample is selected and the data for selected students are submitted to the Materials 

Preparation, Distribution, Processing and Scoring (MDPS) contractor, who includes the data in the 

Packaging and Distribution system for the production of the Administration Schedule and student labels, 

which are then forwarded to field staff and used to manage and facilitate the assessment. These data are 

also added to the School Control System (SCS) used by field staff to print materials used by the schools. 

Student information is deleted from the Packaging and Distribution system after the assessment begins. 

All labels are removed from the assessment materials and destroyed at the schools, upon completion of 

the assessment. The section of the Administration Schedule with names is removed and placed in the 

school storage envelope. The school storage envelope contains all of the forms and materials with student 

names. It is kept at the school until the end of the school year and then destroyed by school personnel.

In addition to student information, teacher and principal names are collected and recorded on a roster, 

which is used to keep track of the distribution and collection of NAEP teacher and school questionnaires. 

The roster is kept at the school until questionnaires are collected. At that time, questionnaires and the 

portion of the roster without names is returned for processing. The portion of the roster with names is kept 

at the school, in the school storage envelope, which is destroyed at the end of the school year. 
NAEP 2014-2016 System Clearance: Supporting Statement Part A page-15 

The completed Administration Schedules and teacher and school questionnaire rosters (without student, 

teacher, or principal names) are returned to the MDPS contractor for processing. 

Furthermore, to ensure the confidentiality of respondents, NAEP staff will use the following precautions: 

 Data files will not identify individual respondents.

 No personally identifiable information, either by schools or respondents, will be gathered or 

released by third parties. No permanent files of names or other direct identifiers of respondents 

will be maintained.

 Student participation is voluntary.

 NAEP data are perturbed. Data perturbation is a statistical data editing technique implemented to 

ensure privacy for student and school respondents to NAEP’s assessment questionnaires for 

assessments in which data are reported or attainable via restricted-use licensing arrangements with 

NCES. The process is coordinated in strict confidence with the IES Disclosure Review Board 

(DRB), with details of the process shared only with the DRB and a minimal number of contractor 

staff.

After the components of NAEP are completed in a school, neither student- nor teacher-reported data are 

retrievable by personal identifiers. We emphasize that confidentiality is assured for individual schools and 

for individual students, teachers, and principals. The following text is printed on all student, teacher, and 

school questionnaires:

The information you provide will be used for statistical purposes only. In accordance with the Confidential 

Information Protection provisions of Title V, Subtitle A, Public Law 107-347 and other applicable Federal 

laws, your responses will be kept confidential and will not be disclosed in identifiable form to anyone other 

than employees or agents. By law, every NCES employee as well as every agent, such as contractors and 

NAEP coordinators, has taken an oath and is subject to a jail term of up to 5 years, a fine of up to $250,000, 

or both if he or she willfully discloses ANY identifiable information about you.

For the HSTS component of NAEP, student transcripts are collected from schools for sampled students, 

and school staff members complete a School Information Form that provides general information about 

class periods, credits, graduation requirements, and other aspects of school policy. To maintain the 

privacy of student and school identities, students’ names are removed from the transcripts and 

questionnaires at the school and given a unique identification number, which is used to match the 

transcript records to the NAEP questionnaire and performance information, on an individual basis. NCES 

ensures that the data collected from schools and students are used for statistical purposes only.
NAEP 2014-2016 System Clearance: Supporting Statement Part A page-16 

11. Sensitive questions

The National Assessment of Educational Progress emphasizes voluntary respondent participation, assures 

confidentiality of individual responses, and avoids asking for information that might be considered 

sensitive or offensive. Insensitive or offensive items are prohibited by the National Assessment of 

Educational Progress Authorization Act, and the Governing Board reviews all items for bias and 

sensitivity. Throughout the item development process, NCES staff works with consultants, contractors, 

and internal reviewers to identify and eliminate potential bias in the items. 

12. Estimation of respondent reporting burden (2014–2016)

Because there are such fluctuations in the burden numbers over the three years of this collection, we will 

continue our practice of showing the estimate of each year’s burden rather than averaging the total over 

the three years. The burden numbers and respondents will be changed accordingly for each year, based on 

the final list of assessments and special studies to be assessed. Exhibit 1 provides the burden information 

per respondent group, by grade and by year, for the 2014–2016 assessments. Exhibit 2 summarizes the 

burden across the three years.

A description of the respondents or study is provided below, as supporting information for Exhibit 1:

 Students - Students in fourth, eighth, and twelfth grades complete assessment booklets or forms

that contain 50 or 60 minutes of cognitive blocks, followed by noncognitive block(s) which 

require a total of 15 minutes to complete. The core noncognitive items are answered by all 

students across subject areas and are related to demographic information. In addition, students 

answer subject-specific noncognitive items. Additional student burden accounts for time to read 

directions, distribute test booklets (for paper-and-pencil assessments), and log on to the computer 

and view a tutorial (for computer-delivered assessments). This additional burden is estimated at 10 

minutes for paper-and-pencil and 15 minutes for computer-delivered assessments. Therefore, the 

total burden for students is 25 minutes for paper-and-pencil and 30 minutes for computerdelivered assessments.

 Teachers - The teachers of fourth- and eighth-grade students (and twelfth-grade economics 

students) participating in NAEP are asked to complete questionnaires about their teaching 

background, education, training, and classroom organization. Fourth-grade teacher burden is 

estimated to be 30 minutes because fourth-grade teachers often have multiple subject-specific 
NAEP 2014-2016 System Clearance: Supporting Statement Part A page-17 

sections to complete. Eighth- and twelfth-grade teacher burden is 20 minutes because they only 

have one subject-specific section.

 Principals/Administrators - The school administrators in the sampled schools are asked to 

complete a questionnaire. The core items are designed to measure school characteristics and 

policies that research has shown are highly correlated with student achievement. A section with 

subject-specific items concentrates on curriculum and instructional services issues. The burden for 

school administrators is estimated at 30 minutes. 

 SD and ELL worksheets are completed by school personnel concerning students identified as SD

or ELL. These worksheets will be used to determine the appropriate accommodations for students.

 Submission of Samples - Survey sample information is collected from schools in the form of lists 

of potential students who may participate in NAEP. This sample information can be gathered 

manually or electronically at the school, district, or state level. If done at the school or district

level, some burden will be incurred by school personnel. It is estimated that it will take one hour 

for school personnel to complete the submission process. Based on recent comparable experience, 

64 percent, 48.7 percent, and 70.4 percent of the schools or districts will complete the sample 

submission process for 2014, 2015, and 2016, respectively. Note that the estimated percent is 

dependent upon the nature of the sample (i.e., national or state) and the assessment program (i.e., 

inclusion of LTT). 

 Pre-Assessment Visit - The pre-assessment visit is the opportunity for the NCES contractor field 

staff to meet with the school personnel to review procedures and logistics for the upcoming 

assessment. It is estimated that it will take two hours for school personnel to complete the preassessment visit.

 HSTS - The NAEP HSTS periodically surveys the curricula being followed in our nation’s high 

schools and the course-taking patterns of high school students through a collection of transcripts. 

This data collection requires three hours per school from a sample of approximately 800 schools.

 National Indian Education Study (NIES) - NIES is designed to describe the condition of education 

for American Indian and Alaska Native (AI/AN) students in the United States. Additional 

questionnaires designed for NIES are given to students (estimated at 15 minutes), teachers (20 

minutes), and school administrators (30 minutes).
NAEP 2014-2016 System Clearance: Supporting Statement Part A page-18 

EXHIBIT 1

Estimated Burden for NAEP 2014–2016 Assessments, By Year, By Grade Level

(Note: all explanatory notes and footnotes are displayed following the 2016 table)

2014

Subjects # of Students Avg. time per 

respondent3

Student 

Burden

(in hours)

# of 

Teachers

Avg. time per 

respondent

Teacher 

Burden

(in hours)

# of 

Schools

Avg. time per 

respondent

School 

Burden

(in hours)

SD/ELL 

(# of school 

personnel)

Avg. time per 

respondent

SD/ELL 

Burden4

(in hours)

Operational (US 

history, civics, 

geography); Pilot 

(science P&P, 

science ICT, 

science HOTs)

21,000 25 minutes 

for P&P; 

30 minutes 

for CDA

8,875 2,180 30 minutes 1,090 545 30 minutes 273 545 10 minutes 805

Special Studies1

5,000 25 minutes 

for P&P; 

30 minutes 

for CDA

2,292 512 30 minutes 256 128 30 minutes 64 128 10 minutes 192

Pre-assessment 

visit 

673 2 hours 1,346

Sample 

submission2

431 1 hour 431

4th Grade 

Totals 26,000 N/A 11,167 2,692 N/A 1,346 673 N/A 2,114 673 N/A 997

Operational (US 

history, civics, 

geography, 

TEL); Pilot 

(science P&P, 

science ICT, 

science HOTs)

47,000 25 minutes 

for P&P; 

30 minutes 

for CDA

21,375 7,710 20 minutes 2,570 1,285 30 minutes 643 1,285 10 minutes 1,410

Special Studies1 5,000 25 minutes 

for P&P; 

30 minutes 

for CDA

2,292 833 20 minutes 278 139 30 minutes 69 139 10 minutes 150

Pre-assessment 

visit 

1,424 2 hours 2,848

Sample 

submission2

911 1 hour 911

8th Grade 

Totals 52,000 N/A 23,667 8,543 N/A 2,848 1,424 N/A 4,471 1,424 N/A 1,560

Operational (US 

history, civics, 

geography); Pilot 

(reading, math, 

science P&P, 

science ICT, 

science HOTs)

34,000 25 minutes 

for P&P; 

30 minutes 

for CDA

14,292 531 30 minutes 266 531 10 minutes 793

Special Studies1

5,000 25 minutes 

for P&P; 

30 minutes 

for CDA

2,292 78 30 minutes 39 78 10 minutes 117

Pre-assessment 

visit 

609 2 hours 1,218

Sample 

submission2

390 1 hour 390

12th Grade 

Totals 39,000 N/A 16,584 N/A N/A N/A 609 N/A 1,913 609 N/A 910

Total 117,000 N/A 51,418 11,235 N/A 4,194 2,706 N/A 8,498 2,706 N/A 3,467

Total number of respondents 133,647 Total Burden (in hours) 67,577

4th Grade

8th Grade

12th Grade
NAEP 2014-2016 System Clearance: Supporting Statement Part A page-19 

2015

Subjects # of Students Avg. time per 

respondent3

Student 

Burden

(in hours)

# of 

Teachers

Avg. time per 

respondent

Teacher 

Burden

(in hours)

# of 

Schools

Avg. time per 

respondent

School 

Burden

(in hours)

SD/ELL 

(# of school 

personnel)

Avg. time per 

respondent

SD/ELL 

Burden4

(in hours)

Operational 

(math, reading, 

science P&P, 

science ICT, 

science HOTs, 

Puerto Rico 

math); Pilot 

(reading, math, 

writing)

506,000 25 minutes 

for P&P; 

30 minutes 

for CDA

212,083 41,640 30 minutes 20,820 10,410 30 minutes 5,205 10,410 10 minutes 19,397

Special Studies1 10,000 25 minutes 

for P&P; 

30 minutes 

for CDA

4,583 832 30 minutes 416 208 30 minutes 104 208 10 minutes 383

NIES 10,000 15 minutes 2,500 8,000 20 minutes 2,667 2,000 30 minutes 1,000

Pre-assessment 

visit 

10,618 2 hours 21,236

Sample 

submission2

5,171 1 hour 5,171

4th Grade 

Totals

516,000 N/A 219,166 42,472 N/A 23,903 10,618 N/A 32,716 10,618 N/A 19,780

Operational 

(math, reading, 

science P&P, 

science ICT, 

science HOT, 

Puerto Rico 

math); Pilot 

(reading, math, 

writing)

498,500 25 minutes 

for P&P; 

30 minutes 

for CDA

208,333 47,100 20 minutes 15,700 7,850 30 minutes 3,925 7,850 10 minutes 14,955

Special Studies1

10,000 25 minutes 

for P&P; 

30 minutes 

for CDA

4,583 954 20 minutes 318 159 30 minutes 80 159 10 minutes 300

NIES 10,000 15 minutes 2,500 8,000 20 minutes 2,667 2,000 30 minutes 1,000

Pre-assessment 

visit 

8,009 2 hours 16,018

Sample 

submission2

3,900 1 hour 3,900

8th Grade 

Totals

508,500 N/A 215,416 48,054 N/A 18,685 8,009 N/A 24,923 8,009 N/A 15,255

Operational 

(math, reading, 

science P&P, 

science ICT, 

science HOTs); 

Pilot (reading, 

math, writing)

140,700 25 minutes 

for P&P; 

30 minutes 

for CDA

59,333 2,325 30 minutes 1,163 2,325 10 minutes 3,283

Special Studies1

10,000 25 minutes 

for P&P; 

30 minutes 

for CDA

4,583 167 30 minutes 84 167 10 minutes 233

HSTS 800 3 hours 2,400

Pre-assessment 

visit 

2,492 2 hours 4,984

Sample 

submission2

1,214 1 hour 1,214

12th Grade 

Totals

150,700 N/A 63,916 N/A N/A N/A 2,492 N/A 9,845 2,492 N/A 3,516

Total 1,175,200 N/A 498,498 90,526 N/A 42,588 21,119 N/A 67,484 21,119 N/A 38,551

Total number of respondents 1,307,964 Total Burden (in hours) 647,121

4th Grade

8th Grade

12th Grade
NAEP 2014-2016 System Clearance: Supporting Statement Part A page-20 

2016

Subjects # of Students Avg. time per 

respondent3

Student 

Burden

(in hours)

# of 

Teachers

Avg. time per 

respondent

Teacher 

Burden

(in hours)

# of 

Schools

Avg. time per 

respondent

School 

Burden

(in hours)

SD/ELL 

(# of school 

personnel)

Avg. time per 

respondent

SD/ELL 

Burden4

(in hours)

Age 9: Operational 

and Pilot (reading 

and math)

14,700 25 minutes 6,125 420 420 10 minutes 564

Age 13: Operational 

and Pilot (reading 

and math)

14,700 25 minutes 6,125 460 460 10 minutes 441

Age 17: Operational 

and Pilot (reading 

and math)

14,700 25 minutes 6,125 530 530 10 minutes 343

Pre-assessment visit 1,410 2 hours 2,820

Sample submission2

993 1 hour 993

LTT totals 44,100 N/A 18,375 N/A N/A N/A 1,410 N/A 3,813 1,410 N/A 1,348

Pilot (US history, 

geography, civics)

1,500 25 minutes 625 140 30 minutes 70 35 30 minutes 18 35 10 minutes 58

Special Studies1

5,000 25 minutes 

for P&P; 

30 minutes 

for CDA

2,292 464 30 minutes 232 116 30 minutes 58 116 10 minutes 192

Pre-assessment visit 151 2 hours 302

Sample submission2

106 1 hour 106

4th Grade 

Totals 6,500 N/A 2,917 604 N/A 302 151 N/A 484 151 N/A 250

Operational (arts); 

Pilot (US history, 

geography, civics)

12,500 25 minutes 5,208 2,136 20 minutes 712 356 30 minutes 178 356 10 minutes 375

Special Studies1

5,000 25 minutes 

for P&P; 

30 minutes 

for CDA

2,292 858 20 minutes 286 143 30 minutes 72 143 10 minutes 150

Pre-assessment visit 499 2 hours 998

Sample submission2

351 1 hour 351

8th Grade 

Totals 17,500 N/A 7,500 2,994 N/A 998 499 N/A 1,599 499 N/A 525

Pilot (US history, 

geography, civics, 

economics)

6,000 25 minutes 2,500 80 30 minutes 40 80 10 minutes 140

Special Studies1 5,000 25 minutes 

for P&P; 

30 minutes 

for CDA

2,292 67 30 minutes 34 67 10 minutes 117

Pre-assessment visit 147 2 hours 294

Sample submission2 103 1 hour 103

12th Grade 

Totals 11,000 N/A 4,792 N/A N/A N/A 147 N/A 471 147 N/A 257

Total 79,100 N/A 33,584 3,598 N/A 1,300 2,207 N/A 6,367 2,207 N/A 2,380

Total number of respondents 87,112 Total Burden (in hours) 43,631

LTT5

4th Grade

8th Grade

12th Grade
NAEP 2014-2016 System Clearance: Supporting Statement Part A page-21 

Notes for all tables in Exhibit 1

Cells with cross-hashes are sub-sets or repeats of previous cells. Therefore, they are shown for row calculation purposes only 

and are not included in the column totals.

Light gray shaded cells are intentionally left blank because no burden is associated with that cell.

1 - Because the specific special studies are not known at this time, a placeholder is included for burden calculation purposes.

2 - Based on most recent comparable data, it is estimated that 64% of district or school personnel will perform sample selection 

activities in 2014, 48.7% in 2015, and 70.4% in 2016.

3 - P&P refers to paper-and-pencil assessments and CDA refers to computer-delivered assessments. All special study 

placeholders assume that half will be P&P and half will be CDA.

4 - SD and ELL burden is calculated as the number of hours that school personnel spend to complete the SD/ELL worksheets 

for students identified as SD and/or ELL (estimated at 10 minutes per student). The overall SD/ELL burden is a factor of 

the number of students identified as SD/ELL. Based on most recent data, it is estimated that 23 percent of grade 4/age 9 

students, 18 percent of grade 8/age 13, and 14 percent of grade 12/age 17 students will be identified as SD/ELL.

5 - Teacher and school questionnaires are not administered in association with the LTT assessments.

EXHIBIT 2

Total Estimated Burden for NAEP 2014–2016 Assessments

Total number of respondents Total number of responses Total Burden (in hours)

2014 133,647 138,085 67,577

2015 1,307,964 1,380,168 647,121

2016 87,112 90,872 43,631

Total 1,528,723 1,609,126 758,329

13. Cost to respondents

There are no direct costs to respondents.

14. Estimates of cost to the federal government 

The total cost to the federal government for the administrations of the 2014–2016 activities is estimated to 

be approximately $48.15 million. The cost estimate is broken down as follows:

 $13.25 million for the printing, packaging, and distribution phases of the administrations;

 $27.1 million for the cost for the field supervisors and data collectors to go into schools to administer the 

2014–2016 assessments, including travel expenses and testing equipment costs; and 

 $7.8 million for web operations and maintenance costs related to the support of the computer-delivered

assessments. 
NAEP 2014-2016 System Clearance: Supporting Statement Part A page-22 

15. Reasons for changes in burden (from last System Clearance submittal)

The nature of NAEP is that burden alternates from a relatively low burden in national-level administration 

years (i.e., even years) to a substantial burden increase in state-level administration years that include one 

or more assessments that support national, state-by-state, and certain urban districts reporting (i.e., odd 

years). In state/district assessment years, NAEP samples approximately 1,000,000 students, while in 

national-only assessment years, approximately 100,000 students. In 2015, NAEP will conduct 

state/district assessments, and in 2014 and 2016, national-level assessments. The previous System 

Clearance included burden for two state/district assessments (2011 and 2013) and only one national-level 

assessment (2012), therefore the overall number of respondents and responses is lower in this clearance 

request than in the previous one. However, because we have adjusted the estimated respondent time for 

students and the pre-assessment visit, the overall time burden estimate is slightly higher for this versus the 

previous System Clearance. Previously, only the time spent responding to the noncognitive questionnaires 

was included in the total burden calculation for the students, but now we also include the time for 

instructions and booklet distribution, which increases the per-student burden estimate by an additional 10 

minutes for paper-and-pencil assessments and by 15 minutes for computer-delivered assessments. Finally, 

recent reports from the field staff have indicated that the pre-assessment visits require two hours, rather 

than the one hour previously estimated. Therefore, we have adjusted the burden estimate for preassessment visit to two hours.

16. Time schedule for data collection

The time schedule for the data collection for the 2014–2016 assessments is shown below.

2014 Main NAEP January–March 2014

2015 Main NAEP January–March 2015

2016 Long-Term Trend 

Main NAEP 

October 2015–May 2016

January–March 2016

17. Approval for not displaying OMB approval expiration date

No exception is requested.

18. Exceptions to Certification Statement

No exception is requested.