Science2005

ASSESSMENT OF STUDENT PERFORMANCE IN GRADES 4, 8, AND 12

U.S. Department of Education

NCES 2006-466
What is the Nation’s Report CardTM?

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. The Nation’s Report 

CardTM compares performance among states, urban districts, public and private schools, 

and student demographic groups.

For over three decades, NAEP assessments have been 

conducted periodically in reading, mathematics, science, 

writing, history, geography, and other subjects. By making 

objective information available on student performance 

at the national, state, and local levels, NAEP is an integral 

part of our nationís evaluation of the condition and progress 

of education. Only information related to academic 

achievement and relevant variables is collected. The privacy 

of individual students is protected, and the identities of 

participating schools are not released. 

MAY 2006

1 Executive Summary

2 Understanding the Results

 4 Reporting the Results

 6 4th Grade

18 8th Grade

30 12th Grade

40 Technical Notes

Contents

NAEP is a congressionally mandated 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 (NAGB) oversees 

and sets policy for NAEP.
SCIENCE 2005 1

Executive Summary

Compared to middle and high school students, younger 

students are making the most progress in science. In 2005, 

a representative sample of more than 300,000 students in 

grades 4, 8, and 12 was assessed in science. This report 

presents national results for all three grades, and state results 

for grades 4 and 8. The 2005 results are compared to those 

from 1996 and 2000. Sample questions are presented to 

illustrate the types of skills and knowledge that were assessed 

at each grade.

At grade 4, the average science score was higher in 2005 

than in earlier years. The percentage of students performing 

at or above the Basic achievement level increased from 

63 percent in 1996 and 2000 to 68 percent in 2005. An 

example of the knowledge associated with the Basic level is 

identifying two organs in the human body that work together 

to supply oxygen. Twenty-nine percent performed at or 

above the Proficient level. Relating the amount of time a 

candle burns to the amount of air available is an example of 

the knowledge and skills at the Proficient level.

At grade 8, there was no overall improvement. In 2005, 

59 percent of students scored at or above the Basic level. 

An example of the knowledge and skills at the Basic level 

is being able to compare changes in heart rate before, 

during, and after exercise. Twenty-nine percent performed 

at or above the Proficient level. Identifying the energy 

conversions that occur in an electric fan is an example of the 

knowledge and skills at the Proficient level.

At grade 12, the average score declined since 1996. In 

2005, 54 percent of students scored at or above the Basic

level. Knowing the function of a neuron is an example of 

knowledge at the Basic level. Eighteen percent performed at 

or above the Proficient level. Identifying the source of heat 

energy released in a combustion reaction is an example of 

knowledge at the Proficient level. 

M I N O R I T Y S T U D E N T S A R E M A K I N G G A I N S 

AT GRADES 4 AND 8

Minority students in grades 4 and 8 are making progress. 

At grade 4, average scores increased by 7 points for Black 

students, and by 11 points for Hispanic students, since 

2000. White and Asian/Pacific Islander fourth-graders also 

improved since 1996, as did Hispanic and Black students. At 

grade 8, Black students were the only racial/ethnic group to 

make gains since 1996, and no racial/ethnic group showed 

improvement since 2000.

S C O R E G A P S N A R R O W E D B E T W E E N 

Y O U N G E R W H I T E , B L A C K , A N D H I S P A N I C 

STUDENTS

Due largely to gains made by minority students, the score 

gaps between fourth-grade White students and their Black 

and Hispanic peers were smaller in 2005 than in 2000. The 

gap between White and Black students narrowed by 4 points 

since 2000, while the gap between White and Hispanic 

students narrowed by 8 points. The gap between White and 

Black twelfth-graders, however, widened during the same 

time period.

Overall

White

Black

Hispanic

Gaps

White – Black

White – Hispanic

Since

1996

Since

2000

4th Grade

Across the board 

improvements

Since

1996

Since

2000

12th Grade

Scores steady 

from 2000, but 

lower than in 1996

Since

1996

Since

2000

8th Grade

Scores remain

flat

Five states take the lead in science score gains

Most states showed no 

improvement at grades 

4 and 8. Five of the 37 

participating states, 

however, did improve 

between 2000 and 2005—

and did so at both grades. 

Those states were 

California, Hawaii, Kentucky, 

South Carolina, and Virginia. At grade 4, 

Virginia was also among the top seven jurisdictions in 2005. 

Since 2000...

● 9 states improved at grade 4

● 11 states improved and 4 declined at grade 8 

Differential patterns were found when results were examined by 

science content area. For example, only three of the nine states that 

showed overall gains at grade 4 also showed gains in each of the 

three fields of science.

CA

HI

DoDEA1

DC KY VA

SC

Indicates the score was higher or the gap increased in 2005

Indicates the score was lower or the gap decreased in 2005

Indicates there was no significant change in the score or 

the gap in 2005

1 Department of Defense Education Activity.
Understanding the Results

NAEP science results contribute information for monitoring the nation’s progress toward 

achieving science literacy for all students. Comparisons across assessment years are possible 

because the assessments were developed under the same framework and share a common set 

of science questions. To understand the results, it is important to consider the major features 

of the NAEP science framework and the types of questions in the assessment.

THE SCIENCE FRAMEWORK

Like every NAEP assessment, the science assessment is 

based on a blueprint called a ìframework,î which specifies 

what should be assessed at grades 4, 8, and 12. Under the 

direction of the National Assessment Governing Board 

(NAGB), the framework was developed in a comprehensive 

and inclusive process, including subject experts, scientists, 

school administrators, policymakers, teachers, parents, and 

others. Believing that science literacy is necessary in 

contemporary life, the developers specified that NAEP 

emphasize assessing science concepts and application of 

scientific knowledge and skills over assessing factual 

knowledge. 

The current science framework was used to guide the 1996, 

2000, and 2005 assessments. A new framework, approved 

in 2005, will be used to direct future assessments. For more 

information on the framework, see http://www.nagb.org/

pubs/pubs.html.

The current science framework requires assessment in 

three broad fieldsóEarth science, physical science, and life 

scienceóand three elements of knowing and doing scienceó

conceptual understanding, scientific investigation, and practical 

reasoning. This science framework also specifies that some 

The Fields of Science 

Earth science includes concepts related to solid Earth, water, air, and Earth in space. 

Physical science (physics and chemistry) includes matter and its transformations, energy and its transformations, and motion.

Life science includes the nature and function of living things.

Elements of Knowing and Doing Science

Conceptual understanding means understanding the 

principles of science used to explain and predict observations 

of the natural world.

Scientific investigation means using scientific knowledge 

and skills to plan investigations and acquire new knowledge.

Practical reasoning means using science understanding to 

solve everyday problems.

2 THE NATION’S REPORT CARD

questions and tasks should assess studentsí understanding of 

the nature of science and key organizing themes of science. 

The nature of science encompasses the historical developments 

and habits of mind that characterize science and technology, 

and methods of scientific inquiry and problem solving. The 

themes of science are ideas that transcend the scientific 

disciplines and give scientists tools for investigating the 

natural world. Themes included in the framework are 

systems, models, and patterns of change.
SCIENCE 2005 3

SCIENCE QUESTIONS

Because of the breadth of content covered in the NAEP 

science assessment, each student took just a portion of the 

questions, answering two 25-minute sections of subjectarea questions. All of the data from the questions that 

students answered are combined to produce an average 

score for the nation and the states. 

Students were asked multiple-choice questions and 

constructed-response questions that require them to 

produce their own answers. Some students were required 

to undertake actual experiments using materials provided 

to them, and to record their observations and conclusions 

in their test booklets. 

Each question on the science assessment measures one 

type of knowing and doing within a field of science. 

The full assessment includes questions in all areas of the 

matrix shown to the right. Only selected questions, as 

indicated in figure 1, are included in this report.

BACKGROUND QUESTIONS

In addition to answering subject-area questions, students 

participating in NAEP answered a short questionnaire 

that asked about their background and home or school 

experiences related to science achievement. This 

background information helps to provide additional context 

for understanding and interpreting the results.

Fields of science

Earth Physical Life

Conceptual 

understanding 

Moon craters,

grade 4,

page 11

Mechanical

weathering,

grade 12, 

page 38

No examples 

included.1

Genetic 

material, 

grade 8, 

page 23

Function of 

a neuron, 

grade 12, 

page 37

Scientific 

investigation 

No examples 

included.1

Salt water, 

grade 8, 

page 24

No examples 

included.1

Practical 

reasoning

No examples 

included.1

Balls in water, 

grade 4, 

page 12

No examples 

included.1

Knowing and doing science 1 Additional sample items may be found on the NAEP Questions Tool at 

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

Figure 1 Selected examples of questions by elements of knowing 

and doing science in each field
Reporting the Results

The students who are selected to take the NAEP assessment represent hundreds of other students 

like them in their state and across the U.S. By participating, they play an important role in 

improving education in the country and in their 

own state and school. These valuable data 

can only be obtained with the cooperation of 

schools, teachers, and students nationwide. 

The NAEP program extends its thanks to all 

those who participated.

4 THE NATION’S REPORT CARD

In This Report:

• National Performance at Grades 4, 8, and 12

• Overall and Subscale Performance by State at Grades 

 4 and 8

• Results for Selected Student Groups

• Coursetaking Patterns at Grade 12
Representative samples of schools and students participated 

in the 2005 NAEP science assessment at each grade. The 

results provide estimates of performance of all students 

in the target grades. The national results reflect the 

performance of students in public schools, private schools, 

Bureau of Indian Affairs schools, and Department of Defense 

schools. The numbers of schools and students participating 

at grades 4 and 8 were larger than at grade 12 in order to 

report results for individual states. The state results reflect the 

performance of students in public schools only.

The three NAEP achievement levels, 

from lowest to highest, are

Basic—denotes partial mastery of the knowledge and skills 

that are fundamental for proficient work at a given grade.

Proficient—represents solid academic performance. 

Students reaching this level have demonstrated competency 

over challenging subject matter.

Advanced—signifies superior performance.

SCIENCE 2005 5

Table 1 Participating schools and students in 2005 NAEP 

science assessment

Number of schools Number of students

Grade 4 8,500 147,700

Grade 8 6,400 143,400

Grade 12 900 13,700

SCALE SCORES

NAEP science results are reported on a 0ñ300 scale. An 

examination of scores at different percentiles along the scale 

shows whether lower-, middle-, and higher-performing 

students are showing the same trends as the national 

average.

Scores are also reported for each of the three fields of 

scienceóEarth, physical, and life. These subscale results are 

also reported on the 0ñ300 scale for each grade and allow a 

comparison of student performance in each field of science 

with overall achievement and progress.

ACHIEVEMENT LEVELS

Achievement levels for science are performance standards 

showing what students know and can do. NAEP results are 

reported as percentages of students performing at or above 

three achievement levels: Basic, Proficient, and Advanced. 

Percentages below Basic are also reported.

NAGB sets specific achievement levels for each subject 

area and grade, based on recommendations from panels of 

educators and members of the public, to provide a context 

for interpreting student performance on NAEP. As provided 

by law, NCES, upon review of congressionally mandated 

evaluations of NAEP, has determined that achievement 

levels are to be used on a trial basis and should be 

interpreted with caution. However, NCES and NAGB have 

affirmed the usefulness of these performance standards for 

understanding trends in achievement. NAEP achievement 

levels have been widely used by national and state officials.

Descriptions of the NAEP science achievement levels 

for each grade can be found in the grade sections of 

this report. More detailed descriptions of NAEP science 

achievement levels for each grade can be found in 

appendix A of the Science Framework for the 2005 

NAEP at the NAGB website, http://www.nagb.org/pubs/

pubs.html.

INTERPRETING RESULTS

NAEP uses widely accepted statistical standards in 

analyzing data. The text of this report discusses only 

findings that are statistically significant at the .05 level. 

In the tables and charts of this report, the symbol (*) is 

used to indicate that scores or percentages are significantly 

different from each other. 

Scales have been established for science achievement 

overall and by each content area at each grade. Because 

scales were set separately for each content area within 

each grade, direct comparisons cannot be made from one 

scale to another.

In addition to overall results, performance at the national level 

is presented for students categorized by different demographic 

and educational background characteristics (for example, by 

gender or science coursetaking). Not all of the data for results 

discussed in the text are presented in corresponding tables or 

graphics (e.g., achievement-level data for student groups), 

but can be found on the NAEP website at http://nces.ed.gov/

nationsreportcard/nde. Similar results at the state level are also 

available on the website. These simple breakdowns cannot 

be used to establish a cause-and-effect relationship between 

background characteristics and achievement. A complex mix 

of educational and socioeconomic factors may interact to 

affect student performance. 

For additional information, see the Technical Notes on 

page 40 or http://nationsreportcard.gov.

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

Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2005 Science Assessment. 
6 THE NATION’S REPORT CARD

4

GRADE

TH

Scores rise for all student groups, 

gaps narrow

In 2005, the average fourth-grade science score was higher than in previous assessment years, 

with minorities and lower-income students making significant gains. From 2000 to 2005, Black 

and Hispanic students’ science scores improved, and the gaps between White and Black and 

White and Hispanic students narrowed. 

Most of the 37 states and jurisdictions that participated in both 2000 and 2005 showed no 

significant change. Nine states, however, did make gains in average scores during this time 

period. The score gap between White and Black students remained unchanged in 35 states—

and narrowed in only two.
SCIENCE 2005 7

Lowest performing students 

make the largest gains

As shown in figure 2, the average score for fourth-graders 

was higher in 2005 than in 1996 and 2000. Figure 3 shows 

trends for students performing at higher, middle, and 

lower levels on the NAEP science scale. As can be seen 

by the trend line toward the bottom of the scale, students 

performing at the lowest level made the largest gains, 

up 10 points since 2000. Scores for higher-performing 

students at the 75th and 90th percentiles were not 

significantly different from previous assessment years. 

Figure 4 shows the percentage of students scoring at or 

above the Basic achievement level, indicating they have 

achieved at least partial mastery of the fundamental 

skills and knowledge in science. The percentage of 

students reaching the Basic level and above increased 

from 63 percent in 1996 and 2000 to 68 percent in 2005, 

while there was no significant change in the percentage 

of students performing at or above Proficient. One 

explanation for this can be seen in figure 3, which shows 

where in the performance distribution gains were being 

made. The only significant increases were in the lower half 

of the scale. The gains made by students in this area of the 

scale resulted in more fourth-graders moving into the Basic

range.

Figure 2 Trend in fourth-grade average NAEP science scores

'96 '00 '05 Year

147* 147* 151

0

140

150

160

300

Scale score

Figure 3 Trend in fourth-grade NAEP science percentile scores

'96 '00 '05 Year

100

0

110

120

130

140

150

160

170

180

190

200

300

90th

75th

50th

25th

10th

Percentile

Scale score

190 190 189

172 172 173

150* 150* 153

125* 125*

130

99* 99*

109

Basic Proficient

* Signifi cantly different from 2005.

Figure 4 Trend in fourth-grade NAEP science achievement-level 

performance

* Signifi cantly different from 2005. The percentage at Advanced was lower in 2005 (2.54) than in 1996 (3.27).

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

Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 1996, 2000, and 2005 Science 

Assessments.

% at or above Proficient

% at Advanced

% at or above Basic

63* 63* 68

3* 3 3

'96 '00 '05 Year

0

20

40

60

80

100

Percent

* Signifi cantly different from 2005.

SCIENCE 2005 7
8 THE NATION’S REPORT CARD

Minority students make gains

As shown in table 2, the percentage of White students in 

the population declined between 1996 and 2005, and the 

percentage of Hispanic students increased. Figure 5 shows 

that the trend of higher performance overall in 2005 was 

also seen for Black and Hispanic students as well as for 

White students. The average score for Asian/Pacific Islander 

students increased from 144 in 1996 to 158 in 2005.

8 THE NATION’S REPORT CARD

* Signifi cantly different from 2005.

NOTE: Score gaps are calculated based on differences between unrounded average scores. Race 

categories exclude Hispanic origin.

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

Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 1996, 2000, and 2005 Science Assessments.

Figure 7 White – Hispanic fourth-grade NAEP science score gap

'96 '00 '05 Year

White

Score gap

Hispanic

158*

34

124*

159*

36*

122*

162

28

133

0

120

130

140

150

160

170

300

Scale score

1996 2000 2005

 White 67* 63* 59

 Black 17 16 16

 Hispanic 10* 15* 19

 Asian/Pacific Islander 5 4 4

 American Indian/Alaska Native 2 1* 1

Table 2 Percentage of fourth-grade students in the population, 

by race/ethnicity

* Signifi cantly different from 2005. The percentage of American Indian/Alaska Native students was higher 

in 2005 (1.18) than in 2000 (0.69).

NOTE: Percentages for the unclassifi ed race/ethnicity category are not included in the table. Race 

categories exclude Hispanic origin.

Score gains made by minority students contributed to a 

narrowing of the gaps between White students and their 

Black and Hispanic peers. Figures 6 and 7 show that in 

2005, the White ñ Black gap was smaller than in either 

previous year, and the White ñ Hispanic gap was smaller 

than in 2000.

Figure 5 Trend in fourth-grade average NAEP science scores, 

by race/ethnicity

'96 '00 '05 Year

White

Asian/Pacific Islander

American Indian/Alaska Native

Hispanic

Black

158*

144*

129

124*

120*

159*

122*

135

122*

162

158

138

129

133

0

120

130

140

150

160

170

300

Scale score

* Signifi cantly different from 2005.

Figure 6 White – Black fourth-grade NAEP science score gap

'96 '00 '05 Year

White

Score gap

Black

158*

38*

120*

159*

37*

122*

162

33

129

0

120

130

140

150

160

170

300

Scale score

* Signifi cantly different from 2005.
Who is at or above Proficient? 

ï 81% White; 4% Black; 7% Hispanic; 6% Asian/Pacific 

Islander; 1% American Indian/Alaska Native 

ï 17% eligible for free/reduced-price school lunch 

ï 25% in central city schools

Both male and female students 

make gains since 2000

As figure 8 shows, the average scores for male and female 

students were higher in 2005 than in 2000. Although 

scores increased from 2000 to 2005 for both groups, there 

continued to be a gap.

Low-income students make gains

A studentís eligibility for free or reduced-price school 

lunch is used as an indicator of socioeconomic status; 

students from low-income families are typically eligible. 

Figure 9 shows that the average fourth-grade science 

scores were higher in 2005 than in previous assessment 

years for students both eligible and not eligible for free 

or reduced-price lunch. The average score for eligible 

students increased 8 points since 2000, twice that for not 

eligible students.

While not shown in the graphics, as a result of improved 

performance, the percentage of eligible students at or 

above Basic increased from 39 percent in 2000 to 48 

percent in 2005.

1996 2000 2005

 Eligible 35* 37* 42

 Not eligible 51 46* 51

Information not available 14* 17* 8

Table 3 Percentage of fourth-grade students in the population, 

by eligibility for free/reduced-price school lunch

* Signifi cantly different from 2005.

NOTE: Percentages may not add to 100 due to rounding.

Who is below Basic?

ï 32% White; 30% Black; 32% Hispanic; 3% Asian/Pacific 

Islander; 2% American Indian/Alaska Native 

ï 67% eligible for free/reduced-price school lunch 

ï 42% in central city schools

Figure 9 Trend in fourth-grade average NAEP science scores, 

by eligibility for free/reduced-price school lunch

'96 '00 '05 Year

Not eligible

Eligible

159* 158* 162

135

0

120

130

140

150

160

170

300

Scale score

129* 127*

Score gap

30 32*

27

* Signifi cantly different from 2005.

NOTE: Score gaps are calculated based on differences between unrounded average scores.

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

Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 1996, 2000, and 2005 Science Assessments.

The percentages shown below provide a profile of two 

groups of students: those who scored below Basic and 

those who scored at or above Proficient. For example, 

the percentages presented below show that, of all 

the students who performed below the Basic level, 32 

percent were White, while 81 percent of all the students 

at or above the Proficient level were White.

Figure 8 Trend in fourth-grade average NAEP science scores, 

by gender

'96 '00 '05 Year

Male

Female

Score gap 148*

146

149*

145*

153

149

0

130

140

150

160

170

300

Scale score

2 4

4

* Signifi cantly different from 2005.

SCIENCE 2005 9
10 THE NATION’S REPORT CARD

Assessment Content at Grade 4

The content of the assessment varies for each grade to reflect what students should know and 

be able to do. The percentage of the assessment dedicated to each of the fields of science and 

the elements of knowing and doing science is specified for each grade. To interpret the overall 

results and the student group results in this report, it is important to understand the content of the 

assessment at each grade.

At grade 4, one-third of the assessment was devoted 

to each of three science fieldsóEarth, physical, and 

life science. The framework specifies that 45 percent 

of assessment time should be devoted to conceptual 

understanding, 45 percent to scientific investigation, 

and 10 percent to practical reasoning.

Fourth-graders were presented with two 25-minute 

sections, each containing 9 to 17 multiple-choice questions 

and constructed-response questions, which require students 

to produce their own answers. One-half of the students 

in each school received one of three hands-on tasks and 

related questions. For example, fourth-grade students who 

participated in the 1996 science assessment were asked to 

determine whether an unknown sample of water was fresh 

water or salt water after observing the levels at which a 

pencil floated in each type of water. (Examples of handson tasks from the 2005 assessment have not yet been 

released.) Fourth-graders spent an additional 20 minutes to 

complete the hands-on portion of the assessment.

Science Achievement Levels 

at Grade 4

The science achievement levels at grade 4 represent what fourth-graders know and can do in science at each level. 

The following are excerpts of the science achievement-level descriptions with the corresponding cut scores noted in 

parentheses. The full descriptions can be found at http://www.nagb.org/pubs/s_framework_05/761907-ScienceFramework.pdf.

Basic (138): Students performing at the Basic level demonstrate some of the knowledge and reasoning required for 

understanding the Earth, physical, and life sciences at a level appropriate to grade 4. For example, they can carry out 

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

understanding of classification, simple relationships, and energy.

Proficient (170): Students performing at the Proficient level demonstrate the knowledge and reasoning required for 

understanding the Earth, physical, and life sciences at a level appropriate to grade 4. For example, they understand 

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

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

Advanced (205): Students performing at the Advanced level demonstrate a solid understanding of the Earth, physical, and 

life sciences as well as the ability to apply their understanding to practical situations at a level appropriate to grade 4. For 

example, they can perform and critique simple investigations, make connections from one or more of the sciences to predict 

or conclude, and apply fundamental concepts to practical applications.
Sample Grade 4 Multiple-Choice Question

 The surface of the Moon is covered with craters. 

Most of these craters were formed by

A eruptions of active volcanoes

 the impacts of many meteoroids

C shifting rock on the Moon’s surface 

 (“moonquakes”)

D tidal forces caused by the Earth and Sun

DoDEA1

53

49

43

49

50

42

55

43

50

44

40

42

57

47

41

54

41

39

44

51

42

43 41

53

44

55

54

45

41

45

56

56

47

55

43

45

50

37 46

48

50

42

42

54

48

Did not participate

DC

The following multiple-choice question from 

the fourth-grade science assessment required 

conceptual understanding in the field of Earth 

science.

The percentages above the question to the 

right indicate how students performed on the 

question. In addition to the overall percentage 

of students who answered the question 

correctly, the percentage of students at each 

achievement level who answered correctly 

is presented. For example, 46 percent of the 

students scoring at the Basic level answered 

this question correctly, and 90 percent of 

the students at the Advanced level answered 

correctly.

Percentage of correct fourth-grade student responses on question above in 2005, by state

1 Department of Defense Education Activity.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2005 Science Assessment. 

National percentage correct in 2005

Overall Below Basic At Basic At Proficient At Advanced

47 22 46 73 90

SCIENCE 2005 11
12 THE NATION’S REPORT CARD

Sample Grade 4 Short Constructed-Response Question

The following is a constructedresponse question requiring practical 

reasoning in the field of physical 

science. Responses were rated using a 

three-level scoring guide. Responses 

which stated that the water level goes 

up more in cup 1 and gave a correct 

explanation were rated ìComplete.î 

Responses which stated that the water 

level goes up more in cup 1, but had 

an inadequate explanation were rated 

ìPartial.î Responses which stated 

that the water level goes up more 

in cup 2, or that ball 2 pushes the 

water level higher in cup 2 were rated 

as ìIncorrect.î The sample student 

response shown here was ìComplete.î

DoDEA1

63

62

67

65

64

67

68

60

62

63

59

56

56

57

58

63

60

59

57

62

69

61 67

66

69 67

63

63

65

58

71

61

68

66

71

62

64

62 55

72

70

61

60

67

67

Did not participate

DC

Percentage of fourth-grade student responses rated “Complete” on question above in 2005, by state

1 Department of Defense Education Activity.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, 

Institute of Education Sciences, National 

Center for Education Statistics, National 

Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 

2005 Science Assessment. 

National percentage “Complete” in 2005

Overall Below Basic At Basic At Proficient At Advanced

62 51 64 72 79

As shown in the picture, Christina 

has two identical cups that are 

filled to the same level with water. 

She also has two solid steel balls.

Christina puts ball 1 in cup 1 and 

ball 2 in cup 2. In which cup will 

the water level rise the most?

Tell why you think so.
SCIENCE 2005 13

Range of Science Performance at Grade 4

The item map below provides another way to interpret 

the scale score and achievement-level results for fourthgraders. The left side of the item map shows the scores 

that define the lower boundaries of the Basic, Proficient, 

and Advanced achievement levels. The right side lists 

descriptions of some selected assessment questions that 

fall at various levels of difficulty on the 0ñ300 scale. 

The map is a useful tool for understanding what it means 

to perform at different levels on the scale. For example, 

the map shows that students performing toward the lower 

end of the Basic achievement-level range were likely to be 

able to identify the organs that are responsible for oxygen 

delivery (143). Students performing at the Proficient level 

were likely to identify similar bone structures (182) and 

relate air supply to burning time (185).

Grade 4 Science Item Map

0

300

205

170

138

237 Use a simple circuit to test an item for conductivity

233 Explain why lightning is seen before thunder is heard

231 Identify objects that conduct electricity

219 Interpret readings from rain gauges

208 Interpret data to conclude conditions needed for seed germination

203 Explain what can be learned from fossils

194 Collect temperature data

193 Identify method to compare the effectiveness of fertilizers

189 Identify cause of most craters on the Moon (page 11)

185 Relate air (oxygen) supply to burning time

182 Identify similar bone structures

174 Interpret melting point data to determine which item melts first

165 Use data table to determine which day has the most daylight

159 Predict and explain water displacement by two objects (page 12)

159 Predict and explain what will happen to a population of whales

157 Form conclusion based on stomach contents of a whale

154 Identify source of energy needed for evaporation from a lake

143 Recognize organs in the human body that are responsible for oxygen delivery

139 Identify function of a human structure

Advanced

Proficient

Basic 

The position of a question on the scale 

represents the average scale score 

attained by students who had a 65 percent 

probability of successfully answering a 

constructed-response question, or a 74 

percent probability of correctly answering 

a four-option multiple-choice question. 

Scale score ranges for science achievement 

levels are referenced on the map. For 

constructed-response questions, the 

question description represents students’

performance rated as completely correct.

NOTE: Regular type denotes a constructedresponse question. Italic type denotes a 

multiple-choice question.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, 

Institute of Education Sciences, National 

Center for Education Statistics, National 

Assessment of Educational Progress 

(NAEP), 2005 Science Assessment.

136 Identify process fish use to obtain oxygen

103 Compare weather data to tell which city has warmer temperatures

100 Identify the graph that represents the data provided about plants

 80 Identify matter present on the surface of the Moon

SCIENCE 2005 13
14 THE NATION’S REPORT CARD

In 2005, 44 states and the Department of Defense Education Activity (DoDEA) schools had 

representative samples of fourth-graders large enough for reporting state-level results. These data 

provide a common comparison point of their state’s performance to other states and to the nation 

as a whole. Thirty-seven of the states and jurisdictions that participated in 2005 also participated 

in 2000, allowing comparisons over time.

When making comparisons, it is important to remember that performance results may be 

affected by differences in demographic makeup and exclusion rates for students with disabilities 

and English language learners, which may vary considerably across states as well as across 

years (see the Technical Notes on page 40 for more information).

State Performance

14 THE NATION’S REPORT CARD

STATE CHANGES AT GRADE 4

Since 2000, the nationís fourth-graders have 

increased their overall average scale score by 

4 points, a statistically significant gain. A state-bystate analysis reveals that while most showed no 

significant change, one out of every four states that 

participated in both years increased its overall score 

from 2000 to 2005, and that no state performed lower 

over that time period.

Of the nine states that saw a significant increase in 

scores from 2000 to 2005, gains in three statesó

Kentucky, South Carolina, and Tennesseeówere 

driven by increased scores for both Black and White 

students. 

Increases in a stateís average 

score do not always translate into 

increases in the percentages of 

students performing at or above 

the Basic or Proficient levels. For 

example, a stateís average score 

may increase even if most of the 

gains are observed in the lower end 

of the performance distribution. In 

this case, the percentage of students 

at or above Basic may increase, 

while the percentage at or above 

Proficient does not.

Significant score increase

No significant change, did 

not participate, or did not

meet reporting standards

DoDEA1

KY

SC

GA

TN

TX

CA

HI

VA MD

DC

1 Department of Defense Education Activity. 

Figure 10 State changes in NAEP science performance from 2000 to 2005 at grade 4

Higher average 

scores

California

Georgia

Hawaii

Kentucky

Maryland

South Carolina

Tennessee

Texas

Virginia

Higher percentage 

of students at or 

above Basic

Higher percentage 

of students at or 

above Proficient

California

Kentucky

South Carolina

Virginia

Georgia

Hawaii

Kentucky

South Carolina

Tennessee

Virginia

Lower average score or 

percentages at or above 

Basic or Proficient

None

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

Educational Progress (NAEP), 2000 and 2005 Science Assessments. 
SCIENCE 2005 15

Figure 11 Changes in fourth-grade average NAEP science subscale scores between 2000 and 2005

1 Department of Defense Education Activity.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2000 and 2005 Science Assessments. 

CO

FL

ID

IL

MD

MI

MO

PA

SC

UT

AL

AR

CA

DoDEA1 GA

HI

KY

LA

MS

NV

TN

WV

IN DE

KS

ME

MN

NE

NH

NJ

NY

NC

OR

TX

VT

VA

WA

WI

WY

IA

OH

MT

AZ OK

AK

ND

SD

NM

CO

FL

ID

IL

MD

MI

MO

PA

SC

UT

AL

AR

CA

DoDEA1

DC

GA

HI

KY

LA

MS

NV

TN

WV

IN DE

KS

ME

MN

NE

NH

NJ

NY

NC

OR

TX

VT

VA

WA

WI

WY

IA

OH

MT

AZ OK

AK

ND

SD

NM

CO

FL

ID

IL

MD

MI

MO

PA

SC

UT

AL

AR

CA

DoDEA1 GA

HI

KY

LA

MS

NV

TN

WV

IN DE

KS

ME

MN

NE

NH

NJ

NY

NC

OR

TX

VT

VA

WA

WI

WY

IA

OH

MT

AZ OK

AK

ND

SD

NM

Higher average scale score for 2005 than 2000

No significant difference from 2000 to 2005

Lower average scale score for 2005 than 2000

Did not participate or did not meet reporting

standards in 2000 and/or in 2005

PHYSICAL EARTH LIFE

RI

CT

MA

RI

CT

MA

RI

CT

MA

DC

DC

The maps in figure 11 show state 

trends in science performance by 

examining changes in average 

scores between 2000 and 2005 

in the three science subscales: 

Earth science, physical science, 

and life science. These results are 

not always consistent from one 

subscale to another or to the overall 

results, and may reflect differences 

in curricular emphasis within 

states.

Among the nine states posting 

gains overall between 2000 and 

2005, Kentucky, South Carolina, 

and Virginia were the only three 

that also scored higher in each of 

the three subscales.

Four states, with no change in 

performance overall, showed 

increased performance in one of 

the content areas. Idaho, North 

Carolina, and West Virginia scored 

higher in physical science, and the 

DoDEA schools scored higher in 

life science. 

Rhode Islandís score went down in 

Earth science, and Connecticutís 

score went down in life science, 

while their overall scores remained 

unchanged. 

SCIENCE 2005 15
16 THE NATION’S REPORT CARD

1 Department of Defense Education Activity.

NOTE: The shaded bars are graphed using unrounded numbers. Percentages may not add to 100 due to rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2005 Science Assessment.

State Results

Nation (public)

Alabama

Arizona

Arkansas

California

Colorado

Connecticut

Delaware

Florida

Georgia

Hawaii

Idaho

Illinois

Indiana

Kentucky

Louisiana

Maine

Maryland

Massachusetts

Michigan

Minnesota

Mississippi

Missouri

Montana

Nevada

New Hampshire

New Jersey

New Mexico

North Carolina

North Dakota

Ohio

Oklahoma

Oregon

Rhode Island

South Carolina

South Dakota

Tennessee

Texas

Utah

Vermont

Virginia

Washington

West Virginia

Wisconsin

Wyoming

Other jurisdiction

DoDEA1

Nation (public)

Alabama

Arizona

Arkansas

California

Colorado

Connecticut

Delaware

Florida

Georgia

Hawaii

Idaho

Illinois

Indiana

Kentucky

Louisiana

Maine

Maryland

Massachusetts

Michigan

Minnesota

Mississippi

Missouri

Montana

Nevada

New Hampshire

New Jersey

New Mexico

North Carolina

North Dakota

Ohio

Oklahoma

Oregon

Rhode Island

South Carolina

South Dakota

Tennessee

Texas

Utah

Vermont

Virginia

Washington

West Virginia

Wisconsin

Wyoming

Other jurisdiction

DoDEA1

Average

State/jurisdiction score State/jurisdiction

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

34 39 25 2

42 37 19 2

47 36 17 1

36 40 23 1

50 33 16 1

26 42 29 2

28 40 30 3

29 44 25 2

32 42 24 2

37 38 22 2

43 38 17 1

25 45 27 2

36 38 24 2

30 43 25 2

24 40 32 4

43 37 19 2

19 45 33 3

36 38 24 2

21 41 34 4

31 39 27 3

24 42 31 3

55 33 12 1

23 41 33 3

20 43 34 3

45 38 16 1

17 46 35 2

28 40 29 3

45 37 16 1

35 40 23 2

18 46 34 2

25 40 31 3

33 42 24 1

32 42 24 2

37 40 22 1

36 39 23 2

21 45 32 2

33 41 24 2

34 41 23 2

26 41 30 3

22 41 34 4

20 40 35 5

29 42 26 3

30 47 23 1

23 42 32 3

22 46 30 2

23 45 29 2

149

142

139

147

137

155

155

152

150

148

142

155

148

152

158

143

160

149

160

152

156

133

158

160

140

161

154

141

149

160

157

150

151

146

148

158

150

150

155

160

161

153

151

158

157

156

Percentage below Basic Percentage at Basic, Proficient, and Advanced

Below Basic Basic Proficient Advanced

Figure 12 Average fourth-grade NAEP science scores and percentage of students in each achievement level in 2005, 

by state
SCIENCE 2005 17

— Not available. The jurisdiction did not participate. 

‡ Reporting standards not met. 

* Signifi cantly different from 2005 when only one jurisdiction or the nation is being examined. 1 Department of Defense Education Activity. Before 2005, DoDEA overseas and domestic schools were separate jurisdictions in NAEP. For this table, 2000 data were recalculated for comparability. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2000 and 2005 Science Assessments.

Percentage of students

Average scale score At or above Basic At or above Profi cient At Advanced

State/jurisdiction 2000 2005 2000 2005 2000 2005 2000 2005

Nation (public) 145* 149 61* 66 26 27 3 2

Alabama 143 142 58 58 22 21 2 2

Alaska — —— —— —— —

Arizona 140 139 55 53 22 18 2 1

Arkansas 145 147 62 64 23 24 2 1

California 129* 137 45 50 13* 17 1 1

Colorado — 155 — 74 — 32 — 2

Connecticut 156 155 75 72 35 33 3 3

Delaware — 152 — 71 — 27 — 2

Florida — 150 — 68 — 26 — 2

Georgia 142* 148 57* 63 23 25 3 2

Hawaii 136* 142 51* 57 16 19 1 1

Idaho 152 155 74 75 29 29 2 2

Illinois 150 148 68 64 31 27 3 2

Indiana 154 152 74 70 32 27 3 2

Iowa 159 — 79 — 36 — 3 —

Kansas — —— —— —— —

Kentucky 152* 158 69* 76 28* 36 2* 4

Louisiana 139 143 54 57 18 20 2 2

Maine 161 160 82 81 37 36 4 3

Maryland 145* 149 61 64 24 27 3 2

Massachusetts 161 160 81 79 42 38 5 4

Michigan 152 152 70 69 32 30 3 3

Minnesota 157 156 78 76 34 33 3 3

Mississippi 133 133 46 45 13 12 1 1

Missouri 157 158 76 77 34 36 3 3

Montana 160 160 80 80 36 37 3 3

Nebraska 150 — 68 — 26 — 2 —

Nevada 142 140 58 55 19 17 1 1

New Hampshire — 161 — 83 — 37 — 2

New Jersey — 154 — 72 — 32 — 3

New Mexico 140 141 54 55 17 18 1 1

New York 148 — 66 — 24 — 2 —

North Carolina 147 149 63 65 23 25 2 2

North Dakota 160 160 81 82 36 36 3 2

Ohio 155 157 73 75 31 35 3 3

Oklahoma 151 150 70 67 26 25 2 1

Oregon 148 151 66 68 27 26 3 2

Pennsylvania — —— —— —— —

Rhode Island 148 146 65 63 25 23 2* 1

South Carolina 140* 148 54* 64 20* 25 2 2

South Dakota — 158 — 79 — 35 — 2

Tennessee 145* 150 61* 67 24 26 2 2

Texas 145* 150 62 66 23 25 2 2

Utah 154 155 73 74 31 33 3 3

Vermont 160 160 79 78 38 38 4 4

Virginia 155* 161 72* 80 32* 40 3 5

Washington — 153 — 71 — 28 — 3

West Virginia 149 151 68 70 24 24 2 1

Wisconsin ‡ 158 ‡ 77 ‡ 35 ‡ 3

Wyoming 156 157 77 78 31 32 2 2

Other jurisdictions

District of Columbia — —— —— —— —

DoDEA1 156 156 76 77 30 32 3 2

Table 4 Average fourth-grade NAEP science scores and achievement-level performance, by state

SCIENCE 2005 17
18 THE NATION’S REPORT CARD

Science scores unchanged overall, 

Black students show gains

While the overall average score for eighth-grade students in 2005 showed no significant difference 

compared to the results in 1996 and 2000, there were some changes in student group performance. 

Black students showed an increase of 3 score points since the 1996 assessment. This gain for 

Black students was the only score increase among all racial/ethnic groups at grade 8. Additionally, 

students who were eligible for the school lunch program showed a gain from 2000 to 2005. 

However, significant score gaps still persisted between White and minority students, and between 

students eligible and not eligible for the school lunch program. Male students also continued to 

outperform female students in 2005.

Of the 37 states and jurisdictions that participated in both the 1996 and 2005 assessments, 

9 increased in average scores, and 5 decreased.

8

GRADE

TH
SCIENCE 2005 19

Overall performance unchanged

Figure 13 shows that since 1996, overall science scores 

for eighth-graders have remained unchanged at 149.

 As might be expected, the achievement-level results are 

similar to the score results. As shown in figure 14, there 

have been no significant changes in the percentages of 

students performing at or above the Proficient level and 

at or above the Basic level compared with either previous 

assessment year.

* Signifi cantly different from 2005.

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

Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 1996, 2000, and 2005 Science Assessments.

Figure 14 Trend in eighth-grade NAEP science achievementlevel performance

'96 '00 '05 Year

Percent

0

20

40

60

80

100

60 59 59

29 30 29

3 4* 3

% at or above Proficient

% at Advanced

% at or above Basic

Figure 13 Trend in eighth-grade average NAEP science scores

'96 '00 '05 Year

149

0

140

150

160

300

149 149

Scale score

Changes detected in results 

by field of science 

In addition to overall average scores, results are also 

available for each of the three fields of science. Figure 15 

shows that, while the performance of eighth-graders overall 

was unchanged in 2005 compared to 1996 and 2000, the 

average score for physical science in 2005 was lower than 

in previous assessment years. 

Figure 15 Trend in eighth-grade average NAEP science scores, 

by field of science

EARTH 

'96 '00 '05 Year

149

0

140

150

160

300

150 150

Scale score

PHYSICAL

'96 '00 '05 Year

150*

0

140

150

160

300

148* 146

Scale score

LIFE

'96 '00 '05 Year

149

0

140

150

160

300

150 150

Scale score

* Signifi cantly different from 2005.
20 THE NATION’S REPORT CARD

Black students make gains

Figure 16 shows that Black students were the only racial/

ethnic group to make significant gains, increasing from 

121 in 1996 to 124 in 2005. Although not shown, the 

percentage of Black students performing at or above Basic

also increased from 23 percent in 1996 to 28 percent in 

2005.

NOTE: Score gaps are calculated based on differences between unrounded average scores. Race categories 

exclude Hispanic origin.

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

Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 1996, 2000, and 2005 Science Assessments.

Figure 18 White – Hispanic eighth-grade NAEP science 

score gap

'96 '00 '05 Year

White

Score gap

Hispanic

159

31

128

161

34

127

160

32

129

0

120

130

140

150

160

170

300

Scale score

While Black students have shown improvement, score 

gaps between White and Black students still exist (see 

figure 17). The 37-point gap in 2005 was not significantly 

different from previous years. Similarly, the 32-point gap 

between White students and Hispanic students was not 

significantly different from 1996 and 2000 as shown in 

figure 18.

1996 2000 2005

 White 68* 66* 61

 Black 17 16 17

 Hispanic 10* 13* 16

 Asian/Pacific Islander 3 4 4

 American Indian/Alaska Native 1 1 1

Table 5 Percentage of eighth-grade students in the population, 

by race/ethnicity

* Signifi cantly different from 2005.

NOTE: Percentages for the unclassifi ed race/ethnicity category are not included in the table. Race categories 

exclude Hispanic origin.

Gaps remain unchanged

Figure 16 Trend in eighth-grade average NAEP science scores,

by race/ethnicity

'96 '00 '05 Year

White

Asian/Pacific Islander

Hispanic

Black

159

151

128

121*

161

127

153

121

160

156

124

129

0

120

130

140

150

160

170

300

Scale score

* Signifi cantly different from 2005.

Figure 17 White – Black eighth-grade NAEP science score gap

'96 '00 '05 Year

White

Score gap

Black

159

38

121*

161

39

121

160

37

124

0

120

130

140

150

160

170

300

Scale score

* Signifi cantly different from 2005.
Lower-income students 

make gains

Figure 19 shows that students from low-income families, 

as indicated by students’ eligibility for free or reducedprice school lunch, had a higher average score in 2005 

compared with the score in 2000, resulting in a narrowing 

of the score gap between eligible and not eligible students. 

However, there was no significant change in the gap in 

2005 when compared to the gap in 1996. Although not 

shown, the percentage of eligible students performing at 

or above Basic increased from 32 percent in 2000 to 37 

percent in 2005. 

Figure 19 Trend in eighth-grade average NAEP science scores, 

by eligibility for free/reduced-price school lunch

'96 '00 '05 Year

Not eligible

Eligible

156* 159

159

130

0

120

130

140

150

160

170

300

Scale score

129 127*

Score gap 27 32* 28

* Signifi cantly different from 2005.

NOTE: Score gaps are calculated based on differences between unrounded average scores.

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

Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 1996, 2000, and 2005 Science Assessments.

Who is below Basic?

• 39% White; 29% Black; 25% Hispanic; 4% Asian/

Pacific Islander; 2% American Indian/Alaska Native

• 56% eligible for free/reduced-price school lunch 

• 20% report always speaking a language other than 

English in the home 

Who is at or above Proficient? 

• 83% White; 4% Black; 6% Hispanic; 5% Asian/

Pacific Islander; 1% American Indian/Alaska Native 

• 16% eligible for free/reduced-price school lunch 

• 7% report always speaking a language other than 

English in the home

SCIENCE 2005 21

Table 6 Percentage of eighth-grade students in the population, 

by eligibility for free/reduced-price school lunch

1996 2000 2005

 Eligible 26* 27* 37

 Not eligible 54 52 55

Information not available 20* 21* 8

* Signifi cantly different from 2005.

The percentages shown here provide a profile of two 

groups of students: those who scored below Basic and 

those who scored at or above Proficient. For example, the 

percentages presented here show that, of all the students 

who performed below the Basic level, 56 percent were 

eligible for free/reduced-price school lunch, while 16 

percent of the students at or above Proficient were eligible.
22 THE NATION’S REPORT CARD

At grade 8, a larger proportion of the assessment focused 

on life science (40 percent). Thirty percent was devoted 

to Earth science and 30 percent to physical science. The 

framework specifies that 45 percent of assessment time 

should be devoted to conceptual understanding, 30 percent 

to scientific investigation, and 25 percent to practical 

reasoning. 

Eighth-graders were presented with two 25-minute 

sections, each containing 10 to 19 multiple-choice and 

Assessment Content at Grade 8

Science Achievement Levels at Grade 8

The science achievement levels at grade 8 represent what eighth-graders know and can do in science at each level. 

Excerpts of the achievement-level descriptions for science at grade 8 along with the corresponding cut score for each 

are provided below. For complete information about achievement levels, visit http://www.nagb.org/pubs/s_framework_

05/761907-ScienceFramework.pdf.

Basic (143): Students performing at the Basic level demonstrate some of the knowledge and reasoning required for 

understanding the Earth, physical, and life sciences at a level appropriate to grade 8. For example, they can carry 

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

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

understanding of cause-and-effect relationships.

Proficient (170): Students performing at the Proficient level demonstrate much of the knowledge and many of the 

reasoning abilities essential for understanding the Earth, physical, and life sciences at a level appropriate to grade 

8. For example, students can interpret graphic information, design simple investigations, and explain such scientific 

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

addressing energy and pollution.

Advanced (208): Students performing at the Advanced level demonstrate a solid understanding of the Earth, physical, 

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

appropriate to grade 8. For example, students can perform and critique the design of investigations, relate scientific 

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

constructed-response questions. An example of one of 

the hands-on tasks administered in 1996 asked students to 

estimate the unknown concentration of salt in a solution 

after plotting the data obtained by observing the levels at 

which a pencil floats in distilled water and in the same 

amount of a 25 percent salt solution. (Examples of handson tasks from the 2005 assessment have not yet been 

released.) One-half of the eighth-graders assessed spent an 

additional 30 minutes on the hands-on activity.
SCIENCE 2005 23

In the picture of a cell, which label indicates 

the part of the cell that contains most of the 

cell's genetic material?

 1

B 2

C 3

D 4

Sample Grade 8 Multiple-Choice Question

The following multiple-choice question from 

the eighth-grade science assessment required 

conceptual understanding in the field of life 

science. 

Percentage of correct eighth-grade student responses on question above in 2005, by state

1 Department of Defense Education Activity.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2005 Science Assessment. 

54

50

58

54

49

50

54

55

56

52

51

50

53

60

42

55

50

52

48

62

51

56 47

50

50 60

55

51

54

49

59

62

49

56

55

52

59

45

60

62

55

48

48

54

55

DoDEA1

Did not participate

DC

National percentage correct in 2005

Overall Below Basic At Basic At Proficient At Advanced

53 40 54 67 83
24 THE NATION’S REPORT CARD

Sample Grade 8 Short Constructed-Response Question

The following constructed-response question was 

categorized as scientific investigation in physical 

science. Responses were rated using a three-level 

scoring guide. Responses that showed an understanding of how to distinguish fresh water from 

salt water by describing both a method for 

determining the difference and a result were 

rated “Complete.” Responses that showed some 

understanding of the difference between fresh 

and salt water, but provided no practical method 

for distinguishing them or gave a correct method but no 

result, were rated “Partial.” Responses that showed no 

understanding of how to distinguish between fresh and 

salt water were rated “Incorrect.” The sample student 

response below was “Complete.”

Percentage of eighth-grade student responses rated “Complete” on question above in 2005, by state

1 Department of Defense Education Activity.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2005 Science Assessment. 

DoDEA1

27

Did not participate

23

25

32

32

19

25

18 22

30

19

15

25

13

15

18

21

21

27

16

12

18

19

18

28 22

30

28

30

29

17

30

18

25

23

33

24 25

25

29

23 18

27

25

17

DC

National percentage “Complete” in 2005

Overall Below Basic At Basic At Proficient At Advanced

23 8 22 42 69

Maria has one glass of 

pure water and one glass 

of salt water, which look 

exactly alike. Explain 

what Maria could do, 

without tasting the 

water, to find out which 

glass contains the salt 

water.
SCIENCE 2005 25

Range of Science Performance at Grade 8

The item map below provides another way to interpret 

the scale score and achievement-level results for eighthgraders. The left side shows the scores that define the 

lower boundaries of the Basic, Proficient, and Advanced

achievement levels. The right side lists descriptions of 

some selected assessment questions that fall at various 

levels of difficulty on the 0–300 scale.

300

208

170

143

0

246 Provide hypothesis from evidence in fossil record

233 State differences between plant and animal cells

230 Explain how to find out if a glass contains salt water (page 24)

218 Describe means by which plants prevent erosion

214 Compare high-power and low-power views through a microscope

210 Identify the property of sound waves that corresponds to loudness

201 Compare two runners’ speeds

198 Identify location of cell’s genetic material (page 23)

196 Identify energy conversion in an electric fan

188 Identify zone on a map with a temperate climate

178 Describe experiment to measure the volume of an object 

176 Identify function of fruit in seed dissemination

172 Recognize a fault line from a diagram

166 Compare heart rates before, during, and after running 

162 Explain relative motion of two vehicles

161 State direction of motion after collision of two objects

160 Describe effect of pollutant on food web

153 Identify components of the human digestive system

147 Identify an action that would reduce carbon dioxide in the atmosphere

138 Identify the roles of an organism in a food web138

136 Identify relationship between rainfall and seed production

111 List three uses for human-made satellites

109 Relate shape of human tooth to its function

 96 Place traffic mirror to reflect in appropriate direction

Advanced

Proficient

Basic 

The position of a question on the scale 

represents the average scale score attained by 

students who had a 65 percent probability of 

successfully answering a constructed-response 

question, or a 74 percent probability of correctly answering a four-option multiple-choice 

question. Scale score ranges for science 

achievement levels are referenced on the 

map. For constructed-response questions, 

the question description represents students’

performance rated as completely correct.

NOTE: Regular type denotes a constructedresponse question. Italic type denotes a 

multiple-choice question.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center 

for Education Statistics, National Assessment 

of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2005 Science 

Assessment.

Grade 8 Science Item Map

For example, the map shows that eighth-graders 

performing at the Basic level, especially in the upper 

range of this level, were likely to be able to compare heart 

rates before, during, and after running (166). Students 

performing at the Proficient level were likely to know the 

function of fruit in seed dissemination (176).
26 THE NATION’S REPORT CARD

State Performance

In 2005, a total of 45 states and jurisdictions (including Department of Defense Education 

Activity [DoDEA] schools) had representative samples of eighth-graders for reporting state-level 

results. These data provide a common comparison point of their state’s performance to other 

states and the nation as a whole. 

STATE CHANGES AT GRADE 8

The map to the right reflects changes in average scores 

from 2000 to 2005. Scores increased in 11 states and 

jurisdictions, and decreased in 4 states. Of the 11 states 

and jurisdictions with increases, 1 showed higher scores 

for both White and Black students, and 2 showed 

increases for both White and Hispanic students.

While there was no significant change in the national 

average science score at grade 8 from 1996 to 2005, nine 

states and jurisdictions showed increases over the same 

period, and five states showed decreases (table 7).

Although not shown here, four of the nine states and 

jurisdictions with increases also showed higher scores for 

both White and Black students, and one showed higher 

scores for both White and Hispanic students. 

 Significant score increase

 Significant score decrease

 No significant change, did

 not participate, or did not

 meet reporting standards

CA

HI

NV

AZ

WY

ND

IN

AL

LA

VT

MA

SC

DoDEA1

DC

KY VA

1 Department of Defense Education Activity.

Higher average 

scores

California

Hawaii

Kentucky

Louisiana

Massachusetts

North Dakota

South Carolina 

Vermont

Virginia

Wyoming

DoDEA

Lower average 

scores

Alabama

Arizona

Indiana

Nevada

Higher percentage 

of students at or 

above Basic

California

North Dakota

South Carolina

Vermont

Virginia

Wyoming

DoDEA

Lower percentage 

of students at or 

above Basic

Arizona

Higher percentage 

of students at or 

above Proficient

California

North Dakota

Virginia

Wyoming

Lower percentage 

of students at or 

above Proficient

None

Figure 20 State changes in NAEP science performance from 2000 to 2005 at grade 8

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2000 and 2005 Science Assessments. 
SCIENCE 2005 27

Figure 21 Changes in eighth-grade average NAEP science subscale scores between 2000 and 2005

1 Department of Defense Education Activity.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2000 and 2005 Science Assessments. 

CO

FL

ID

IL

MD

MI

MO

PA

SC

UT

AL

AR

CA

DoDEA1 GA

HI

KY

LA

MS

NV

RI

TN

WV

DE

CT

IN

KS

ME

MA

RI

CT

MA

RI

CT

MA

MN

NE

NH

NJ

NY

NC

OR

TX

VT

VA

WA

WI

WY

IA

OH

MT

AZ OK

AK

ND

SD

NM

CO

FL

ID

IL

MD

MI

MO

PA

SC

UT

AL

AR

CA

DoDEA1 GA

HI

KY

LA

MS

NV

TN

WV

IN DE

KS

ME

MN

NE

NH

NJ

NY

NC

OR

TX

VT

VA

WA

WI

WY

IA

OH

MT

AZ OK

AK

ND

SD

NM

CO

FL

ID

IL

MD

MI

MO

PA

SC

UT

AL

AR

CA

DoDEA1 GA

HI

KY

LA

MS

NV

TN

WV

IN DE

KS

ME

MN

NE

NH

NJ

NY

NC

OR

TX

VT

VA

WA

WI

WY

IA

OH

MT

AZ OK

AK

ND

SD

NM

Higher average scale score for 2005 than 2000

No significant difference from 2000 to 2005

Lower average scale score for 2005 than 2000

Did not participate or did not meet reporting

standards in 2000 and/or in 2005

PHYSICAL EARTH LIFE

DC

DC

DC

The maps in figure 21 show 

changes in average scores for 

eighth-graders between 2000 

and 2005 in the three science 

subscales: Earth science, physical 

science, and life science. The 

results are not always consistent 

from one subscale to another or 

to the overall results, perhaps 

reflecting differences in curricular 

emphasis within states. 

Among the 11 states posting gains 

overall between 2000 and 2005, 

California, Hawaii, and Virginia 

scored higher in each of the three 

subscales.

One state, Arkansas, with no 

change in performance overall, 

showed increased performance in 

Earth science.

Rhode Island’s score went down 

in Earth science, and scores for 

Idaho, Mississippi, North Carolina, 

Ohio, and Rhode Island went 

down in physical science, while 

their overall scores remained 

unchanged. 
28 THE NATION’S REPORT CARD

State Results

1 Department of Defense Education Activity.

NOTE: The shaded bars are graphed using unrounded numbers. Percentages may not add to 100 due to rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2005 Science Assessment. 

Nation (public)

Alabama

Arizona

Arkansas

California

Colorado

Connecticut

Delaware

Florida

Georgia

Hawaii

Idaho

Illinois

Indiana

Kentucky

Louisiana

Maine

Maryland

Massachusetts

Michigan

Minnesota

Mississippi

Missouri

Montana

Nevada

New Hampshire

New Jersey

New Mexico

North Carolina

North Dakota

Ohio

Oklahoma

Oregon

Rhode Island

South Carolina

South Dakota

Tennessee

Texas

Utah

Vermont

Virginia

Washington

West Virginia

Wisconsin

Wyoming

Other jurisdiction

DoDEA1

Nation (public)

Alabama

Arizona

Arkansas

California

Colorado

Connecticut

Delaware

Florida

Georgia

Hawaii

Idaho

Illinois

Indiana

Kentucky

Louisiana

Maine

Maryland

Massachusetts

Michigan

Minnesota

Mississippi

Missouri

Montana

Nevada

New Hampshire

New Jersey

New Mexico

North Carolina

North Dakota

Ohio

Oklahoma

Oregon

Rhode Island

South Carolina

South Dakota

Tennessee

Texas

Utah

Vermont

Virginia

Washington

West Virginia

Wisconsin

Wyoming

Other jurisdiction

DoDEA1

Average

State/jurisdiction score State/jurisdiction

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

43 30 24 3

52 28 18 1

51 29 18 2

44 33 22 2

56 26 16 2

34 31 30 4

37 30 29 4

37 34 27 3

49 29 19 2

47 28 23 3

56 29 14 1

29 35 33 4

42 30 25 3

38 33 26 3

37 33 28 3

53 28 18 1

28 37 32 3

46 28 22 4

28 32 35 6

34 31 31 4

29 32 36 4

60 26 13 1

34 33 30 3

24 35 38 4

52 29 18 1

24 36 36 4

35 32 29 4

54 28 17 1

47 31 20 2

23 35 39 4

33 32 31 4

43 32 23 2

34 33 29 3

42 32 24 2

46 31 21 2

24 35 37 4

45 30 22 3

47 29 21 2

35 32 30 3

24 35 36 4

34 32 30 4

34 33 29 4

43 33 22 2

30 32 34 5

26 37 33 3

25 37 35 3

147

138

140

144

136

155

152

152

141

144

136

158

148

150

153

138

158

145

161

155

158

132

154

162

138

162

153

138

144

163

155

147

153

146

145

161

145

143

154

162

155

154

147

158

159

160

Percentage below Basic Percentage at Basic, Proficient, and Advanced

Below Basic Basic Proficient Advanced

Figure 22 Average eighth-grade NAEP science scores and percentage of students in each achievement level in 2005, 

by state
SCIENCE 2005 29

— Not available. The jurisdiction did not participate.

# The estimate rounds to zero.

‡ Reporting standards not met. 

* Signifi cantly different from 2005 when only one jurisdiction or the nation is being examined. 1 Accommodations were not permitted for this assessment.

2 Department of Defense Education Activity. Before 2005, DoDEA overseas and domestic schools were separate jurisdictions in NAEP. For this table, 1996 and 2000 data were recalculated for comparability. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 1996, 2000, and 2005 Science 

Assessments.

Percentage of students

Average scale score At or above Basic At or above Profi cient At Advanced

State/jurisdiction 19961 2000 2005 19961 2000 2005 19961 2000 2005 19961 2000 2005

Nation (public) 148 148 147 60 57 57 27 29 27 3 4* 3

Alabama 139 143* 138 47 53 48 18 23 19 1 2 1

Alaska 153 — — 65 — — 31 — — 3 — —

Arizona 145* 145* 140 55* 55* 49 23 23 20 2 2 2

Arkansas 144 142 144 55 53 56 22 22 23 1 1 2

California 138 129* 136 47 38* 44 20 14* 18 1 1 2

Colorado 155 — 155 68 — 66 32 — 35 2* — 4

Connecticut 155 153 152 68* 64 63 36 35 33 3 4 4

Delaware 142* — 152 51* — 63 21* — 29 1* — 3

Florida 142 — 141 51 — 51 21 — 21 1 — 2

Georgia 142 142 144 49 52 53 21* 23 25 1* 2 3

Hawaii 135 130* 136 42 40 44 15 14 15 1 1 1

Idaho — 158 158 — 71 71 — 37 36 — 4 4

Illinois — 148 148 — 59 58 — 29 27 — 3 3

Indiana 153 154* 150 65 66 62 30 33 29 2 3 3

Iowa 158 — — 71 — — 36 — — 3 — —

Kansas — — —— — —— — —— — —

Kentucky 147* 150* 153 58* 60 63 23* 28 31 2 3 3

Louisiana 132* 134* 138 40* 44 47 13* 18 19 1* 1 1

Maine 163* 158 158 78* 72 72 41* 35 34 4 3 3

Maryland 145 146 145 55 57 54 25 27 26 2* 3 4

Massachusetts 157* 158* 161 69 70 72 37 39 41 4* 5 6

Michigan 153 155 155 65 68 66 32 35 35 3 4 4

Minnesota 159 159 158 72 72 71 37 41 39 3 4 4

Mississippi 133 134 132 39 41 40 12 15 14 1 1 1

Missouri 151 154 154 64 66 66 28* 33 33 2 3 3

Montana 162 164 162 77 79 76 41 44 42 3 5 4

Nebraska 157 158 — 71 71 — 35 38 — 3 4 —

Nevada ‡ 141* 138 ‡ 52 48 ‡ 22 19 ‡ 2 1

New Hampshire ‡ — 162 ‡ — 76 ‡ — 41 ‡ — 4

New Jersey ‡ — 153 ‡ — 65 ‡ — 33 ‡ — 4

New Mexico 141* 139 138 49 48 46 19 20 18 1 1 1

New York 146 145 — 57 58 — 27 28 — 2 2 —

North Carolina 147 145 144 56 54 53 24 25 22 2 3 2

North Dakota 162 159* 163 78 72* 77 41 38* 43 3 4 4

Ohio — 159 155 — 72 67 — 39 35 — 5 4

Oklahoma — 149 147 — 60 57 — 25 25 — 2 2

Oregon 155 154 153 68 68 66 32 34 32 3 3 3

Pennsylvania — — —— — —— — —— — —

Rhode Island 149* 148 146 59 58 58 26 27 26 2 2 2

South Carolina 139* 140* 145 45* 48* 54 17* 20 23 1 2 2

South Dakota — — 161 — — 76 — — 41 — — 4

Tennessee 143 145 145 53 55 55 22 24 25 2 2 3

Texas 145 143 143 55 52 53 23 23 23 1 2 2

Utah 156* 154 154 70* 67 65 32 34 33 2* 3 3

Vermont 157* 159* 162 70* 71* 76 34* 39 41 3* 4 4

Virginia 149* 151* 155 59* 61* 66 27* 29* 35 2* 3 4

Washington 150* — 154 61* — 66 27* — 33 2* — 4

West Virginia 147 146 147 56 57 57 21 24 23 1* 2 2

Wisconsin 160 ‡ 158 73 ‡ 70 39 ‡ 39 4 ‡ 5

Wyoming 158 156* 159 71 69* 74 34 34* 37 2 3 3

Other jurisdictions

District of Columbia 113 — — 19 — — 5 — — # — —

DoDEA2 155* 158* 160 67* 71* 75 30* 36 38 2 4 3

Table 7 Average eighth-grade NAEP science scores and achievement-level performance, by state
30 THE NATION’S REPORT CARD

Overall performance in science 

declines since 1996

Performance of the nation’s twelfth-graders in 2005 was unchanged from 2000; however, it was 

lower than that in 1996. This was true for both overall scores and scores for Earth, physical, and 

life sciences. 

Compared with both 1996 and 2000, scores in 2005 for White, Black, and Hispanic students 

showed no significant change. Both male and female students scored lower in 2005 than in 

1996, with male students outperforming females in both years. The score gap between White 

and minority students and between male and female students did not narrow between 1996 and 

2005. 

Twelfth-graders who took biology, chemistry, and physics scored higher than their peers who took 

fewer of these courses, and the percentages of White and Asian/Pacific Islander students taking 

all three courses were higher than those of Black and Hispanic students.

GRADE

2

TH 1
SCIENCE 2005 31

Performance down from 1996

Score trends at grade 12 are shown in figure 23. In 2005, 

the average science score for twelfth-graders was 3 points 

lower than in 1996, but statistically unchanged from 2000. 

As shown in figure 24, achievement-level results mirrored 

the score results with a smaller percentage of students 

performing either at or above Proficient or Basic in 2005 

than in 1996.

Declines seen in all fields of 

science

The score trends for Earth, physical, and life sciences 

are presented in figure 25. In all three cases, scores in 

2005 were lower than those in 1996, but not significantly 

different from those in 2000. There was a 6-point score 

decline from 1996 to 2005 in Earth science and 2-point 

declines in physical and life science.

Figure 25 Trend in twelfth-grade average NAEP science scores,

by field of science

'96 '00 '05 Year

151*

0

140

150

160

300

145 145

Scale score

'96 '00 '05 Year

150*

0

140

150

160

300

147 148

Scale score

'96 '00 '05 Year

150*

0

140

150

160

300

148 148

Scale score

EARTH 

PHYSICAL

LIFE

* Signifi cantly different from 2005.

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

Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 1996, 2000, and 2005 Science Assessments.

Figure 24 Trend in twelfth-grade NAEP science achievementlevel performance

'96 '00 '05 Year

Percent

0

20

40

60

80

100

57* 52 54

21* 18 18

3* 2 2

% at or above Proficient

% at Advanced

% at or above Basic

* Signifi cantly different from 2005.

Figure 23 Trend in twelfth-grade average NAEP science scores

'96 '00 '05 Year

150*

146 147

0

140

150

160

300

Scale score

* Signifi cantly different from 2005.
32 THE NATION’S REPORT CARD

No narrowing of gaps between 

White and minority students

Average scores for each of the racial/ethnic groups have 

not changed significantly over the period of the three 

assessments as shown in figure 26.

Significant gaps persist between White students and their 

Black and Hispanic peers as shown in figures 27 and 28. 

At 36 points, the White ñ Black student score gap in 2005 

was about the same as it was in 1996, and has widened 

since 2000. The White ñ Hispanic student score gap of 

28 points was not significantly different from either 

previous assessment. 

Figure 26 Trend in twelfth-grade average NAEP science scores, 

by race/ethnicity

'96 '00 '05 Year

White

Asian/Pacific Islander

American Indian/Alaska Native

Hispanic

Black

159

147

144

131

123

153

128

151 149

122

156

153

139

120

128

0

120

130

140

150

160

170

300

Scale score

Figure 28 White – Hispanic twelfth-grade NAEP science score 

gap

'96 '00 '05 Year

White

Score gap

Hispanic

159

28

131

153

25

128

156

28

128

0

120

130

140

150

160

170

300

Scale score

NOTE: Score gaps are calculated based on differences between unrounded average scores. Race categories 

exclude Hispanic origin.

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

Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 1996, 2000, and 2005 Science Assessments.

1996 2000 2005

 White 72* 73* 66

 Black 14 13 14

 Hispanic 9* 9* 13

 Asian/Pacific Islander 4* 4 5

 American Indian/Alaska Native 1 1 1

Table 8 Percentage of twelfth-grade students in the population, 

by race/ethnicity

* Signifi cantly different from 2005.

NOTE: Percentages for the unclassifi ed race/ethnicity category are not included in the table. Race categories 

exclude Hispanic origin.

Figure 27 White – Black twelfth-grade NAEP science score gap

'96 '00 '05 Year

White

Score gap

Black

159

36

123

153

30*

122

156

36

120

0

120

130

140

150

160

170

300

Scale score

* Signifi cantly different from 2005.
SCIENCE 2005 33

Who is at or above Proficient? 

ï 86% White; 2% Black; 4% Hispanic; 6% Asian/

Pacific Islander; 1% American Indian/Alaska Native 

ï 68% reported at least one parent graduated from college

ï 40% have taken at least one Advanced Placement 

science course

SCIENCE 2005 33

Male students outperform female 

students 

Trends in performance of male and female students are 

shown in figure 29. Mirroring the overall results, scores for 

both groups in 2005 declined when compared with 1996. 

In all three assessments, the scores for male students were 

numerically higher than those of female students, but the 

differences were significant only in 1996 and 2005. The 

apparent change in score gap between 1996 and 2005 was 

not significant. 

Figure 29 Trend in twelfth-grade average NAEP science scores, 

by gender

'96 '00 '05 Year

Male

Female

149

145

0

130

140

150

160

170

300

Scale score

154*

147*

148

145

Score gap

7

2 4

* Signifi cantly different from 2005.

NOTE: Score gaps are calculated based on differences between unrounded average scores.

Who is below Basic?

ï 50% White; 24% Black; 20% Hispanic; 4% Asian/

Pacific Islander; 1% American Indian/Alaska Native

ï 35% reported at least one parent graduated from college

ï 18% have taken at least one Advanced Placement 

science course

Students in Midwest lead the 

nation 

While no individual state results are available at grade 12, 

regional differences in average scale scores are shown in 

figure 30. NAEP currently reports performance for the four 

U.S. Census regions: Northeast, South, Midwest, and West. 

In earlier assessments, results were reported by different 

NAEP-defined regions; therefore, performance by Census 

region is shown only for 2005 (for more information see 

http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/science/interpretresults.asp). Twelfth-graders in the Midwest scored higher 

than their peers in the Northeast, and both groups scored 

higher than twelfth-graders in either the South or the West. 

143

145 154

149

DC

Although not shown here, achievement-level results have 

held steady for female students; however, the percentages 

of male students at or above Proficient and Basic were 

lower in 2005 than in 1996. The percentage of male 

students at or above Proficient decreased from 26 to 21 

percent, and the percentage at or above Basic decreased 

from 60 to 56 percent.

In the Northeast, the apparent difference between male and 

female students was not statistically significant. In all other 

regions, male students outperformed female students.

The percentages shown below provide a profile of two groups of 

students: those who scored below Basic and those who scored 

at or above Proficient. For example, the percentages presented 

here show that, of all the students who performed below the 

Basic level, 18 percent reported taking at least one Advanced 

Placement (AP) science course, while 40 percent of the students 

at or above Proficient took at least one AP course.

NOTE: Results by region do not include Department of Defense Education Activity.

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

Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2005 Science Assessment.

Figure 30 Average twelfth-grade NAEP science scores in 2005, by 

region
34 THE NATION’S REPORT CARD

Coursetaking Patterns at Grade 12

A rigorous high school curriculum provides students with more options for postsecondary 

education, training, and employment. For that reason, many states have increased the number of 

courses required for high school graduation, especially in mathematics and science, as a part of 

their educational reform efforts.

A higher percentage of twelfth-graders reported 

taking both biology and chemistry in 2005 than 

in 2000.

GRADE 12 COURSETAKING

The 2005 science results show that twelfth-graders who 

took biology, chemistry, and physics scored higher than 

students who took biology and chemistry, and both groups 

scored higher than those who took just biology or other 

science courses. These results are presented in figure 31.

About one-third of students were in each category. These 

results are shown in the ìAll studentsî column of figure 32. 

Although not shown here separately, included in the 

30 percent of students in the highest coursetaking level 

were 10 percent who took a second year of study in one 

or more of the three core science content areas. Among 

the 33 percent of students in the lowest coursetaking 

level, only 10 percent did not take first-year biology. 

A higher percentage of twelfth-graders reported taking 

both biology and chemistry in 2005 than in 2000, and 

fewer reported taking just biology or other science courses. 

Recall that science performance for twelfth-graders overall 

was not significantly different between 2000 and 2005; the 

same was true for students who took only biology or other 

science courses, and for students who took biology plus 

chemistry. However, scores declined for students who took 

the most science classesóbiology, chemistry, and physics.

Biology/chemistry/physics

Biology/chemistry

Biology only or other

166*

149

131

164

149

131

2000 2005

0 150 160 170 180 190 100 110 120 130 140 200 300

Scale score

Figure 31 Average twelfth-grade NAEP science scores, 

by coursetaking

* Signifi cantly different from 2005.

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

Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National 

Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2000 and 2005 

Science Assessments.
SCIENCE 2005 35

COURSETAKING BY STUDENT GROUPS

The overall relationship between coursetaking and 

performance was mirrored in the results by gender 

and race/ethnicity. Within each coursetaking level, the 

performance of student groups followed the same pattern 

as for all twelfth-graders. Male students outperformed 

female students. White and Asian/Pacific Islander students 

scored higher than Hispanic students, and Hispanic 

students scored higher than Black students. Asian/Pacific 

Islander students in the highest coursetaking level did 

not score differently from White students in the same 

curriculum, while White students scored higher than Asian/

Pacific Islander students in the lower coursetaking levels. 

Few changes in coursetaking and science achievement 

were noted for specific student groups between 2000 and 

2005. 

Differences in the distribution of student groups across 

coursetaking levels are shown in figure 32. In 2005, 

the percentage of Asian/Pacific Islander students taking 

The overall relationship between coursetaking 

and performance was mirrored in the results by 

gender and race/ethnicity.

biology, chemistry, and physics (45 percent) was greater 

than the percentage of White students taking the same 

curriculum (31 percent), which in turn was greater than 

the percentages of Black and Hispanic students taking all 

three courses (22 percent and 25 percent, respectively). 

The opposite pattern was seen for the distribution of 

students taking just biology or other science coursesó

the proportion of Black and Hispanic students in this 

curriculum level was higher than the proportion of White 

students, which in turn was higher than the proportion of 

Asian/Pacific Islander students. 

Figure 32 Percentage of twelfth-grade students in science coursetaking categories, by gender and race/ethnicity

* Signifi cantly different from 2005.

NOTE: Percentages may not add to 100 due to rounding. Race categories exclude Hispanic origin.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2000 and 

2005 Science Assessments.

Percent

0

20

40

60

80

100

29 34*36*30

3733

2000 2005

31 30

40

31 32 37

2000 2005

28

38*34* 29

42

29

2000 2005

30 34 36* 31

37

31

2000 2005

23

41 36

22

39 39

2000 2005

23

32

45

25

36 39

2000 2005

50

28

45

33

23

2000 2005

All students Black Hispanic Asian/Pacific Male Female White

Islander

22*

Biology/chemistry/physics

Biology/chemistry

Biology only or other
36 THE NATION’S REPORT CARD

Assessment Content at Grade 12

At grade 12, the distribution of questions across the three 

fields of science was similar to grade 4 (i.e., one-third of 

assessment time was devoted to each of the three fields 

of science), but slightly different from grade 8, reflecting 

similarities and differences in curricular emphasis at the 

three grades. The framework specifies that 45 percent 

of the assessment time at grade 12 should be devoted 

to conceptual understanding, 30 percent to scientific 

investigation, and 25 percent to practical reasoning.

Twelfth-graders were presented with two 25-minute 

sections, each containing 8 to 20 multiple-choice and 

constructed-response questions. One-half of the students 

assessed were given an additional 30 minutes to complete a 

hands-on task and related questions. In one of the hands-on 

tasks administered as part of the 1996 assessment, twelfthgraders were given a bag containing three different metals, 

sand, and salt. They were asked to separate them using a 

magnet, sieve, filter paper, funnel, spoon, and water. At 

the end, they were asked to document the steps they used 

to perform the task. (Examples of hands-on tasks from the 

2005 assessment have not yet been released.)

Science Achievement Levels at Grade 12

The science achievement levels at grade 12 represent what twelfth-graders know and can do in science at each level. 

The following are excerpts of the science achievement-level descriptions with the corresponding cut scores noted in 

parentheses. The full descriptions can be found at http://www.nagb.org/pubs/s_framework_05/761907-ScienceFramework.pdf.

Basic (146): Students performing at the Basic level demonstrate some knowledge and certain reasoning abilities required 

for understanding the Earth, physical, and life sciences at a level appropriate to grade 12. In addition, they demonstrate 

knowledge of the themes of science (models, systems, and patterns of change) required for understanding the most basic 

relationships among the Earth, physical, and life sciences. They are able to conduct investigations, critique the design of 

investigations, and demonstrate a rudimentary understanding of scientific principles.

Proficient (178): Students performing at the Proficient level demonstrate the knowledge and reasoning abilities required 

for understanding the Earth, physical, and life sciences at a level appropriate to grade 12. In addition, they demonstrate 

knowledge of the themes of science (models, systems, and patterns of change) required for understanding how these 

themes illustrate essential relationships among the Earth, physical, and life sciences. They are able to analyze data and 

apply scientific principles to everyday situations.

Advanced (210): Students performing at the Advanced level demonstrate the knowledge and reasoning abilities required 

for a solid understanding of the Earth, physical, and life sciences at a level appropriate to grade 12. In addition, they 

demonstrate knowledge of the themes of science (models, systems, and patterns of change) required for integrating 

knowledge of scientific principles from the Earth, physical, and life sciences. Students can design investigations that 

answer questions about real-world situations and use their reasoning abilities to make predictions.
SCIENCE 2005 37

Sample Grade 12 Multiple-Choice Question

 Which is a function of a neuron?

A It carries oxygen to other cells.

B It secretes digestive enzymes.

C It removes foreign particles from the bloodstream.

 It receives signals from the internal and external environments.

The following multiple-choice question from 

the twelfth-grade science assessment required 

conceptual understanding in the field of life 

science.

Percentage of correct twelfth-grade student responses on question above in 2005, by region

NOTE: Results by region do not include Department of Defense Education Activity.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2005 Science Assessment. 

50

53 63

61

DC

National percentage correct in 2005

Overall Below Basic At Basic At Proficient At Advanced

56 29 69 96 ‡

‡ Reporting standards not met. Sample size was insuffi cient.
38 THE NATION’S REPORT CARD

Sample Grade 12 Short Constructed-Response Question

The following is a constructed-response question requiring 

conceptual understanding in the field of Earth science. 

Responses were rated using a three-level scoring guide. 

Responses that correctly identified two conditions that 

cause rocks to undergo physical weathering and 

explained their actions were rated ìComplete.î 

Responses that correctly identified one condition 

and explained its action, or correctly identified 

one or more conditions with incorrect or no 

explanations were rated ìPartial.î Responses that showed 

no understanding of what processes cause the deterioration 

of rocks were rated ìIncorrect.î The sample student 

response below was ìComplete.î

Percentage of twelfth-grade student responses rated “Complete” on question above in 2005, by region

NOTE: Results by region do not include Department of Defense Education Activity.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2005 Science Assessment. 

20

23 28

22

DC

Mechanical weathering is the physical breakdown or disintegration of rocks without 

a change in composition. Briefly explain two ways that rocks can undergo mechanical 

weathering.

National percentage “Complete” in 2005

Overall Below Basic At Basic At Proficient At Advanced

23 7 27 58 ‡

‡ Reporting standards not met. Sample size was insuffi cient.
SCIENCE 2005 39

Range of Science Performance at Grade 12

The item map provides another way to interpret the 

scale score and achievement-level results for twelfthgraders. The left side of the item map shows the scores 

that define the lower boundaries of the Basic, Proficient, 

and Advanced achievement levels. The right side lists 

descriptions of some selected assessment questions that fall 

at various levels of difficulty on the 0ñ300 scale. 

The map is a useful tool for understanding what it means 

to perform at different levels on the scale. For example, 

the map shows that students performing toward the lower 

end of the Basic achievement-level range were likely to 

be able to identify the best approach for measuring time 

precisely (148). Students performing at the Proficient level 

likely could relate properties of rock layers to radioactive 

dating of a fossil (179) and identify the source of heat in a 

chemical reaction (193).

300

210

178

146

0

257 Design experiment to test whether wave motion disperses oil

242 Identify the primary consumers in food web

231 Describe body functions that prevent temperature from rising

210 Balance a chemical equation

209 Describe mechanical weathering (page 38)

206 Design an experiment to compare heating times of different substances

200 Relate Doppler effect to properties of light reaching Earth in an expanding universe

195 Explain the reason for the amount of genetic material in a zygote

193 Identify source of heat in chemical reaction

192 Identify systems that regulate body function

179 Relate properties of rock layers to radioactive dating of a fossil

176 Identify the relationship between genes and enzymes 

167 Identify the function of a neuron (page 37)

160 Identify energy conversion in home appliances

156 Graph the populations of two Paramecium species

148 Identify best approach for measuring time precisely

146 Identify the reason for different physical states of the Earth’s core

140 Identify a method to reduce acid precipitation

116 Identify the function of a bird beak based on its shape

112 Compare properties of layers of Earth from model

 74 Describe ways of preventing electric shock

Advanced 

Proficient

Basic

The position of a question on the scale 

represents the average scale score 

attained by students who had a 65 

percent probability of successfully 

answering a constructed-response 

question, or a 74 percent probability 

of correctly answering a four-option 

multiple-choice question. Scale score 

ranges for science achievement 

levels are referenced on the map. 

For constructed-response questions, 

the question description represents 

students’ performance rated as 

completely correct.

NOTE: Regular type denotes a constructed-response question. Italic type 

denotes a multiple-choice question.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, 

Institute of Education Sciences, National 

Center for Education Statistics, National 

Assessment of Educational Progress 

(NAEP), 2005 Science Assessment.

Grade 12 Science Item Map
40 THE NATION’S REPORT CARD

Technical Notes

S A M P L I N G A N D W E I G H T I N G 

At grades 4 and 8, the nationally representative sample in 

2005 consisted of students assessed in each participating 

state, students in states that did not participate in the statelevel assessment, and students from nonpublic schools. 

This represents a change from previous assessments in 

which the national and state samples were independent. 

At grade 12, the sample was chosen using a stratified twostage design that involved sampling students from selected 

schools (public and nonpublic) across the country. More 

information on sampling can be found at http://nces.ed.gov/

nationsreportcard/about/nathow.asp.

Results are weighted to take into account that states, and 

schools within states, represent different proportions of the 

national population. Prior to 2002, the national samples 

used weights that were poststratified to the census or 

Current Population Survey (CPS) totals for the assessed 

populations. Due to the change to nonpoststratified 

weights in 2005, national results for the 1996 and 2000 

assessments at grades 4 and 8 may differ slightly from 

those previously reported.

Because of concerns about the accuracy of estimates for 

American Indian/Alaska Native eighth-graders in 2005, 

results for this student group are not presented in this 

reportóalthough they are available on the NAEP website. 

The apparent unreliability of these results is likely due to 

the fact that this population is small, heterogeneous, and 

highly clustered in certain locations. These factors can lead 

to large sampling variability in survey results. Reporting 

standards were also not met for Asian/Pacific Islander 

students at grade 4 in 2000.

STATISTICAL SIGNIFICANCE

Comparisons over time or between groups are based on 

statistical tests that consider both the size of the differences 

and the standard errors of the statistics. Standard errors are 

margins of error, and estimates based on smaller groups 

are likely to have larger margins of error. The size of the 

standard errors may also be influenced by other factors such 

as how representative the assessed students are of the entire 

population. When an estimate has a large standard error, a 

numerical difference that seems large may not be statistically 

significant. For example, a 4-point difference between male 

and female students may be statistically significant, while 

a 5-point difference between Black and Hispanic students 

may not be. Standard errors for the estimates presented in this 

report are available at http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/nde/.

In the charts of this report, the symbol (*) is used to 

indicate that scores or percentages are significantly 

different. Statistically significant differences between 

groups of students in the same year are not identified in 

the charts, but they were tested in the same way. Any 

difference between scores or percentages discussed in 

this report are statistically significant at the .05 level 

with adjustments for multiple comparisons.

A C C O M M O D A T I O N S 

Procedures were introduced at the national level in 1996 

that allowed the use of accommodations such as extra 

testing time or individual administration for students 

who required them to participate. These procedures were 

then introduced at the state level in 2000. In that year, 

two samples of students were assessedóone in which 

accommodations were permitted and one in which they 

were not. This made it possible to continue reporting statelevel trends back to 1996 when no accommodations were 

permitted in the state assessments. Results for the nonaccommodated samples are available at http://nces.ed.gov/

nationsreportcard/nde.

Introducing accommodations in the NAEP program 

appears to have had some impact on the percentage of 

students excludedóat least at the fourth grade. Since 

1996, the percentage of all sampled fourth-graders who 

were excluded has dropped from 6 percent to 3 percent. 

At grades 8 and 12, the exclusion rate has generally been 

2 or 3 percent of the total sample in 1996, 2000, and 2005. 

Additional information can be found at http://nces.ed.gov/

nationsreportcard/science/whotook.asp.

S C H O O L A N D S T U D E N T P A R T I C I P A T I O N R A T E S 

In order to ensure unbiased samples, NCES and NAGB 

established participation rate standards that states and 

jurisdictions were required to meet in order for their 

results to be reported. Participation rates for the original 

sample needed to be at least 85 percent for schools. In the 

2005 science assessment, 44 states and all Department of 

Defense schools met participation rate standards at both 

grades 4 and 8. Student response rates at grade 12 fell 

below 85 percent for both public and private schools. A 

nonresponse bias analysis showed significant differences 

between responding and nonresponding public school 

students in terms of gender, race/ethnicity, age, and English 

language learner identification. Although the differences 

are quite small, it is unlikely that nonresponse weighting 

adjustments completely accounted for these differences.
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK.
Margaret Spellings

Secretary

U.S. Department 

of Education

Grover J. Whitehurst

Director

Institute of 

Education Sciences

Mark Schneider

Commissioner

National Center for 

Education Statistics

Peggy Carr

Associate Commissioner

National Center for 

Education Statistics

“ O U R M I S S I O N I S T O E N S U R E E Q U A L A C C E S S T O E D U C A T I O N A N D T O 

PROMOTE EDUCATIONAL EXCELLENCE THROUGHOUT THE NATION.”

www.ed.gov

 U . S . D E P A R T M E N T O F E D U C A T I O N

The National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) is a congressionally mandated project sponsored by the U.S. 

Department of Education. The National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), a department within the Institute of 

Education Sciences, administers NAEP. The Commissioner of Education Statistics is responsible by law for carrying out 

the NAEP project.

T H E N A T I O N ’ S 

REPORT CARD

SCIENCE 2005

May 2006

MORE INFORMATION

The NCES web page is 

http://nces.ed.gov.

The NCES web electronic 

catalog is http://nces.ed.gov/

pubsearch.

For ordering information, 

write to

U.S. Department of Education

ED Pubs

P.O. Box 1398

Jessup, MD 20794-1398

Or call toll free 1-877-4ED-Pubs

Or order online at http://www.

edpubs.org

S U G G E S T E D 

CITATION

Grigg, W., Lauko, M., and

Brockway, D. (2006).

The Nationís Report Card: 

Science 2005

(NCES 2006-466). U.S. 

Department of Education, 

National Center for Education 

Statistics. Washington, D.C.: 

U.S. Government Printing Office.

CONTENT CONTACT

William Tirre

202-502-7361

william.tirre@ed.gov

THE NATIONAL ASSESSMENT GOVERNING BOARD

In 1988, Congress created the National Assessment Governing Board (NAGB) to set 

policy for the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), commonly known 

as the Nation's Report Cardô. The 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.

Darvin M. Winick, Chair

President

Winick & Associates

Dickinson, Texas

Sheila M. Ford, Vice Chair

Former Principal

Horace Mann Elementary School

Washington, D.C.

Francie Alexander

Chief Academic Officer, 

Scholastic, Inc.

Senior Vice President, 

Scholastic Education

New York, New York

David J. Alukonis

Chairman

Hudson School Board

Hudson, New Hampshire

Amanda P. Avallone

Assistant Principal & 

Eighth-Grade Teacher

Summit Middle School

Boulder, Colorado

Honorable Jeb Bush

Governor of Florida

Tallahassee, Florida

Barbara Byrd-Bennett

Executive Superintendent-inResidence

Cleveland State University

Cleveland, Ohio

Shirley V. Dickson

Educational Consultant

Laguna Niguel, California

David P. Driscoll

Commissioner of Education

Massachusetts Department of 

Education

Malden, Massachusetts

John Q. Easton

Executive Director

Consortium on Chicago 

School Research

Chicago, Illinois

David W. Gordon

Sacramento County 

Superintendent of Schools

Sacramento County 

Office of Education

Sacramento, California

Kathi M. King

Twelfth-Grade Teacher

Messalonskee High School

Oakland, Maine

Honorable Keith King

Member

Colorado House of Representatives

Colorado Springs, Colorado

Kim Kozbial-Hess

Fourth-Grade Teacher

Fall-Meyer Elementary School

Toledo, Ohio

Andrew C. Porter

Director

Learning Sciences Institute

Peabody College

Vanderbilt University

Nashville, Tennessee

Luis A. Ramos

Community Relations Manager

PPL Susquehanna

Berwick, Pennsylvania

John H. Stevens

Executive Director

Texas Business and 

Education Coalition

Austin, Texas

Mary Frances Taymans, SND

Executive Director

National Catholic Educational 

Association

Washington, D.C.

Oscar A. Troncoso

Principal

Socorro High School

Socorro Independent School 

District

El Paso, Texas

Honorable Thomas J. Vilsack

Governor of Iowa

Des Moines, Iowa

Michael E. Ward

Former State Superintendent 

of Public Instruction

North Carolina Public Schools

Jackson, Mississippi

Eileen L. Weiser

Member, State Board of 

Education

Michigan Department of 

Education

Lansing, Michigan

Grover J. Whitehurst 

(Ex officio)

Director

Institute of Education Sciences

U.S. Department of Education

Washington, D.C.

Charles E. Smith

Executive Director

NAGB

Washington, D.C.