U.S. Department of Education

NCES 2014–466

A First Look: 

2013 Mathematics and Reading

Trial Urban District Assessment

NATioNAL AssessMeNT oF eDUcATioNAL PRogRess AT gRADes 4 AND 8

http://nationsreportcard.gov/reading_math_tuda_2013/
Urban district results easy to

access online

NAEP results are now easier than ever to access in a new interactive website at 

http://nationsreportcard.gov/reading_math_tuda_2013/. The results from the 2013 

assessments in mathematics and reading at grades 4 and 8 highlighted on the following 

pages can be explored in more detail with interactive graphics, downloadable data, and 

enhanced features for viewing urban district results. 

What is The Nation’s Report cardTM?

assessment an integral part of our nation’s 

evaluation of the condition and progress of 

education. Only academic achievement data 

and related background information are 

collected. The privacy of individual students 

and their families is protected.

NAEP is a congressionally authorized project 

of the National Center for Education Statistics 

(NCES) within the Institute of Education 

Sciences of the U.S. Department of Education. 

The Commissioner of Education Statistics is 

responsible for carrying out the NAEP project. 

The National Assessment Governing Board sets 

policy for NAEP.

The Nation’s Report CardTM informs the public 

about the academic achievement of elementary 

and secondary students in the United States. 

Report cards communicate the findings of 

the National Assessment of Educational 

Progress (NAEP), a continuing and nationally 

representative measure of achievement in 

various subjects over time.

Since 1969, NAEP assessments have been 

conducted periodically in reading, mathematics, 

science, writing, U.S. history, civics, geography, 

and other subjects. NAEP collects and reports 

information on student performance at the 

national, state, and local levels, making the 

To stay up-to-date with the latest results 

and advances in NAEP assessments, follow 

us on Facebook and Twitter. 

Photo Credits:

© oscillate/iStockphoto #198864; © Kali Nine LLC/iStockphoto 

#25982958; © Jill McCorkel/iStockphoto #5699686; © Digital 

Vision Photography/Veer #DVP1940089; © Nastco/iStockphoto 

#22522027; © Diane Diederich/iStockphoto #5411701

2

THE NATION’S REPORT CARD
What is TUDA?

The National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), in partnership with the National Assessment

Governing Board and the Council of the Great City Schools (CGCS), created the Trial Urban District 

Assessment (TUDA) in 2002 to support the improvement of student achievement in the nation’s large 

urban districts. The TUDA focuses attention on urban education and measures educational progress 

within participating large urban districts. Reading results were first reported for six urban districts in 

2002, and mathematics results were first reported in 2003 for 10 districts. Since 2002, urban districts 

have been added in each assessment year, culminating in the 21 districts that participated in both 201

and 2013.

1 

What are results based upon?

TUDA results are based on the same mathematics and reading assessments used to report national 

and state results, thus allowing students’ performance in the 21 participating districts to be compared 

to the performance of their peers in the nation’s large cities as well as their home state. The National 

Assessment Governing Board oversees the development of NAEP frameworks that describe the specific 

knowledge and skills to be assessed in each subject.

The NAeP mathematics assessment measures students’ knowledge and skills in mathematics 

and students’ ability to apply their knowledge in problem-solving situations. At each grade, students 

responded to multiple-choice and constructed-response questions designed to measure what 

they know and can do across five mathematics content areas: number properties and operations; 

measurement; geometry; data analysis, statistics, and probability; and algebra.

The NAeP reading assessment measures students’ reading comprehension by asking them to read 

selected grade-appropriate materials and answer questions based on what they have read. At each 

grade, students responded to multiple-choice and constructed-response questions designed to 

measure their reading comprehension across two types of text: literary and informational.

How are results reported?

Student performance is reported as average scores on separate 0 to 500 scales in mathematics and 

reading, and as percentages of students performing at or above three achievement levels (Basic, 

Proficient, and Advanced). Changes in students’ performance over time are noted only if the differences 

in scores or percentages are determined to be statistically significant (p < .05). Because NAEP scales 

and achievement levels are developed independently for each subject, results cannot be compared 

across subjects. NAEP results in mathematics and reading are based on representative samples of 

1,100 to 2,300 public school students at grade 4 and 900 to 2,100 public school students at grade 8 in 

each participating urban district. 

The complete 2013 mathematics and reading frameworks are 

available on the National Assessment Governing Board website at 

http://www.nagb.org/publications/frameworks.html.

TRIAL URBAN DISTRICT ASSESSMENT 

3
How are large cities performing?

* Significantly different (p < .05) from 2013.

NOTE: Large city includes students from all cities in the nation with populations of 250,000 or more including the participating districts. Detail may not 

sum to totals because of rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational 

Progress (NAEP), 2003 and 2013 Mathematics and Reading Assessments.

FIGURE 1 Achievement-level results in NAeP mathematics and reading for fourth- and 

eighth-grade students attending large city public schools in the nation: 2003 

and 2013

.

explore more results for large cities and selected student groups over time at 

http://nationsreportcard.gov/reading_math_tuda_ 2013/.

4

THE NATION’S REPORT CARD

“Large city” is a comparison category that includes public school students from all cities 

in the nation with populations of 250,000 or more. In addition to comparing the results in 

each urban district to public school students in the nation, comparisons are also made to 

large cities because their students are the peer group most similar to the students in the 

21 urban districts.

The percentages of students in large cities performing below the Basic achievement 

level were lower in 2013 than in 2003 in both mathematics and reading at grades 4 and 8 

(figure 1). Over the same period, the percentages of students performing at or above the 

Basic and Proficient levels were higher across both subjects and grades. 
How are urban districts performing?

Mathematics and reading scores in three urban districts (Austin, Charlotte, and Hillsborough 

County) were higher in 2013 than the scores for large cities at grades 4 and 8 (figure 2). Scores 

in nine urban districts (Baltimore City, Chicago, Cleveland, Detroit, the District of Columbia, 

Fresno, Los Angeles, Milwaukee, and Philadelphia) were lower in both subjects and both grades. 

In 2013, average mathematics and reading scores for fourth- and eighth-grade public school 

students in large cities were lower than the scores for public school students in the nation.

NOTE: Large city includes students from all cities 

in the nation with populations of 250,000 or more 

including the participating districts. DCPS = District 

of Columbia Public Schools.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of 

Education Sciences, National Center for Education 

Statistics, National Assessment of Educational 

Progress (NAEP), 2013 Mathematics and Reading 

Assessments.

FIGURE 2. comparison of NAeP mathematics and reading average scores for fourth- and eighthgrade public school students, by jurisdiction: 2013

Jurisdiction

Mathematics Reading

grade 4 grade 8 grade 4 grade 8

Nation (public) 241 284 221 266

Large city 235 276 212 258

Albuquerque 235 274 È 207 256

Atlanta 233 È 267 214 È 255

Austin Ç 245 Ç 285 Ç 221 Ç 261

Baltimore City È 223 È 260 È 204 È 252

Boston 237 Ç 283 214 257

Charlotte Ç 247 Ç 289 Ç 226 Ç 266

Chicago È 231 È 269 È 206 È 253

Cleveland È 216 È 253 È 190 È 239

Dallas 234 275 È 205 È 251

Detroit È 204 È 240 È 190 È 239

District of Columbia (DCPS) È 229 È 260 È 206 È 245

Fresno È 220 È 260 È 196 È 245

Hillsborough County (FL) Ç 243 Ç 284 Ç 228 Ç 267

Houston 236 Ç 280 È 208 È 252

Jefferson County (KY) 234 273 Ç 221 Ç 261

Los Angeles È 228 È 264 È 205 È 250

Miami-Dade 237 274 Ç 223 259

Milwaukee È 221 È 257 È 199 È 242

New York City 236 274 Ç 216 256

Philadelphia È 223 È 266 È 200 È 249

San Diego Ç 241 277 Ç 218 260

Find achievement-level results for the districts, large cities, and the nation at

http://nationsreportcard.gov/reading_math_tuda_2013/.

ÇHigher average score

 than large city.

ÈLower average score

 than large city.

No significant difference between

 district and large city.

TRIAL URBAN DISTRICT ASSESSMENT 

5
Are urban districts making progress?

Students in eight districts scored higher in 2013 than in 2011 in at least one subject and 

grade combination (figure 3). Students in Los Angeles scored higher in three of four subject 

and grade combinations, while students in the District of Columbia scored higher at all four 

subject and grade combinations.

More comparisons of district scores to the nation, to home states, 

and to previous assessment years are available at http://nces.ed.gov/

nationsreportcard/naepdata/.

FIGURE 3. change between 2011 and 2013 NAeP mathematics and reading average scores for 

fourth- and eighth-grade public school students, by jurisdiction

# Rounds to zero.

NOTE: Large city includes students from all cities in the 

nation with populations of 250,000 or more including 

the participating districts. Score-point changes are 

calculated using unrounded average scores. A scorepoint change preceded by a minus sign (-) indicates that 

the score was numerically lower in 2013. DCPS = District 

of Columbia Public Schools.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of 

Education Sciences, National Center for Education 

Statistics, National Assessment of Educational 

Progress (NAEP), 2011 and 2013 Mathematics and 

Reading Assessments.

Jurisdiction

Mathematics Reading

grade 4 grade 8 grade 4 grade 8

Nation (public) Ç 1 Ç 1 1 Ç 2

Large city Ç 2 2 2 Ç 3

Albuquerque –1 –1 –2 2

Atlanta Ç 5 1 3 2

Austin # –2 –3 #

Baltimore City –3 –2 4 Ç 6

Boston # 2 –3 2

Charlotte # Ç 4 2 2

Chicago Ç 7 –1 3 1

Cleveland # –3 –3 –1

Dallas 1 # 1 Ç 4

Detroit 1 È –6 –1 3

District of Columbia (DCPS) Ç 7 Ç 5 Ç 5 Ç 8

Fresno 2 Ç 4 2 Ç 7

Hillsborough County (FL) –1 2 –3 3

Houston –1 1 È –5 #

Jefferson County (KY) –2 –1 –2 1

Los Angeles Ç 5 4 Ç 4 Ç 4

Miami-Dade 2 2 2 –1

Milwaukee 2 3 3 3

New York City 1 2 # 2

Philadelphia –2 2 1 2

San Diego 2 –2 2 4

ÇHigher average score

 in 2013.

ÈLower average score

 in 2013.

No significant difference

 in 2013.

6

THE NATION’S REPORT CARD
Compared to the nation, score gains from 2003 to 2013 in mathematics were greater in six 

districts at grade 4 and in seven districts at grade 8 (figure 4). Five districts had greater 

reading score gains than the nation from 2003 to 2013 at grade 4, while three districts did 

so at grade 8 (figure 5).

FIGURE 4. change in NAeP mathematics average scores between 2003 and 2013 for fourth- and 

eighth-grade public school students, by jurisdiction

# Rounds to zero.

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

NOTE: Large city includes students from all cities in the nation with populations of 250,000 or more including the participating districts. Results are not shown for those 

jurisdictions that did not participate or did not meet the minimum participation guidelines for reporting. Score-point changes are calculated using unrounded average scores. 

DCPS = District of Columbia Public Schools.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2003 

and 2013 Mathematics Assessments.

FIGURE 5. change in NAeP reading average scores between 2003 and 2013 for fourth- and eighthgrade public school students, by jurisdiction

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

NOTE: Large city includes students from all cities in the nation with populations of 250,000 or more including the participating districts. Results are not shown for those 

jurisdictions that did not participate or did not meet the minimum participation guidelines for reporting. Score-point changes are calculated using unrounded average 

scores. A score-point change preceded by a minus sign (-) indicates that the score was numerically lower in 2013. DCPS = District of Columbia Public Schools.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2003 

and 2013 Reading Assessments.

7

TRIAL URBAN DISTRICT ASSESSMENT 
Which student groups are making 

progress in urban districts?

4th Grade

8th Grade

Eligible for free/

reduced-price

school lunch

Increase

Chicago

Los Angeles

Atlanta

District of Columbia

 (DCPS)

Los Angeles

Chicago

Los Angeles

Atlanta

Chicago

District of Columbia

 (DCPS)

Los Angeles

Decrease – – Jefferson County (KY) –

White

Eligible for free/

reduced-price

school lunch

Increase

– – – Charlotte

District of Columbia

 (DCPS)

Fresno

Decrease Cleveland Detroit Detroit Detroit

NOTE: Results are not shown for jurisdictions with insufficient sample sizes or with 2011 scores that were not significantly different from 2013. Black includes African 

American, and Hispanic includes Latino. Race categories exclude Hispanic origin. In NAEP, lower-income students are students identified as eligible for the National School 

Lunch Program (NSLP). Higher-income students are not eligible for NSLP. DCPS = District of Columbia Public Schools.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2011 

and 2013 Mathematics Assessments.

TABLE 1. Change in NAEP mathematics average scores between 2011 and 2013 for fourth- and 

eighth-grade public school students, by selected student groups

In Los Angeles, White, Black, and Hispanic students all made gains from 2011 to 2013 in 

mathematics at grade 4 (table 1). ln the District of Columbia, White, Black, and Hispanic 

students had score increases from 2011 to 2013 in reading at grade 8 (table 2). Average 

scores for students eligible for the National School Lunch Program increased from 2011 

to 2013 in at least one subject and grade combination in eight districts (Atlanta, Baltimore 

City, Charlotte, Chicago, Dallas, the District of Columbia, Fresno, and Los Angeles). There 

was only one district (Detroit) where the average score for eligible students decreased in 

2013 from 2011, and that was in mathematics at grade 8.

8

THE NATION’S REPORT CARD

Black Hispanic

White Black Hispanic
4th Grade

8th Grade

Eligible for free/

reduced-price

school lunch

Increase – – – Los Angeles

Decrease – – – –

White Black Hispanic

White Black Hispanic

Eligible for free/

reduced-price

school lunch

Increase

District of Columbia

 (DCPS)

Baltimore City

District of Columbia

 (DCPS)

Dallas

District of Columbia

 (DCPS) 

Fresno

Milwaukee

Baltimore City

Dallas

District of Columbia

 (DCPS)

Fresno

Los Angeles

Decrease – – – –

NOTE: Results are not shown for jurisdictions with insufficient sample sizes or with 2011 scores that were not significantly different from 2013. Black includes African 

American, and Hispanic includes Latino. Race categories exclude Hispanic origin. In NAEP, lower-income students are students identified as eligible for the National School 

Lunch Program (NSLP). Higher-income students are not eligible for NSLP. DCPS = District of Columbia Public Schools.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2011 

and 2013 Reading Assessments.

TABLE 2. Change in NAEP reading average scores between 2011 and 2013 for fourth- and eighth-grade 

public school students, by selected student groups

TRIAL URBAN DISTRICT ASSESSMENT 

9
District Profiles

District Profiles provide an in-depth look at each participating district’s performance in 

context by subject and grade. Results are also shown for large city, each district’s home 

state, and the nation overall to facilitate relevant comparisons. Select from drop-down 

menus to create the profile of your choice.

The Overview of Performance section provides a complete 

trend line of the district’s average scores and achievement-level 

results for 2013.

The Performance Gaps section displays the differences 

in average scores for racial/ethnic groups and by students’ 

eligibility for the National School Lunch Program. 

Classroom Context shows the percentages of students in 

terms of subject-specific variables: for example, instructional 

time spent on mathematics and emphasis on algebra in 

fourth-grade mathematics.

The Inclusion section provides a display of percentages 

of students with disabilities and English language learners 

who were identified, and those who were excluded in the 

2013 assessments.

10

THE NATION’S REPORT CARD
Urban district results from the 2013 NAEP mathematics and reading assessments can 

be explored in more detail at http://nationsreportcard.gov/reading_math_tuda_2013/.

The NAEP website features a number of applications designed to give users the ability to 

analyze NAEP data, explore assessment questions, and compare district results at 

http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/about/naeptools.aspx.

What other information is 

available online?

Use the NAeP 

Questions Tool to view 

more than 3,000 questions 

released in nine subject areas 

along with actual student 

responses, scoring guides, 

and data on how students 

performed on each question. 

http://nces.ed.gov/

nationsreportcard/itmrlsx/

View District Profiles

highlighting information on a 

district’s student and school 

characteristics, and a summary 

of its performance on NAEP 

assessments. 

http://nces.ed.gov/

nationsreportcard/districts/

11

Use the NAeP Data 

explorer to see additional 

results based on information 

collected from school, teacher, 

and student questionnaires 

and to create custom tables, 

graphics, and maps with results 

for the nation, states, and 

districts. 

http://nces.ed.gov/

nationsreportcard/naepdata/
The National Assessment governing Board

In 1988, Congress created the National Assessment Governing Board to set policy for 

the National Assessment of Educational Progress, commonly known as The Nation's 

Report CardTM. The Governing Board is an independent, bipartisan group whose 

members include governors, state legislators, local and state school officials, educators, 

business representatives, and members of the general public.

The National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) is a congressionally authorized 

project sponsored by the U.S. Department of Education. The National Center for Education 

Statistics, within the Institute of Education Sciences, administers NAEP. The Commissioner 

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

THE NaTioN’s 

REPoRT CaRd

A First Look: 

2013 Mathematics 

and Reading Trial 

Urban District 

Assessment

december 2013

sUggesTeD ciTATioN

National Center for Education

statistics (2013).

The Nation’s Report Card:

A First Look: 2013 

Mathematics and Reading

Trial Urban District 

Assessment

(NCEs 2014-466).

institute of Education sciences, 

U.s. department of Education, 

Washington, d.C.

coNTeNT coNTAcTs

Angela Glymph • 202-219-7127

angela.glymph@ed.gov

Samantha Burg • 202-502-7335 

samantha.burg@ed.gov

This report was prepared for the National 

Center for Education Statistics under 

Contract No. ED-IES-13-C-0017 with 

Educational Testing Service. Mention of 

trade names, commercial products, or 

organizations does not imply endorsement 

by the U.S. Government.

U.s. Department of education

Arne Duncan

secretary

U.S. Department 

of Education

John Q. easton

Director

Institute of 

Education Sciences

Jack Buckley

commissioner

National Center for 

Education Statistics

Peggy g. carr

Associate commissioner 

for Assessment

National Center for 

Education Statistics

Honorable David P. Driscoll,

chair

Former commissioner of education

Melrose, Massachusetts

susan Pimentel, 

Vice chair

educational consultant

Hanover, New Hampshire

Andrés Alonso

Professor of Practice

Harvard Graduate school of Education

Harvard University

Cambridge, Massachusetts

Lucille e. Davy

President and ceo

Transformative Education 

solutions, LLC

Pennington, New Jersey

Louis M. Fabrizio

Data, Research and Federal 

Policy Director

North Carolina department of Public 

instruction

Raleigh, North Carolina

Honorable Anitere Flores

senator

Florida state senate

Miami, Florida

Rebecca gagnon

school Board Member

Minneapolis Public schools

Minneapolis, Minnesota

shannon garrison

Fourth-grade Teacher

solano avenue Elementary school

Los angeles, California

Doris R. Hicks

Principal and chief executive 

officer

dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Charter 

school for science and Technology

New orleans, Louisiana

Andrew Dean Ho

Assistant Professor

Harvard Graduate school of 

Education

Harvard University

Cambridge, Massachusetts 

Honorable Terry Holliday

commissioner of education

Kentucky department of Education

Lexington, Kentucky

Richard Brent Houston

Assistant superintendent

shawnee Public schools

shawnee, oklahoma

Hector ibarra

eighth-grade Teacher

Belin-Blank international Center

and Talent development

iowa City, iowa

Honorable Tom Luna

idaho superintendent of Public 

instruction

Boise, idaho

Terry Mazany

President and ceo

The Chicago Community Trust

Chicago, illinois

Tonya Miles

general Public Representative

Mitchellville, Maryland

Dale Nowlin

Twelfth-grade Teacher

Columbus North High school

Columbus, indiana

Joseph M. o’Keefe, s.J.

Professor

Lynch school of Education

Boston College

Chestnut Hill, Massachusetts

W. James Popham

Professor emeritus 

University of California, Los angeles

Wilsonville, oregon

B. Fielding Rolston

chairman

Tennessee state Board of Education

Kingsport, Tennessee

cary sneider

Associate Research Professor

Portland state University

Portland, oregon

Honorable Leticia 

Van de Putte

senator

Texas state senate

san antonio, Texas

John Q. easton (ex officio)

Director

institute of Education sciences

U.s. department of Education

Washington, d.C.

cornelia s. orr

executive Director 

National assessment Governing Board

Washington, d.C.

MoRe iNFoRMATioN

The report release site is 

http://nationsreportcard.gov. 

The NCEs Publications and 

Products address is 

http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch.

For ordering information, write to

Ed Pubs

U.s. department of Education 

P.o. Box 22207

alexandria, Va 22304

or call toll free 1-877-4-Ed-Pubs

or order online at 

http://www.edpubs.gov.

“ The Depar tment of Education’s mission is to promote student 

achievement and preparation for global competitiveness by 

fostering educational excellence and ensuring equal access.”

www.ed.gov