Reading Framework for the 

2007 National Assessment 

of Educational Progress 

National Assessment Governing Board 

U.S. Department of Education 
What Is NAEP? 

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

Department of Education’s National Center for Education Statistics. It assesses what U.S. students should 

know and be able to do in geography, reading, writing, mathematics, science, U.S. history, the arts, civics, 

and other academic subjects. Since 1969, NAEP has surveyed the achievement of students at ages 9, 13, and 17 

and, since the 1980s, in grades 4, 8, and 12. Measuring educational achievement trends over time is critical to 

measuring progress. 

The 2005–2006 National Assessment Governing Board 

The National Assessment Governing Board was created by Congress to formulate policy for NAEP. Among the 

Governing Board’s responsibilities are developing objectives and test specifications and designing the assessment 

methodology for NAEP. 

Members 

Darvin M. Winick, Chair 

President 

Winick & Associates 

Austin, Texas 

Sheila M. Ford, Vice Chair 

Former Principal 

Horace Mann Elementary School 

Washington, D.C. 

Francie M. 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 and Eighth-Grade 

Teacher 

Summit Middle School 

Boulder, Colorado 

Honorable Jeb Bush 

Governor of Florida 

Tallahassee, Florida 

Barbara Byrd-Bennett 

Executive Superintendent-in-Residence 

Cleveland State University 

Cleveland, Ohio 

Shirley V. Dickson 

Educational Consultant 

Aliso Viejo, California 

Honorable 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 M. Kozbial-Hess 

Fourth-Grade Teacher 

Hawkins 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, Department of 

Secondary Schools 

National Catholic Education Association 

Washington, D.C. 

Oscar A. Troncoso 

Principal 

Socorro High School 

El Paso, Texas 

Honorable Thomas J. Vilsack 

Governor of Iowa 

Des Moines, Iowa 

Honorable 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 

National Assessment Governing Board 
Reading Framework for the 

2007 National Assessment 

of Educational Progress 

National Assessment Governing Board 

U.S. Department of Education 
National Assessment Governing Board 

Darvin M. Winick 

Chair 

Sheila Ford 

Vice Chair 

Charles E. Smith 

Executive Director 

Mary Crovo 

Project Officer 

Reading Framework for the 2007 

National Assessment of Educational Progress 

For further information, contact: 

National Assessment Governing Board 

 800 North Capitol Street, N.W.

Suite 825 

Washington, DC 20002-4233

www.nagb.org 

September 2006 

For sale by the U.S. Government Printing Office 

Superintendent of Documents, Mail Stop: SSOP, Washington, DC 20402–9328
Reading Framework for the 2007 NAEP 

Contents 

Executive Summary............................................................................................................... v

Chapter One: What Is the NAEP Reading Assessment? ................................................... 1

Goals for Reading Literacy.................................................................................................. 2 

Definitions of Reading Literacy........................................................................................... 2 

Contexts for Reading ........................................................................................................... 4 

Aspects of Reading .............................................................................................................. 7

Grade 4 Sample Reading Passage and Questions: Informational...................................... 11 

Chapter Two: How Is the NAEP Reading Assessment Designed?.................................. 15 

Purposes of the Assessment............................................................................................... 15 

Methodology...................................................................................................................... 15 

Format of the Assessment.................................................................................................. 15 

Reading Passages............................................................................................................... 16 

Item Development.............................................................................................................. 17 

Review Process .................................................................................................................. 21 

Accommodations ............................................................................................................... 21

Chapter Three: How Are Results of the NAEP Reading Assessment Reported?.......... 23 

Chapter Four: What Are the Foundations for the NAEP Reading Assessment?.......... 29

Reading Process................................................................................................................. 29 

Types of Assessments........................................................................................................ 29 

Background Surveys .......................................................................................................... 30 

Bibliography ......................................................................................................................... 31

Appendix A: Sample Reading Passages, Items, and Scoring Rubrics ............................ 33

Appendix B: NAEP Reading Framework Panels ............................................................. 57

2002 Reading Framework Advisory Panel........................................................................ 59 

1992 Steering and Project Planning Committees............................................................... 60 

iii 
Executive Summary 

This document, the Reading Framework for the 2007 National Assessment of 

Educational Progress, describes the content and format of the 4th, 8th, and 12th 

grade assessments. The 2007 National Assessment of Educational Progress 

(NAEP) Reading Assessment will be administered in grades 4 and 8 at the national and 

state levels, as well as for Trial Urban District Assessment (TUDA) participants, continuing 

a trend of results which began in 1992. 

What Is the NAEP Reading Assessment? 

The NAEP reading assessment measures the achievement of the nation’s students in 

reading. Authorized by Congress and administered by the U.S. Department of Education, 

NAEP regularly reports to the public on the educational progress of students in various 

subject areas. NAEP collects achievement information on nationally representative samples 

of students in grades 4, 8, and 12 and on state-level samples of fourth and eighth graders. 

As The Nation’s Report CardTM, the NAEP reading assessment reports how well students 

perform in reading various texts and responding to those texts in both multiple-choice and 

constructed-response formats. The latter questions ask students to write their responses and 

explain and support their ideas with information from the text. NAEP provides information 

about student achievement that is needed to help the public, decisionmakers, and education 

professionals understand strengths and weaknesses in student performance and make 

informed decisions about education. 

Since 1992, the NAEP Reading Framework has provided guidelines for developing the 

reading assessments administered to random samples of students. The NAEP Reading 

Framework reflects the ideas of many individuals and organizations involved in reading 

education, including researchers, policymakers, teachers, business representatives, and other 

members of the public. NAEP is a project of the National Center for Education Statistics, 

U.S. Department of Education, and is overseen by the National Assessment Governing 

Board. 

The NAEP Reading Framework reflects research that views reading comprehension as a 

dynamic, interactive process. The NAEP definition of reading literacy has been used 

internationally to help the public understand what students should know and be able to 

perform in the area of reading. This understanding plays a role in unifying the important 

reading dimensions for student achievement. Reading includes the ability to understand and 

use written texts for enjoyment and to learn, to participate in society, and to achieve one’s 

goals. 

What Must Students Know and Be Able To Do? 

The NAEP Reading Framework specifies three contexts for reading: reading for literary 

experience, reading for information, and reading to perform a task (see exhibit 1). 

v 
Reading Framework for the 2007 NAEP 

Exhibit 1. Contexts for Reading Specified in the NAEP Reading Framework 

Context for 

Reading Description 

Reading for 

Literary 

experience 

Readers explore events, characters, themes, settings, plots, actions, and 

the language of literary works by reading novels, short stories, poems, 

plays, legends, biographies, myths, and folktales. 

Reading for 

information 

Readers gain information to understand the world by reading materials 

such as magazines, newspapers, textbooks, essays, and speeches. 

Reading to 

perform a task 

Readers apply what they learn from reading materials such as bus or 

train schedules, directions for repairs or games, classroom procedures, 

tax forms (grade 12), maps, and so on. 

The Framework also specifies four aspects of reading that characterize the way readers 

respond to text: forming a general understanding, developing interpretation, making 

reader/text connections, and examining content and structure (see exhibit 2). 

Exhibit 2. Aspects of Reading and Reader Responses 

Aspects of Reading 

Forming a General 

Understanding 

Developing 

Interpretation 

Making 

Reader/Text 

Connections 

Examining Content 

and Structure 

Consider text in its 

entirety 

Understanding in a 

broad way 

Focus on specific 

parts 

Think beyond the 

text 

Linking information 

across parts of the 

text 

Applying the text to 

real-world situations 

Consider why and 

how the text was 

developed 

Considering the 

content, 

organization, and 

form 

Detailed information on sample questions and results can be found on the NAEP Web 

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

How Is the NAEP Reading Assessment Designed? 

The reading assessment includes a booklet with reading materials and comprehension 

questions. The questions are presented in both multiple-choice and constructed-response 

formats. At least half are constructed-response questions, which allow students to write their 

answers and explain and support their ideas. Materials used in the assessment are taken 

from sources that are typically available to students, such as collections of stories, 

children’s magazines, or informational books. By giving students different types of 

vi 
Reading Framework for the 2007 NAEP 

materials, NAEP is able to provide a measure of reading performance that reflects students’ 

typical reading experiences both in and out of school. 

What Accommodations Are Made for Special Populations? 

NAEP’s intention is to assess all students who are capable of participating in the reading 

assessment. Although some students may be excluded according to carefully defined 

criteria, English-language learners and students with disabilities are accommodated as 

necessary with extra testing time, individual or small group administrations, large-print 

booklets, and/or multiple sessions. However, because NAEP is a reading comprehension 

assessment, test administrators are not allowed to read the passages and questions aloud to 

students. Since NAEP measures reading in English, the assessment cannot be translated into 

other languages. 

How Are the Results of the NAEP Reading Assessment 

Reported? 

NAEP reading assessment results are reported in two ways: scale scores and achievement 

levels. Scale scores, ranging from 0 to 500, are average scores for groups of students. 

Achievement level scores are reported as percentages of students who attain each of three 

achievement levels: Basic, Proficient, and Advanced. Achievement levels serve to identify 

percentages of students taking NAEP who have demonstrated certain reading proficiencies. 

Authorized by NAEP legislation and adopted by the National Assessment Governing Board, 

these achievement levels are performance standards based on the collective judgments of 

experts about what students should know and be able to do in terms of the NAEP Reading 

Framework. 

What Are the Limitations of the NAEP Reading Assessment? 

School-based tests provide curriculum-specific results so that teachers and administrators 

can alter classroom practice. As currently designed, the NAEP reading assessment cannot 

provide the kind of diagnostic information that pertains to individual students. Instead, it 

profiles the performance of groups of students at a given time—and across time—without 

promoting particular approaches in curriculum or prescribing actions for certain school 

districts. Yet, combined with other information, NAEP is an integral part of our nation’s 

evaluation of the condition and progress of education. 

vii 
Chapter One 

This document, the Reading Framework for the 2007 National Assessment of 

Educational Progress, describes the content and format of the 4th, 8th, and 12th 

grade assessments. The 2007 National Assessment of Educational Progress 

(NAEP) Reading Assessment will be administered in grades 4 and 8 at the national and 

state levels, as well as for Trial Urban District Assessment (TUDA) participants, continuing 

a trend of results which began in 1992. 

What Is the NAEP Reading Assessment? 

The NAEP reading assessment measures the achievement of the nation’s students in 

reading. Authorized by Congress and administered by the U.S. Department of Education, 

NAEP regularly reports to the public on the educational progress of students in various 

subject areas. NAEP collects achievement data from nationally representative samples of 

students in grades 4, 8, and 12 and from state-level samples of fourth and eighth graders. 

As The Nation’s Report CardTM, the NAEP reading assessment reports how well students 

perform in reading various texts and responding to those texts in multiple-choice and 

constructed-response formats. It provides information about student achievement that is 

needed to help the public, decisionmakers, and education professionals understand the 

strengths and weaknesses in student performance and make informed decisions about 

education. 

The NAEP reading assessment measures comprehension by asking students to read 

passages and answer questions about what they have read. As such, it represents a measure 

of reading achievement and provides a broad picture of what our nation’s students should be 

able to read and understand at specific grade levels. Students use various skills and 

strategies in the reading assessment. However, NAEP does not report on strategies such as 

finding a detail or summarizing a plot. This is in keeping with NAEP’s role as an 

assessment of overall achievement rather than a diagnostic test for individual students. 

Although broad implications for instruction can be inferred from the assessment, NAEP 

does not specify how reading should be taught, nor does it prescribe a particular curricular 

approach to teaching reading. 

The NAEP Reading Framework provides the guidelines and theoretical basis for 

developing the 1992–2007 reading assessments. It reflects the ideas of many diverse 

individuals and organizations involved in reading education. In developing the framework 

for the national assessment of reading, researchers, policymakers, teachers, business 

representatives, and other experts have specified behaviors of proficient readers who are 

active, strategic, knowledgeable, and motivated to read. 

The Report of the National Reading Panel summarizes research describing such a reader: 

“In the cognitive research, reading is purposeful and active. According to this view, a reader 

reads a text to understand what is read, to construct memory representations of what is 

1 
Reading Framework for the 2007 NAEP 

understood, and to put this understanding to use” (National Institute for Child Health and 

Human Development (NICHD), 2000b, p. 4–39). These processes are the basis for 

establishing broad goals for reading that are addressed by NAEP. 

Goals for Reading Literacy 

The goals for reading literacy are to develop good readers who: 

• read with enough fluency to focus on the meaning of what they read; 

• form an understanding of what they read and extend, elaborate, and critically judge its 

meaning; 

• use various strategies to aid their understanding and plan, manage, and check the 

meaning of what they read; 

• apply what they already know to understand what they read; 

• read various texts for different purposes; 

• possess positive reading habits and attitudes. 

These characteristics of good readers are appropriate for students as early as third grade, 

as this is the grade level by which it is expected that children will learn to read. National 

programs such as the Reading Excellence Act and No Child Left Behind focus on 

improving reading achievement. Policy and the commitment of resources at the national and 

state levels continue to focus on this goal. Therefore, it makes sense that the NAEP Reading 

Framework should also reflect this aim. 

The National Research Council’s research-based report Preventing Reading Difficulties 

in Young Children (Snow et al., 1998) corroborates the characteristics listed above when it 

describes third-grade accomplished readers as being able to: 

• summarize major points from fiction and nonfiction texts; 

• read longer fictional selections and chapter books independently; 

• discuss underlying themes or messages when interpreting fiction; 

• distinguish cause and effect, fact and opinion, main idea, and supporting details when 

interpreting nonfiction. 

These characteristics are important for describing the performance of good readers in the 

NAEP reading assessment. 

Definitions of Reading Literacy 

National 

Reading literacy is a fundamental right of every person. It gives people access to 

information and the ability to function in life. Reading enriches through the power of 

language and the beauty of poetry. It extends the human experience through the exploration 

of events in literary works. It is the key to knowledge and information. 

2 
Reading Framework for the 2007 NAEP 

Today, reading literacy means more than a functional ability to read simple directions and 

books. In The Keys to Literacy, Reid Lyon (1998) describes the multifaceted nature of the 

reading process: 

In general, if children can read the words on a page accurately and fluently, they 

will be able to construct meaning at two levels. At the first level, literal 

understanding is achieved. However, constructing meaning requires far more 

than literal comprehension. Children must eventually guide themselves through 

text by asking questions such as: “Why am I reading this, and how does this 

information relate to my reasons for doing so?” “What is the author’s point of 

view?” “Do I understand what the author is saying and why?” “Is the text 

internally consistent?” It is this second level of comprehension that leads 

readers to reflective, purposeful understanding. (p. 4) 

In a world driven by information technology, the complexity of reading literacy is 

increasing as the format of texts becomes more diverse. Varied texts such as CD-ROMs, 

Web pages, newspapers, and magazines place different demands on the reader. As 

information technology grows, people will encounter even more varied texts and will be 

called on to use information in new ways. 

International 

When the 1992 NAEP reading assessment was developed, no one could have predicted 

the effect the NAEP Reading Framework would have on the design of international reading 

assessments. The frameworks of two international assessments provide pertinent evidence 

of this trend: 

• The Progress in International Reading Literacy Study (PIRLS) is being conducted 

under the auspices of the International Association for the Evaluation of Educational 

Achievement and focuses on the achievement of young children (ages 9 and 10). 

• The Program for International Student Assessment (PISA), conducted under the 

auspices of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, is a 

regular survey of 15-year-olds and assesses aspects of their preparedness for adult life. 

Reading literacy, mathematical literacy, and scientific literacy are the primary 

domains assessed. 

PIRLS most closely aligns with the fourth-grade NAEP assessment. PISA samples 

students in grade 10, in contrast to NAEP’s sampling of grades 8 and 12. Strong similarities 

exist among the three assessments’ definitions of reading literacy. 

PIRLS defines reading literacy as “the ability to understand and use those written 

language forms required by society and/or valued by the individual. Young readers can 

construct meaning from a variety of texts. They read to learn, to participate in communities 

of readers, and for enjoyment” (International Association for the Evaluation of Educational 

Achievement, 2000, p. 3). 

3 
Reading Framework for the 2007 NAEP 

PISA defines reading literacy as “understanding, using, and reflecting on written texts in 

order to achieve one’s goals, to develop one’s knowledge and potential, and to participate in 

society” (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, 2000, p. 18). 

All three definitions of reading literacy (NAEP, PIRLS, and PISA) convey the notion that 

reading involves developing an understanding of various texts, thinking about them, and 

using various texts for many different purposes. For example, readers may use maps to gain 

information, stories to enjoy the human experience, and science texts to form hypotheses. 

The congruence in framework definitions clearly represents a growing international 

agreement on the important dimensions of reading literacy. This agreement has played the 

same unifying role in the international assessment of reading as that of the Third 

International Mathematics and Science Study in the international assessment of 

mathematics. 

One way NAEP reflects current definitions of literacy is by differentiating among three 

contexts for reading and four aspects of reading. Contexts for reading and aspects of reading 

are the foundation of the NAEP reading assessment. 

Contexts for Reading 

• Reading for literary experience 

• Reading for information 

• Reading to perform a task 

Many commonalities exist among different reading contexts, including developing 

understanding, reflecting critically on the text, and analyzing the author’s perspective. The 

contexts are not mutually exclusive. For example, readers may read historical novels for 

literary experience and information. However, distinctions exist because various texts and 

tasks can place differing demands on the reader. Readers often have greater facility with 

one type of reading material than another. For example, some people can read novels with 

greater ease than they can read technical manuals. 

Different contexts for reading lead to real differences in what readers do. When reading 

for literary experience, readers make complex, abstract summaries and identify major 

themes. They describe the interactions of various literary elements (for example, setting, 

plot, characters, and theme). When reading for information, readers may critically judge the 

form and content of the text and explain their judgments. They may also look for specific 

pieces of information. When reading to perform a task, readers may search quickly for 

specific pieces of information. The contexts for reading and the reader’s expectations may 

influence the comprehension process, determine what strategies and skills are used to 

develop meaning, and influence the extent to which content is integrated with prior 

knowledge. 

4 
Reading Framework for the 2007 NAEP 

The contexts for reading are addressed by the specific tasks, or items, on the NAEP 

reading assessment. An item can be easy even if the text is complex. For example, given a 

difficult text and a question with wording directly from the text, a reader might scan the 

text, find the relevant information, and answer the question with ease. Because this type of 

item requires little more than matching words or phrases, it can be accomplished without 

having an understanding of the passage as a whole or even the specific part of the text 

addressed by the item. Once readers have a certain level of automaticity, they can handle 

simple tasks such as this. However, to respond to a text within the Reading Framework, 

readers must be able to understand the text in its entirety as well as focus on specific parts 

and think beyond what was directly stated. 

Reading for literary experience involves the reader in exploring themes, events, 

characters, settings, problems, and the language of literary works. The reader brings his 

or her experiences and knowledge to the text in activities such as anticipating events, 

picturing settings, predicting consequences, analyzing actions, and considering the language 

of literary works. He or she thinks about the authors’ and characters’ perspectives and 

considers the language and story structure. Various types of texts are associated with 

reading for literary experience, including novels, short stories, poems, plays, legends, 

biographies, myths, and folktales. 

Reading for information engages the reader with aspects of the real world. Reading 

for information is most commonly associated with textbooks, primary and secondary 

sources, newspaper and magazine articles, essays, and speeches. Two features that 

distinguish informational text from literary text are organization and presentation of 

information. Informational text is organized by topic and supporting details, whereas 

literary text is organized by the structure of a story, poem, or drama. Informational texts 

may have boldfaced headings, graphics, illustrations, and captions that signal important 

text. However, some commonalities exist between literary and informational text and the 

skills and strategies required for reading each: Both require people to critically analyze the 

text, reflect on it, and draw conclusions. 

When reading for information, readers need to know the specific text patterns, or forms 

of organization (for example, cause and effect, sequential order, comparison/contrast, 

opinion and supporting arguments), to develop understanding. People frequently have 

different purposes for reading text of this nature; for example, to find specific pieces of 

information, answer a question, or get some general information when glancing through a 

magazine article. Reading informational text requires orientations to the text that differ from 

those used in reading for literary experience because readers are specifically focused on 

acquiring information. When people read for information, they may select parts of the text 

they need rather than reading from beginning to end. 

Reading to perform a task involves reading to accomplish something. When people 

read to perform tasks, they use their expectations of the purpose and structure of practical 

text to guide how they select, understand, and apply information. Practical text may include 

charts, bus or train schedules, directions for games or repairs, classroom or library 

procedures, tax or insurance forms, recipes, voter registration materials, maps, referenda, 

5 
Reading Framework for the 2007 NAEP 

consumer warranties, or office memos. The reader’s orientation involves looking for 

specific information to do something. Readers need to apply information, not simply 

understand it. For this type of reading, readers are not likely to savor the style or thought in 

the texts as they might in reading for literary experience. 

NAEP assesses reading for literary experience and reading for information in grades 4, 8, 

and 12. Reading to perform a task is assessed only in grades 8 and 12. Contexts for reading 

are shown in exhibit 1. 

Exhibit 1. Contexts for Reading Specified in the NAEP Reading Framework 

Context for 

Reading Description 

Reading for 

Literary 

experience 

Readers explore events, characters, themes, settings, plots, actions, and the 

language of literary works by reading novels, short stories, poems, plays, 

legends, biographies, myths, and folktales. 

Reading for 

information 

Readers gain information to understand the world by reading materials such as 

magazines, newspapers, textbooks, essays, and speeches. 

Reading to 

perform a task 

Readers apply what they learn from reading materials such as bus or train 

schedules, directions for repairs or games, classroom procedures, tax forms 

(grade 12), maps, and so on. 

The proportion of items related to each context for reading changes from grade to grade 

to reflect the changing demands made of students as they mature. The proportion of items in 

each grade is shown in exhibit 2. 

Exhibit 2. Percentage of NAEP Reading Items, by Grade and Context for Reading 

Grade 

Context for Reading 

For Literary 

Experience (%) 

For Information 

(%) 

To Perform a Task 

(%) 

4 55 45 No scale 

8 40 40 20 

12 35 45 20 

6 
Reading Framework for the 2007 NAEP 

Aspects of Reading 

• Forming a general understanding 

• Developing interpretation 

• Making reader/text connections 

• Examining content and structure 

Readers develop understanding in different ways. They focus on general topics or 

themes, interpret and integrate ideas within and across texts, make connections to 

background knowledge and experiences, and examine the content and structure of the text. 

NAEP’s questions and tasks are based on these four aspects of reading and require the 

selection and integration of various reading strategies rather than the application of a 

specific strategy or skill. Inherent in these aspects are the strategies that readers use to build 

and examine their understanding and adjust their approach. According to the Report of the 

National Reading Panel (NICHD, 2000b), readers use their knowledge of the world, 

including language and print, to make meaning. 

Forming a General Understanding 

To form a general understanding, the reader must consider the text as a whole and have a 

global knowledge of it. Students may be asked, for example, to demonstrate a general 

understanding by providing the topic of a passage, explaining the purpose of an article, or 

reflecting on the theme of a story. Tasks and questions that measure this aspect of reading 

include: 

• Write a paragraph telling what the story/poem is about. 

• Which of the following is the best statement of the theme of the story? 

• Write a paragraph telling what this article generally tells you. 

• What is this text supposed to help you do? 

• What would you tell someone about the main character? 

Developing Interpretation 

To develop an interpretation, the reader must extend initial impressions to develop a 

more complete understanding of what was read. This process involves linking information 

across parts of a text as well as focusing on specific information. Questions that assess this 

aspect of reading include drawing inferences about the relationship of two pieces of 

information and providing evidence to determine the reason for an action. Questions that 

assess this aspect of reading include: 

• What event marked a change in the plot or situation? 

• What caused the character to __________? 

• What caused this event? 

7 
Reading Framework for the 2007 NAEP 

• What is the meaning of __________? 

• What type of person is this character? Explain. 

• What does this idea imply? 

• In what ways are these ideas important to the topic or theme? 

• What will be the result of this step in the directions? 

• What does this character think about __________? 

Making Reader/Text Connections 

To make reader/text connections, the reader must link information in the text with 

knowledge and experience. This might include applying ideas in the text to the real world. 

All student responses must be text based to receive full credit. NAEP does not ask students 

about their personal feelings. Tasks and questions that assess this aspect of reading include: 

• Why do __________ (bullfrogs eat dragonflies)? Is there anything else you think 

__________ (they might eat)? Explain your answer using information from the text 

and what you know. 

• Colonists lived in different ways than we live today. Tell about two of these 

differences. 

• Would you have liked to live in colonial times? Use information from the text to 

support your answer. 

• In this story, two characters chose different ways to solve a problem. Which solution 

was most effective in solving the problem? Use information from the text to support 

your answer. 

• How would you change the directions to build this __________ if you did not have a 

__________? 

Examining Content and Structure 

Examining text content and structure requires critically evaluating, comparing and 

contrasting, and understanding the effect of features such as irony, humor, and organization. 

Questions used to assess this aspect of reading require readers to stand apart from the text, 

consider it objectively, and evaluate its quality and appropriateness. Knowledge of text 

content and structure is important. Questions ask readers to determine the usefulness of a 

text for a specific purpose, evaluate the language and textual elements, and think about the 

author’s purpose and style. Some questions also require readers to make connections across 

parts of a text or between texts. For example, students might be asked to compare a poem 

and a story with the same theme or relate information from a first-person account to a 

textbook description of an event. Questions that assess this aspect of reading include: 

• Compare the structure of this magazine article to that one. 

• How useful would this be for __________? Why? 

• Does the author use (irony, personification, humor) effectively? Explain. 

8 
Reading Framework for the 2007 NAEP 

• What is the author’s point of view? Using the text, provide a sentence or two to 

support your response. 

• Is this information needed for __________? Explain your reasoning. 

• What other information would you need to find out about __________? Support your 

answer with information from the text. 

Exhibit 3 portrays the four aspects of reading. Although the strategies and skills required 

to master these aspects overlap to some extent, successfully mastering one aspect may not 

depend on successfully mastering any other aspect, and the aspects are not mutually 

exclusive. For example, comparing two authors’ points of view would require forming a 

general understanding before making the comparison. The reader would use several aspects 

of reading to provide a wide range of responses to reading. 

Exhibit 3. Aspects of Reading and Reader Responses 

Aspects of Reading 

Forming a 

General 

Understanding 

Developing 

Interpretation 

Making 

Reader/Text 

Connections 

Examining Content 

and Structure 

Consider text in its 

entirety 

Understanding in a 

broad way 

Focus on specific 

parts 

Think beyond the 

text 

Linking information 

across parts of the 

text 

Applying the text to 

real-world situations 

Consider why and 

how the text was 

developed 

Considering the 

content, 

organization, and 

form 

Exhibit 4 shows the percentage of time students in a given grade would spend on NAEP 

items that measure each aspect of reading (general understanding and developing 

interpretation are combined) if they responded to all items in the NAEP reading assessment. 

Originally, the 1989 Reading Committees proposed a distribution of one-third of the items 

for each reading aspect. Please refer to the NAEP Web site (http://nces.ed.gov/ 

nationsreportcard) for sample student responses, performance data, and a glossary of 

NAEP terms. 

9 
Reading Framework for the 2007 NAEP 

Exhibit 4. Percentage Distribution of Student Time, by Grade and Aspect of Reading 

Grade 

Aspect of Reading 

Forming a General 

Understanding and 

Developing 

Interpretation (%) 

Making Reader/Text 

Connections (%) 

Examining Content 

and Structure (%) 

4 60 15 25 

8 55 15 30 

12 50 15 35 

Exhibit 5 shows sample NAEP questions by context for reading and aspect of reading. 

The bulleted items are the skills involved in each aspect of reading. Readers are expected to 

demonstrate a level of competency in each aspect. 

Exhibit 5. Sample NAEP Questions and Reading Strategies, by Context for Reading 

and Aspect of Reading 

Context for 

Reading 

Aspect of Reading 

Forming a 

General 

Understanding 

Developing 

Interpretation 

Making 

Reader/Text 

Connections 

Examining Content 

and Structure 

Reading for 

literary 

experience 

What is the story/ 

plot about? 

• Synthesis 

• Analysis 

• Inference 

How did this 

character change 

from the beginning 

to the end of the 

story? 

• Synthesis 

• Analysis 

• Inference 

• Using details 

What other character 

that you have read 

about had a similar 

problem? 

• Analogy 

• Synthesis 

• Using details 

• Relating information 

and ideas 

What is the mood of 

this story, and how 

does the author use 

language to achieve it? 

• Using details 

• Inference 

• Analysis 

• Synthesis 

• Search 

Reading for 

information 

What point is the 

author making 

about this topic? 

• Generalization 

• Using details 

• Synthesis 

What caused this 

change? 

• Cause and effect 

• Inference 

• Search 

What other event in 

history or recent news 

is similar to this one? 

• Analogy 

• Synthesis 

• Analysis 

• Inference 

• Using details 

• Relating information 

and ideas 

Is this author biased? 

Support your answer 

with information about 

this article. 

• Synthesis 

• Analysis 

• Judgment 

• Inference 

• Using details 

• Determining fact and 

opinion 

Reading to 

perform a task 

What time can you 

get a nonstop flight 

to X? 

• Search 

What must you do 

before step 3? 

• Search 

• Inference 

• Sequence 

Describe a situation in 

which you would omit 

step 5. 

• Inference 

• Analysis 

• Using details 

• Relating information 

and ideas 

Is the information in 

this brochure easy to 

use? 

• Evaluation 

• Using details 

• Synthesis 

• Search 

10 
Reading Framework for the 2007 NAEP 

The following fourth-grade 

informational passage and questions were 

released from the NAEP 2000 reading 

assessment. The bracketed text below 

each question presents the reading aspect 

assessed and the percentage of students 

who answered the question successfully. 

Additional sample passages and 

questions can be found in appendix A 

and on the NAEP Web site 

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

Please refer to the Web site for sample student responses and performance data. 

Grade 4 Sample Reading Passage and Questions: Informational 

I

magine shivering on a cold winter’s night. The tip of your nose tingles in the frosty air. 

Finally, you climb into bed and find the toasty treat you have been waiting for—your 

very own hot brick. If you had lived in colonial days, that would not sound as strange as 

it does today. Winters were hard in this New World, and the colonists had to think of clever 

ways to fight the cold. At bedtime, they heated soapstones, or bricks, in the fireplaces. They 

wrapped the bricks in cloths and tucked them into their beds. The brick kept them warm at 

night, at least for as long as its heat lasted. 

Before the colonists slipped into bed, they rubbed their icy sheets with a bed warmer. 

This was a metal pan with a long wooden handle. The pan held hot embers from the 

fireplace. It warmed the bedding so well that sleepy bodies had to wait until the sheets 

cooled before climbing in. 

Staying warm wasn’t just a bedtime problem. On winter rides, colonial travelers covered 

themselves with animal skins and warm blankets. Tucked under the blankets, near their feet, 

were small tin boxes called foot stoves. A foot stove held burning coals. Hot smoke puffed 

from small holes in the stove’s lid, soothing freezing feet and legs. When the colonists went 

to Sunday services, their foot stoves, furs, and blankets went with them. The meeting houses 

had no heat of their own until the 1800s. 

At home, colonial families huddled close to the fireplace, or hearth. The fireplace was 

wide and high enough to hold a large fire, but its chimney was large, too. That caused a 

problem: Gusts of cold air blew into the house. The area near the fire was warm, but in the 

rest of the room it might still be cold enough to see your breath. 

Reading or needlework was done by candlelight or by the light of the fire. During the 

winter, animal skins sealed the drafty windows of some cabins and blocked out the daylight. 

The living area inside was gloomy, except in the circle of light at the hearth. 

Early Americans did not bathe as often as we do. When they did, their “bathroom” was 

the kitchen, in that toasty space by the hearth. They partially filled a tub of cold water, then 

11 
Reading Framework for the 2007 NAEP 

warmed it up with water heated in the fireplace. A blanket draped from chairs for privacy 

also let the fire’s warmth surround the bather. 

The household cooks spent hours at the hearth. They stirred the kettle of corn pudding or 

checked the baking bread while the rest of the family carried on their own fireside activities. 

So you can see why the fireplace was the center of a colonial home. The only time the fire 

was allowed to die down was at bedtime. Ashes would be piled over the fire, reducing it to 

embers that might glow until morning. 

By sunrise, the hot brick had become a cold stone once more. An early riser might get 

dressed under the covers, then hurry to the hearth to warm up. 

Maybe you’d enjoy hearing someone who kept warm in these ways tell you what it was 

like. You wouldn’t need to look for someone who has been living for two hundred years. In 

many parts of the country, the modern ways didn’t take over from the old ones until 

recently. Your own grandparents or other older people might remember the warmth of a 

hearthside and the joy of having a brick to cuddle up to. 

Used by permission of Highlights for Children, Inc., Columbus, OH 

Copyright © 1991. Illustration by Katherine Dodge. 

Questions for “A Brick to Cuddle Up To” 

(See appendix A for scoring criteria or rubrics.) 

1. You would probably read this article if you wanted to know how the colonists 

a. cooked their food 

b. traveled in the winter 

c. washed their clothes 

d. kept warm in cold weather 

[Aspect, General understanding; Key, D; Percent correct, 85] 

2. After reading this article, would you like to have lived during colonial times? What 

information in the article makes you think this? 

(Responses to this question were scored according to a three-level rubric.) 

[Aspect, Reader/text connections; Percent full comprehension, 20] 

3. Some of the ways that colonists kept warm during the winter were different from 

the ways that people keep warm today. Tell about two of these differences. 

(Responses to this question were scored according to a three-level rubric.) 

[Aspect, Reader/text connections; Percent full comprehension, 17] 

12 
Reading Framework for the 2007 NAEP 

4. Do you think “A Brick to Cuddle Up To” is a good title for this article? Using 

information from the article, tell why or why not. 

(Responses to this question were scored according to a three-level rubric.) 

[Aspect, Developing interpretation; Percent full comprehension, 37] 

5. Give two reasons stated in the article why the hearth was the center of the home in 

colonial times. 

(Responses to this question were scored according to a three-level rubric.) 

[Aspect, Developing interpretation; Percent full comprehension, 20] 

6. A colonist would probably have used a foot stove when 

a. going on a trip 

b. sleeping in bed 

c. sitting by the fireplace 

d. working around the house 

[Aspect, Developing interpretation; Key, A; Percent correct, 36] 

7. Pretend that you are an early American colonist. Describe at least three activities 

you might do during a cold winter evening. Be specific. Use details from the article 

to help you write your description. 

(Responses to this question were scored according to a four-level rubric.) 

[Aspect, Developing interpretation; Percent extensive, 12] 

8. In writing this article, the author mostly made use of 

a. broad ideas 

b. specific details 

c. important questions 

d. interesting characters 

[Aspect, Examining content and structure; Key, B; Percent correct, 66] 

9. Does the author help you understand what colonial life was like? Use examples 

from the article to explain why or why not. 

(Responses to this question were scored according to a three-level rubric.) 

[Aspect, Examining content and structure; Percent full comprehension, 20] 

13 
___________________________________ 

Chapter Two 

How Is the NAEP Reading Assessment Designed? 

Purposes of the Assessment 

With the reauthorization of the NAEP program in 1988, 1994, and 2002, Congress 

mandated that NAEP provide a fair and accurate measurement of academic 

achievement in reading and other subjects. In this mission, NAEP: 

• informs the public about trends in the reading proficiency of students at state and 

national levels; 

• provides data for comparing student achievement across states; 

• informs policymakers about relationships between student achievement and key 

background variables; 

• provides comparative data on the performance of states, regions, and groups. 

As The Nation’s Report CardTM, NAEP provides descriptive information about student 

reading achievement to the general public, policymakers, and educators. The NAEP reading 

assessment is not intended to be a model for teaching reading. It measures the outcomes of 

instruction as reflected in the behaviors of readers. 

Methodology 

NAEP measures student achievement by taking a stratified random sample of schools 

throughout the nation and in participating states. NAEP also uses a matrix-sampling design 

of test items so that no one student takes the entire test.1 The design distributes the large 

numbers of items across school buildings, districts, and states but limits the number of items 

that an individual student takes. The assessment is designed to glean information from 

hundreds of items but restricts the amount of time that any student has to spend responding 

to the assessment to approximately 50 minutes. Consequently, students taking the 

assessment will have one of eight or more possible booklets of passages and questions. 

Format of the Assessment 

Given the broad goals of the NAEP Reading Framework and its emphasis on the use of 

authentic texts, the assessment is given either in two 25-minute blocks or one 50-minute 

block. In the fourth grade, only 25-minute blocks are used. Students receive a booklet 

containing the reading materials and questions. Questions are presented in multiple-choice 

or constructed-response formats. At least half are constructed-response questions, which 

allows students to write their answers and explain and support their ideas. There are two 

types of constructed-response questions: short, requiring a one- or two-sentence answer, and 

extended, requiring a paragraph or full-page response. 

1

 Passages and accompanying items are divided into blocks and administered to representative samples of students. Results 

are pooled, profiling the performance of groups of students on the entire assessment. 

15 
Reading Framework for the 2007 NAEP 

All NAEP questions emphasize critical thinking and reasoning rather than factual recall. 

Multiple-choice questions require students to choose a single, clear answer. In contrast, 

constructed-response questions require students to integrate information from the text with 

their background knowledge, reorganize ideas, and critically consider the text. In an 

assessment of reading, it is important to have items that can directly and accurately reflect 

how readers use multiple strategies to build understanding. 

Reading Passages 

To reach the goal of approximating actual reading experiences, NAEP reading passages 

are typical of those read by students every day. The passages are taken from authentic texts 

found in the environments of students in grades 4, 8, and 12. Selected passages are original 

sources, not simplifications, paraphrases, abridgments, or modernizations. Only minimal 

changes are permitted in reading passages used in NAEP (for example, substituting an 

obscure word, revising a confusing phrase, or replacing an unfamiliar popular name). Such 

changes do not affect overall passage difficulty level, purpose, or meaning. Complete 

stories, articles, or chapters of textbooks are used to engage students’ interest. These 

passages make it possible to ask questions that elicit various reading strategies. 

Passages vary in length. In 4th grade, students read passages of 250 to 800 words; in 8th 

grade, 400 to 1,000 words; and in 12th grade, 500 to 1,500 words. In grades 8 and 12, 

students may be given two related reading passages in the 50-minute block. 

The selected passages for each grade are developmentally and topically appropriate. In 

addition, passages are intact and meet criteria for genre, language, interest, and 

organization. These criteria include curricular considerations, appropriateness of the topic, 

style, perspective, and fairness. Documents are genuine and relate to tasks that are 

appropriate for the grade level and experiences of the students being assessed. Exhibit 6 

outlines the major criteria for passage selection. 

Exhibit 6. Criteria for Passage Selection 

• Developmental appropriateness 

• Topic appropriateness 

• Language appropriateness 

• Fairness 

• Interest level 

• Reproducibility (copyright, format, Internet use) 

• Diversity among authors 

Item difficulty is a function of the difficulty of the passage, the complexity of the text, 

and the amount of background knowledge required to respond correctly. Because of their 

limitations, conventional readability estimates are not the main criteria for determining the 

16 
Reading Framework for the 2007 NAEP 

difficulty of a passage, which is a function of the complexity of its arguments, the 

abstractness of its concepts, and the inclusion of unusual points of view and shifting time 

frames—factors not addressed by traditional readability measures. As the difficulty of the 

passages increases, so does the difficulty of the questions because the questions focus on 

important points in the text. 

Passages range in difficulty from those that could be read by the least proficient readers 

(for example, about second-grade level in a fourth-grade class) to those that could be read 

by only the most proficient readers (for example, possibly eighth-grade level in a fourthgrade class), as determined by teachers in specific grades. 

Item Development 

Items are based on the aspects of reading and the related strategies readers use to build 

understanding. In developing the items, NAEP focuses on the range of questions that tap 

into each aspect of reading as well as the important elements of text. Exhibits 7 through 9 

list sample questions that address each aspect of reading and element of text in a given 

context: reading for literary experience (exhibit 7), reading for information (exhibit 8), and 

reading to perform a task (exhibit 9). Note that the elements of text are related to the 

organization and type of text and therefore vary with the context for reading. 

17 
Reading Framework for the 2007 NAEP 

Exhibit 7. Sample NAEP Items, by Element of Literary Text and Aspect of Reading 

Element of 

Literary Text 

Aspect of Reading 

Forming a 

General 

Understanding 

Developing 

Interpretation 

Making 

Reader/Text 

Connections 

Examining 

Content and 

Structure 

Theme What is the moral 

in the story? Use 

evidence from the 

story in your 

response. 

How does the 

setting help to 

illustrate the theme 

of the story? 

Do you think the 

lesson in this story 

is true today? Why 

or why not? 

Explain what 

makes this story a 

fable. 

Major 

characters 

What was the major 

character’s opinion 

of _____? 

What causes the 

main character to 

do _____? Use 

evidence from the 

story in your 

response. 

How do you think 

the character’s 

actions might be 

different today? 

Support your 

response with 

evidence from the 

story. 

How does the 

author’s description 

of _____ help 

explain the 

character’s actions? 

Major events Write a short 

summary of the 

major events in the 

story. 

What happens after 

_____? 

How do you think 

the story would 

have ended if 

_____ had not 

happened? 

How do the first 

events help you 

predict the ending? 

Problem How does _____ 

make the problem 

worse? Use 

evidence from the 

text to support your 

response. 

How did _____ 

help solve the 

problem? 

How does the 

problem in the 

story compare with 

another story you 

have read? Include 

evidence from the 

text and another 

story. 

Why does the 

author explain the 

problem in the first 

part of the story? 

Explain with 

evidence from the 

story. 

Vocabulary Which words 

describe what the 

story is mostly 

about? Use 

evidence from the 

text to support your 

response. 

Which words let 

you know that time 

has gone by? 

Explain with 

evidence from the 

story. 

Explain the double 

meaning of _____. 

Tell which meaning 

better explains the 

major ideas in the 

passage. 

Why does the 

author use the 

words _____ to 

describe how _____ 

feels? 

18 
Reading Framework for the 2007 NAEP 

Exhibit 8. Sample NAEP Items, by Element of Informational Text and Aspect of 

Reading 

Element of 

Informational 

Text 

Aspect of Reading 

Forming a 

General 

Understanding 

Developing 

Interpretation 

Making 

Reader/Text 

Connections 

Examining 

Content and 

Structure 

Central purpose What might be the 

author’s message in 

this article? 

How does the 

author support the 

message? 

Do you agree with 

the author’s 

message? Give 

evidence from the 

text. 

Based on what you 

read, what might 

be the reason the 

author wrote this? 

Major ideas Give a summary of 

the major ideas. 

How does the big 

idea in the first 

section relate to the 

big idea in the last 

section? 

Who might need or 

want this 

information? Use 

details from the 

text in your 

answer. 

What did the 

author do to 

present information 

clearly? 

Supporting ideas Identify ideas that 

most closely relate 

to the topic. Give 

evidence from the 

text to support your 

choice. 

How does the 

author show you 

that the main idea 

is important? 

Which details 

about the _____ 

help you to have a 

clear image of the 

topic? Explain why 

you chose them. 

What information 

did the author have 

to know before 

writing the article? 

Adjunct aids The chart in this 

article is mostly 

used to _____? 

How does the 

information in the 

chart support the 

information in the 

article? 

Why did the author 

include the picture 

with the chart? 

Explain using what 

you know and 

information from 

the text. 

What is the 

significance of the 

map to the article? 

Explain. 

Vocabulary Which words 

describe what the 

passage is mostly 

about? Use the 

evidence from the 

text to support your 

choice. 

Which words do 

you think mean the 

same as the title? 

Tell why you think 

so. 

Explain the double 

meaning of _____. 

Tell which 

meaning better 

explains the major 

ideas in the 

passage. 

Why did the author 

give a definition of 

_____ in paragraph 

2? 

19 
Reading Framework for the 2007 NAEP 

Exhibit 9. Sample NAEP Items, by Element of Practical Text and Aspect of Reading 

Element of 

Practical Text 

Aspect of Reading 

Forming a 

General 

Understanding 

Developing 

Interpretation 

Making 

Reader/Text 

Connections 

Examining 

Content and 

Structure 

Central purpose What is the purpose 

of the document? 

Use evidence from 

the document in 

your response. 

Do these directions 

list all the materials 

you need? Give a 

reason for your 

answer. 

Do you think the 

directions would be 

the same for ____? 

Use evidence from 

the text. 

Is this mainly for 

readers familiar 

with the activity? 

Explain why or 

why not. 

Key 

information 

Tell how this 

information would 

be useful. Use 

evidence from the 

document. 

Why is it important 

to do _____ before 

_____? Use 

evidence from the 

document in your 

response. 

Compare the 

directions to a set 

of directions you 

have used in the 

past. Which set is 

easier to follow? 

Tell why. 

Name one step that 

is important in 

order to follow the 

directions. Explain 

why this step is 

important. 

Key organizing 

features 

Tell what you need 

to complete the 

steps. Which 

features indicate 

this? 

What happens after 

_____? Explain 

why this is an 

important step. 

When might you 

use these steps? 

Support your 

answer with 

evidence from the 

text. 

Explain how the 

author organized 

this document. Use 

support from the 

text. 

Key graphics What is the significance of the 

graphics to the total 

set of directions? 

Use support from 

the text in your 

response. 

Why does the 

second picture 

show _____? 

Which additional 

graphics would you 

add to make the 

directions clear? 

Use support from 

the text. 

Why is there 

boldface print at the 

front of each 

section? 

Vocabulary Which words tell 

what the document 

is mostly about? 

Use evidence from 

the text to support 

your response. 

Use the context to 

tell the meaning of 

_____. 

Explain why the 

phrase _____ is 

useful in these 

directions. 

Why does the 

author use the 

words _____ to 

present the last step 

of the directions? 

20 
Reading Framework for the 2007 NAEP 

Review Process 

An extensive review process ensures that the assessments are consistent in meeting the 

criteria outlined in the framework. External reading committees and state-level testing and 

reading experts check the content of the assessments. Items are reviewed for bias and 

sensitivity, and test specialists review the items for technical qualities. An extensive 

editorial review provides quality assurance. Finally, as mandated by NAEP law, the 

National Assessment Governing Board reviews the items both before and after field testing 

for appropriateness and bias. 

Accommodations 

NAEP reading is administered to English-language learners and students with disabilities 

who, by judgment of the school staff, are capable of taking the assessment. NAEP’s intent is 

to assess all selected students from the target population. Therefore, every effort is made to 

ensure that all selected students who are capable of participating in the assessment are 

assessed. Some students sampled for NAEP participation are excluded according to 

carefully defined criteria. These criteria were revised in 1996 to more clearly communicate 

a presumption of inclusion except under special circumstances. Students are excluded only 

if the school’s Individual Education Plan (IEP) team determines that the student cannot 

participate or the student’s cognitive functioning is so severely impaired that she or he 

cannot participate. 

According to these criteria, students who are English-language learners, as well as those 

with disabilities who have IEPs that indicate accommodation strategies and procedures, 

participate in the assessment. Accommodations include (but are not limited to): 

• extra testing time 

• individual or small-group administrations 

• large-print booklets 

• multiple testing sessions 

Accommodations may be provided in combination—for example, extra testing time and 

individual administration. Because NAEP considers the domain of its reading assessment to 

be reading, the assessment cannot be read aloud. Moreover, NAEP does not provide an 

alternate language version, since the assessment measures reading in English. 

21 
Chapter Three 

How Are Results of the NAEP Reading Assessment Reported? 

NAEP reading assessment results are reported in terms of average scores for groups 

of students on the NAEP 0–500 scale and as percentages of students who attain 

each of the three achievement levels: Basic, Proficient, and Advanced (see exhibit 

10). The achievement levels offer a means of identifying percentages of students who have 

demonstrated certain reading proficiencies. Authorized by NAEP legislation and adopted by 

the National Assessment Governing Board, the achievement levels are performance 

standards based on the collective judgments of experts about what students should know 

and be able to do in terms of the NAEP Reading Framework. 

Exhibit 10. Policy Definitions of NAEP Achievement Levels 

Advanced Superior performance. 

Proficient Solid academic performance for each grade assessed. Students reaching this level have 

demonstrated competency over challenging subject matter, including subject-matter 

knowledge, application of such knowledge to real-world situations, and analytical skills 

appropriate to the subject matter. 

Basic Partial mastery of prerequisite knowledge and skills that are fundamental for proficient work 

at each grade. 

As part of the process for setting achievement levels for each NAEP subject area, panels 

of teachers, curriculum experts, policymakers, and members of the general public use the 

generic policy definitions to develop descriptions of what students should know and be able 

to do at the Basic, Proficient, and Advanced levels. These descriptions are presented in 

exhibits 11 and 12 to illustrate Basic, Proficient, and Advanced performance on the NAEP 

reading assessment for fourth and eighth graders. 

23 
Reading Framework for the 2007 NAEP 

Exhibit 11. NAEP Reading Achievement Levels: Grade 4 

Reading 

Achievement 

Level Description 

Advanced Fourth-grade students performing at the Advanced level should be able to generalize about 

topics in the reading selection and demonstrate an awareness of how authors compose and 

use literary devices. When reading text appropriate to fourth grade, they should be able to 

judge texts critically and, in general, give thorough answers that indicate careful thought. 

For example, when reading literary text, Advanced-level students should be able to make 

generalizations about the point of the story and extend its meaning by integrating personal 

experiences and other readings with ideas suggested by the text. They should be able to 

identify literary devices such as figurative language. 

When reading informational text, Advanced-level fourth graders should be able to 

explain the author’s intent by using supporting material from the text. They should be able 

to make critical judgments of the form and content of the text and explain their judgments 

clearly. 

Proficient Fourth-grade students performing at the Proficient level should be able to demonstrate an 

overall understanding of the text, providing inferential as well as literal information. 

When reading text appropriate to fourth grade, they should be able to extend the ideas in 

the text by making inferences, drawing conclusions, and making connections to their own 

experiences. The connections between the text and what the student infers should be clear. 

For example, when reading literary text, Proficient-level fourth graders should be able to 

summarize the story, draw conclusions about the characters or plot, and recognize 

relationships such as cause and effect. 

When reading informational text, Proficient-level students should be able to summarize 

the information and identify the author’s intent or purpose. They should be able to draw 

reasonable conclusions from the text, recognize relationships such as cause and effect or 

similarities and differences, and identify the meaning of the selection’s key concepts. 

Basic Fourth-grade students performing at the Basic level should demonstrate an understanding 

of the overall meaning of what they read. When reading text appropriate for fourth 

graders, they should be able to make relatively obvious connections between the text and 

their own experiences and extend the ideas in the text by making simple inferences. 

For example, when reading literary text, they should be able to tell what the story is 

generally about—providing details to support their understanding—and be able to connect 

aspects of the stories to their own experiences. 

When reading informational text, Basic-level fourth graders should be able to tell what 

the selection is generally about or identify the purpose for reading it, provide details to 

support their understanding, and connect ideas from the text to their background 

knowledge and experiences. 

24 
Reading Framework for the 2007 NAEP 

Exhibit 12. NAEP Reading Achievement Levels: Grade 8 

Reading 

Achievement 

Level Description 

Advanced Eighth-grade students performing at the Advanced level should be able to describe the 

more abstract themes and ideas of the overall text. When reading text appropriate to 

eighth grade, they should be able to analyze both meaning and form and support their 

analyses explicitly with examples from the text, and they should be able to extend text 

information by relating it to their experiences and to world events. At this level, student 

responses should be thorough, thoughtful, and extensive. 

For example, when reading literary text, Advanced-level eighth graders should be able to 

make complex, abstract summaries and theme statements. They should be able to describe 

the interactions of various literary elements (e.g., setting, plot, characters, and theme) and 

explain how the use of literary devices affects both the meaning of the text and their 

response to the author’s style. They should be able to critically analyze and evaluate the 

composition of the text. 

When reading informational text, they should be able to analyze the author’s purpose and 

point of view. They should be able to use cultural and historical background information 

to develop perspectives on the text and be able to apply text information to broad issues 

and world situations. 

When reading practical text, Advanced-level students should be able to synthesize 

information that will guide their performance, apply text information to new situations, 

and critique the usefulness of the form and content. 

Proficient Eighth-grade students performing at the Proficient level should be able to show an overall 

understanding of the text, including inferential as well as literal information. When 

reading text appropriate to eighth grade, they should be able to extend the ideas in the text 

by making clear inferences from it, by drawing conclusions, and by making connections 

to their own experiences—including other reading experiences. Proficient eighth graders 

should be able to identify some of the devices authors use in composing text. 

For example, when reading literary text, students at the Proficient level should be able to 

give details and examples to support themes that they identify. They should be able to use 

implied as well as explicit information in articulating themes; to interpret the actions, 

behaviors, and motives of characters; and to identify the use of literary devices such as 

personification and foreshadowing. 

When reading informational text, they should be able to summarize the text using 

explicit and implied information and support conclusions with inferences based on the 

text. 

When reading practical text, Proficient-level students should be able to describe its 

purpose and support their views with examples and details. They should be able to judge 

the importance of certain steps and procedures. 

continued on page 26 

25 
Reading Framework for the 2007 NAEP 

Exhibit 12. NAEP Reading Achievement Levels: Grade 8 (continued) 

Reading 

Achievement 

Level Description 

Basic Eighth-grade students performing at the Basic level should demonstrate a literal 

understanding of what they read and be able to make some interpretations. When reading 

text appropriate to eighth grade, they should be able to identify specific aspects of the text 

that reflect the overall meaning, extend the ideas in the text by making simple inferences, 

recognize and relate interpretations and connections among ideas in the text to personal 

experience, and draw conclusions based on the text. 

For example, when reading literary text, Basic-level eighth graders should be able to 

identify themes and make inferences and logical predictions about aspects such as plot 

and characters. 

When reading informational text, they should be able to identify the main idea and the 

author’s purpose. They should make inferences and draw conclusions supported by 

information in the text. They should recognize the relationships among the facts, ideas, 

events, and concepts of the text (e.g., cause and effect, order). 

When reading practical text, they should be able to identify the main purpose and make 

predictions about the relatively obvious outcomes of procedures in the text. 

The reading performance of fourth graders and the aspects of reading can be illustrated 

by a map that positions item descriptions along the NAEP reading composite scale where 

items are likely to be answered successfully by students (see exhibit 13). The descriptions 

used on the map focus on the reading skill or ability needed to answer the question. For 

each test item indicated, students who scored above the scale point had a higher probability 

of successfully answering the question, and students who scored below the scale point had a 

lower probability of successfully answering the question. Item maps are useful indicators of 

higher or lower probability of successfully answering test questions depending on students’ 

overall ability as measured by the NAEP scale. 

NAEP achievement level descriptions provide descriptions of Basic, Proficient, and 

Advanced performance. However, based on the NAEP reading results, it may be useful to 

give some information about students who score below the Basic level. These students are 

not necessarily nonreaders. They may be able to read but not well enough to attain the 

minimum score for Basic. For example, exhibit 13 indicates what fourth-grade students 

scoring below Basic could do on the 2000 NAEP reading assessment. As one can see, 

students who scored below Basic could complete tasks such as identifying a character trait 

and identifying a character’s problem, tasks that require some reading and comprehension 

skills. Given the length and difficulty of the passages, the skills demonstrated by some of 

the students who scored below Basic indicated some comprehension. Additional NAEP 

reading questions with performance results are available on the NAEP Web site at 

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

The NAEP reading assessment provides important information for nationally 

representative samples of students in grades 4, 8, and 12 and for state-level samples of 

fourth and eighth graders. NAEP also reports on subgroups of students by gender, 

26 
Reading Framework for the 2007 NAEP 

race/ethnicity, region of the country, location of school (e.g., central city, urban fringe/large 

town, rural/small town), eligibility for free or reduced price lunch, public or nonpublic 

school, and other variables of interest. For an example of how NAEP reports such data, see 

Fourth-Grade Reading Highlights 2005 [National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), 

2005] or the NAEP Web site at http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard. 

One of NAEP’s most important functions is to report trends in the average reading 

achievement of students over time. This information helps policymakers and the public 

answer the following: 

• Are students improving in reading achievement over time? 

• Are percentages of students at the upper achievement levels increasing, decreasing, or 

remaining the same? 

• Are the gaps in achievement among various groups narrowing? 

This information is useful in making decisions about the allocation of resources and the 

framing of policy related to reading. For examples of how NAEP reports trends, see The 

Nation’s Report Card: Reading 2005 (Perie et al., 2005) or the NAEP Web site at 

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

Students participating in NAEP respond to a background survey that provides 

information to round out the picture of reading in the United States. This survey gathers 

information on items such as time spent reading in and out of school, home activities related 

to reading, and types of activities their teachers use for reading instruction. Some activities 

are related to average scores on NAEP. NAEP collects only background information that is 

related to reading achievement. For example, students who report having the opportunity to 

read books for fun every day have significantly higher average scores than those who only 

read for fun once or twice a week. However, a complex mix of educational and 

socioeconomic factors may affect student achievement. To see how NAEP reports relate 

information from the surveys to the main part of NAEP, see the NAEP Web site at 

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

The results of the NAEP reading assessment and analysis of those results provide a useful 

snapshot of reading achievement in the United States that can be compared with 

achievement in previous years to identify trends and background factors in reading. When 

interpreting NAEP results, keep in mind that there is no simple causal relationship between 

membership in a subgroup and performance on NAEP. 

27 
Reading Framework for the 2007 NAEP 

Exhibit 13. Selected Item Descriptions on NAEP Reading Scale: Grade 4 

Note: Regular type denotes a constructed-response question. Italic type denotes a multiple-choice question. Each grade 4 

reading question was mapped onto the NAEP 0–500 reading scale. The position of the question on the scale represents the 

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. Only selected 

questions are presented. Scale score ranges for reading achievement levels are referenced on the map. 

Source: National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2000 NAEP 

reading assessment. 

28 
Chapter Four 

What Are the Foundations for the NAEP Reading Assessment? 

The NAEP Reading Framework reflects professional viewpoints, empirical evidence 

from high-quality research on reading, and the best technical design possible in a 

reading assessment that measures the achievement of thousands of students. It 

embraces a broad concept of reading that is supported by the findings of contemporary 

research and is relevant to state and local standards and curricula. It is based on recognition 

of the fact that a balance of approaches and programs is needed to produce successful 

readers. The framework is a synthesis of various perspectives, emphases, and opinions 

among professionals in universities, states, local districts, and classrooms. 

An obvious goal of reading education is the development of highly skilled readers. 

Consequently, it is reasonable that a process guiding the development of a national 

assessment of reading should start with a clear vision of that goal (see “What Is the NAEP 

Reading Assessment?”). As a result of that starting point, the NAEP Reading Framework 

focuses on tasks highly skilled readers in 4th, 8th, and 12th grades should perform. The 

assessment does not focus solely on the many specific skills a reader must use but seldom 

uses in isolation. This is in keeping with NAEP’s role as an assessment of overall 

achievement rather than a diagnostic tool for individual students. Although teachers 

certainly need to know which specific skills students possess or need to improve, 

policymakers and the general public are concerned mainly with whether students are 

reaching overall goals. 

Reading Process 

The NAEP reading assessment approaches reading as a complex process rather than a 

simple set of skills. This approach is confirmed by the following statement in the Report of 

the National Reading Panel (NICHD, 2000a): 

Comprehension is defined as “intentional thinking during which meaning is 

constructed through interactions between text and reader” (Harris and Hodges, 

1995). Thus, readers derive meaning from text when they engage in intentional, 

problemsolving thinking processes. (p. 14) 

Types of Assessments 

The NAEP reading assessment is an assessment of overall achievement, not a tool for 

diagnosing the needs of individuals or groups of students. A diagnostic assessment of 

reading ability for students in grade 4 would examine an individual student’s ability to read 

fluently aloud, using both the ability to decode words and to recognize them instantly. It 

would explore what specific comprehension skills the reader could demonstrate, such as 

finding the main idea, relating cause and effect, inferring character qualities, and detecting 

sequence. However, an achievement measure such as NAEP asks broader questions (e.g., 

29 
Reading Framework for the 2007 NAEP 

How well does this student or group of students read? Is this level of achievement good 

enough to meet the standard that has been set?). 

NAEP examines whether students can use multiple skills, not specific skills, to 

comprehend what they read. Effective reading programs definitely focus on teaching 

specific reading skills. However, when people actually read, they choose and orchestrate 

arrays of skills, sometimes almost simultaneously. The NAEP reading assessment examines 

whether students can actually use sets of skills in reading for different purposes. 

Background Surveys 

Because reading proficiency results from factors in the home, school, and community, the 

NAEP reading assessment includes several background surveys. They provide information 

on the resources and activities both in and out of school that affect students’ development as 

readers. Surveys are administered to students, teachers, and principals. NAEP reports 

survey results as general trends and as they relate to average scores and achievement levels 

on the assessment. The factors addressed in the background surveys were considered 

carefully as the committee guiding the development of the NAEP reading assessment 

debated, reached agreement, and worked to articulate the framework for the assessment. 

30 
Bibliography 

Adams, M.J. (1990). Beginning To Read: Thinking and Learning About Print. Cambridge, 

MA: MIT Press. 

Donahue, P.L., R.J. Finnegan, A.D. Lutkus, N.J. Allen, and J.R. Campbell (2001). The 

Nation’s Report Card: Fourth-Grade Reading 2000. Washington, DC: National Center for 

Education Statistics. 

Donahue, P.L., K.E. Voekl, J.R. Campbell, and J. Mazzeo (1999). NAEP 1998 Reading 

Report Card for the Nation and the States. Washington, DC: National Center for Education 

Statistics. 

Harris, T.L., and R.E. Hodges, eds. (1995). The Literary Dictionary: The Vocabulary of 

Reading and Writing. Newark, DE: International Reading Association. 

International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement (2000). 

Framework and Specifications for PIRLS Assessment 2001. Chestnut Hill, MA: 

International Study Center, Boston College. 

Kamil, M.L., P.B. Mosenthal, P.D. Pearson, and R. Barr, eds. (2000). Handbook of Reading 

Research. Vol. 3. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. 

Lyon, G.R. (1998). “Overview of Reading and Literacy Research.” In S. Patton and M. 

Holmes, eds., The Keys to Literacy. Washington, DC: Council for Basic Education. 

National Assessment Governing Board (2000). Reading Framework for the National 

Assessment of Educational Progress: 1992–2000. Washington, DC: Author. 

National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) (2001). Fourth-Grade Reading Highlights 

2000. Washington, DC: Author. 

——— (2005). Fourth-Grade Reading Highlights 2005. Washington, DC: Author. 

——— (2003). The Nation’s Report Card: Reading 2002. Washington, DC: Author. 

National Institute for Child Health and Human Development (NICHD) (2000a). Report of 

the National Reading Panel. Washington, DC: Author. 

——— (2000b). Report of the National Reading Panel: Report of the Subgroups. 

Washington, DC: Author. 

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (2000). Measuring Student 

Knowledge and Skills: The PISA 2000 Assessment of Reading, Mathematical, and Scientific 

Literacy. Paris: Author. 

31 
Reading Framework for the 2007 NAEP 

Perie, M., Grigg, W., and Donahue, P. (2005). The Nation’s Report Card: Reading 2005. 

(NCES 2006–451). U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. 

Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office. 

Snow, C.E. (2000). Reading for Understanding: Toward an R&D Program in Reading 

Comprehension. Santa Monica, CA: Rand. 

Snow, C.E., S. Burns, and P. Griffin, eds. (1998). Preventing Reading Difficulties in Young 

Children. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. 

32 
Appendix A 

Sample Reading Passages, Items, and Scoring Rubrics 

33 
Reading Framework for the 2007 NAEP 

Sample Reading Passages, Items, and Scoring Rubrics 

Grade 4—“A Brick to Cuddle Up To” 

Scoring Criteria for Constructed-Response Questions 

Note: Performance results may not total 100 percent due to off-task and omitted responses. 

Question 2. After reading this article, would you like to have lived during colonial 

times? What information in the article makes you think this? 

Scoring Guide 

Score and Description 

Evidence of Full Comprehension 

These responses give an opinion using clear and substantive information from the article 

and displaying an ability to make a personal connection with the text information. The 

supporting information is explicitly from the article and is used appropriately in support 

of their opinion. 

Evidence of Partial or Surface Comprehension 

These responses support an opinion of colonial life with unclear information or 

information related to colonial life that is not clearly from the article. Or, they use 

evidence from the article to describe colonial life without explicitly stating an opinion. 

Evidence of Little or No Comprehension 

These responses contain inappropriate information from the article or personal opinions 

about the article but do not demonstrate an understanding of what it was like to live 

during colonial times as described in the article. They may answer the question, but 

provide no substantive explanation. 

[Full, 20 percent; Partial, 58 percent; Little or no comprehension, 20 percent] 

35 
Reading Framework for the 2007 NAEP 

Question 3. Some of the ways that colonists kept warm during the winter were 

different from the ways that people keep warm today. Tell about two of these 

differences. 

Scoring Guide 

Score and Description 

Evidence of Full Comprehension 

These responses explain at least two ways the colonists kept warm that are different from 

two methods used today. The explanations of both the colonial and/or modern methods 

must be clear, logical, and distinct. These responses demonstrate an ability to link 

information from the article with related knowledge about the way things are done today. 

Evidence of Partial or Surface Comprehension 

These responses include some information about how people keep warm. However, they 

describe no more than one difference between the ways colonists kept warm and the ways 

people keep warm today. Or, they talk only about the colonists without linking 

information from the article with knowledge about methods of keeping warm today. 

Evidence of Little or No Comprehension 

These responses contain inappropriate information from the article and/or do not explain 

how colonists kept warm in the winter. They may or may not discuss how people keep 

warm today. 

[Full, 17 percent; Partial, 59 percent; Little or no comprehension, 21 percent] 

36 
Reading Framework for the 2007 NAEP 

Question 4. Do you think “A Brick to Cuddle Up To” is a good title for this article? 

Using information from the article, tell why or why not. 

Scoring Guide 

Score and Description 

Evidence of Full Comprehension 

These responses support an opinion with a clear explanation of the relationship between 

the title and the article. They summarize or articulate information from the article and tell 

whether it does or does not relate to the title. 

Evidence of Partial or Surface Comprehension 

These responses support an opinion with a vague explanation that does not demonstrate a 

clear understanding of how the title applies to the article. Or, they use evidence from the 

article to assess the title’s appropriateness without explicitly stating or implying an 

opinion. 

Evidence of Little or No Comprehension 

These responses contain inappropriate information from the article or personal opinions 

about the article and/or do not demonstrate any understanding of the title. They may 

answer the question, but they provide no substantive explanation from the article. 

[Full, 37 percent; Partial, 32 percent; Little or no comprehension, 27 percent] 

37 
Reading Framework for the 2007 NAEP 

Question 5. Give two reasons stated in the article why the hearth was the center of 

the home in colonial times. 

Scoring Guide 

Score and Description 

Evidence of Full Comprehension 

These responses provide two text-based reasons why the hearth was the center of the 

colonial home. They demonstrate understanding of why the daily conditions in a colonial 

household highlighted the hearth’s importance. 

Evidence of Partial or Surface Comprehension 

These responses give only one text-based reason why the hearth was important. Although 

the responses must demonstrate the need for a hearth, they do not have to explicitly 

mention its role. 

Evidence of Little or No Comprehension 

These responses contain inappropriate information from the article or personal opinions 

about the article that fail to address the importance of the hearth. They demonstrate no 

understanding of how the colonists used the hearth as described in the article. 

[Full, 20 percent; Partial, 46 percent; Little or no comprehension, 20 percent] 

38 
Reading Framework for the 2007 NAEP 

Question 7. Pretend that you are an early American colonist. Describe at least three 

activities you might do during a cold winter evening. Be specific. Use details from 

the article to help you write your description. 

Scoring Guide 

Score and Description 

Extensive 

These responses demonstrate an overall understanding of how staying warm was a central 

concern for colonists on a cold winter evening. They present three or more evening 

activities, three of which involve the need to stay warm as described in the article. 

Essential 

These responses demonstrate an understanding of the colonial lifestyle portrayed in the 

article. They present at least three text-based evening activities, one or two of which 

involve the need to stay warm as described in the article. 

Partial 

These responses begin to discuss a typical evening in the colonies. They use details that 

are based on superficial information from the article and describe one or two activities 

unrelated to the need to stay warm (which was the major focus of the article). Or, they 

mention one or two activities from the article that involve staying warm. Or, they 

generalize about the need to stay warm without specifying any activity. 

Unsatisfactory 

These responses contain inappropriate information from the article or personal opinions 

about the article but do not discuss a typical colonial evening. They demonstrate no 

understanding of the colonists’ lifestyle as portrayed in the passage. 

[Extensive, 12 percent; Essential, 6 percent; Partial, 52 percent; Unsatisfactory, 24 

percent] 

39 
Reading Framework for the 2007 NAEP 

Question 9. Does the author help you understand what colonial life was like? Use 

examples from the article to explain why or why not. 

Scoring Guide 

Score and Description 

Evidence of Full Comprehension 

These responses provide an opinion about the author’s abilities. In addition, they provide 

at least one supportive example from the text that demonstrates an objective consideration 

of the article and/or text-based critical judgment of the author’s competence. 

Evidence of Partial or Surface Comprehension 

These responses provide an opinion about the author. These opinions go beyond simply 

“yes” or “no” by demonstrating some understanding of the information in the article. 

They fail to provide appropriate evidence from the article to support their opinion 

concerning the author’s abilities. 

Evidence of Little or No Comprehension 

These responses contain inappropriate information from the article or unsupported 

personal opinions about either the article or the author. These personal opinions provide 

no evidence of understanding the information in the article. 

[Full, 20 percent; Partial, 29 percent; Little or no comprehension, 51 percent] 

40 
_____________________________ 

Reading Framework for the 2007 NAEP 

Grade 4 Sample Reading Passage: Literary 

HUNGRY SPIDER AND THE TURTLE 

(Description of Story)* 

“Hungry Spider and the Turtle” is a West African folktale that humorously depicts 

hunger and the custom of hospitality through the actions and conversations of the title 

characters. 

Spider and Turtle live in different countries. They first meet when Turtle, famished from 

traveling a long way from home, comes upon Spider’s house. While Spider is well 

known among his neighbors for his great appetite and his greediness, Turtle, being a 

stranger, believes Spider’s offer of a meal to be sincere. It becomes clear that Spider 

wants all the food for himself and that his gesture of hospitality is merely show so that 

people will not speak badly of him. Turtle realizes that he has been tricked out of having 

any food but doesn’t let on that he knows. He suavely concurs with Spider that it was a 

fine meal; and as Turtle leaves, he assures Spider of similar hospitality if Spider ever 

visits in his country. 

In time, the gluttonous Spider finds himself a long way from home in Turtle’s country. 

Now it is Turtle’s turn to use local custom as a camouflage for true intent. He repays 

Spider’s gesture of hospitality, and Spider gets the meal that he deserves. 

* We did not receive copyright approval to put the actual text from the student booklet on the Web site. The full text can be found in Harold 

Courlander, “Hungry Spider and the Turtle,” from The Cow-Tail Switch & Other West African Stories. Copyright © 1987 by Henry Holt and 

Company, Inc. 

Questions for “Hungry Spider and the Turtle” 

1. Why did Spider invite Turtle to share his food? 

a. to amuse himself 

b. to be kind and helpful 

c. to have company at dinner 

d. to appear generous 

[Aspect, Developing interpretation; Key, D; Percent correct, 40] 

2. There is a saying, “Don’t get mad, get even.” How does this apply to the story? 

[Aspect, Examining content and structure; Percent acceptable, 55] 

41 
Reading Framework for the 2007 NAEP 

3.Which best describes Spider’s character? 

a. patient 

b. friendly 

c. selfish 

d. angry 

[Aspect, General understanding; Key, C; Percent correct, 77] 

4. What do Turtle’s actions at Spider’s house tell you about Turtle? 

[Aspect, Developing interpretation; Percent acceptable, 41] 

5. When Turtle remains quiet about his mistreatment by Spider, the author wants to 

a. believe Turtle is afraid 

b. have sympathy for Turtle 

c. feel dislike for Turtle 

d. think Turtle deserved no dinner 

[Aspect, Examining content and structure; Key, B; Percent correct, 60] 

6. Think about Spider and Turtle in the story. Pick someone you know, have read 

about, or have seen in the movies or on television and explain how that person is 

like either Spider or Turtle. 

[Aspect, Reader/text connections; Percent extensive, 14] 

7. Spider’s behavior during the first part of the story is most like that of 

a. mothers protecting their children 

b. thieves robbing banks 

c. runners losing races 

d. people not sharing their wealth 

[Aspect, Reader/text connections; Key, D; Percent correct, 73] 

8. Who do you think would make a better friend, Spider or Turtle? Explain why. 

[Aspect, Reader/text connections; Percent acceptable, 62] 

42 
Reading Framework for the 2007 NAEP 

9. Spider’s visit to Turtle in the second part of the story mainly shows that 

a. Turtle could treat Spider the same way 

b. Spider could float on the water 

c. Spider could get a free meal 

d. Turtle lived in a small house 

[Aspect, Examining content and structure; Key, A; Percent correct, 82] 

10. Do you think Turtle should have done what he did to Spider? Explain why or why 

not. 

[Aspect, Reader/text connections; Percent acceptable, 61] 

11. The final sentence of the story is: “People always say that one good meal deserves 

another.” The author uses this sentence as a way of saying that 

a. Turtle and Spider both were good cooks 

b. Turtle should not have invited Spider to dinner 

c. Spider earned what Turtle did to him 

d. Spider should have cooked what Turtle liked to eat 

[Aspect, Examining content and structure; Key, C; Percent correct, 73] 

Grade 4—“Hungry Spider and the Turtle” 

Scoring Criteria for Constructed-Response Questions 

Note: Performance results may not total 100 percent due to off-task and omitted responses. 

Question 2. There is a saying, “Don’t get mad, get even.” How does this apply to the 

story? 

Scoring Guide 

Score and Description 

Acceptable 

Acceptable answers indicate that Turtle got back at Spider or got revenge for Spider’s not 

sharing his food. 

Unacceptable 

Unacceptable responses do not demonstrate an understanding of Turtle’s getting back at 

Spider for not sharing his food. 

[Acceptable, 55 percent; Unacceptable, 37 percent] 

43 
Reading Framework for the 2007 NAEP 

Question 4. What do Turtle’s actions at Spider’s house tell you about Turtle? 

Scoring Guide 

Score and Description 

Acceptable 

Acceptable responses indicate, essentially, that Turtle was any of the following: 

• passive • long-suffering 

• patient • smart 

• polite • hungry/desperate for food 

• correct or right • suckered 

• resigned • always trying over and over 

Unacceptable 

Unacceptable responses include: 

• washed his feet 

• dirty 

The following responses are unacceptable unless accompanied by a valid explanation or 

supportive information. 

• nice 

• friendly 

[Acceptable, 41 percent; Unacceptable, 52 percent] 

44 
Reading Framework for the 2007 NAEP 

Question 6. Think about Spider and Turtle in the story. Pick someone you know, 

have read about, or have seen in the movies or on television and explain how that 

person is like either Spider or Turtle. 

Scoring Guide 

Score and Description 

Extensive 

These responses demonstrate an in-depth, rich understanding of the character of Spider or 

Turtle and link this understanding to a real-world person or a fictional character. Evidence 

of depth of understanding includes describing more than one essential story-character trait 

linked to a real-world person or a fictional character, providing a sophisticated 

interpretation of an essential story-character trait that is linked to a real-world person or a 

fictional character, identifying how a real-world person or a fictional character is like 

Spider in one way and like Turtle in another, or identifying a pair of real-world people or 

fictional characters and explaining how these two people or characters are like Spider and 

Turtle. For example: 

• “My brother and Spider are alike because they both unfairly control the people 

around them to their own advantage.” 

• “My brother and Spider are alike because they both cheat people and are selfish.” 

• “Scrooge is like Spider because he is greedy, and Bob Cratchet is like Turtle 

because he gets something in the end too.” 

• “My friend Anne is like Turtle because when someone calls her names, she just 

walks away, but sometimes she’s like Spider and plays tricks on people.” 

Essential 

These responses demonstrate a good understanding of the character of Spider or Turtle by 

providing any important character trait that is related or linked to a real-world person or a 

fictional character. For example: 

• “My older brother and Turtle are alike because they both get revenge on their 

enemies.” 

• “My sister is like Spider because she likes to trick people.” 

continued on page 46 

45 
Reading Framework for the 2007 NAEP 

Scoring Guide (Question 6, continued) 

Score and Description 

Partial 

These responses indicate some understanding of the character of Spider or Turtle in the 

story by providing information about the character of Spider or Turtle but fail to make a 

connection with a real-world person or character; or they make the connection between a 

story character and a real-world person or a fictional character but do so on a trivial point; 

or they make a connection between a story character and a real-world person or fictional 

character but don’t distinguish whether the story character is like Spider or like Turtle. 

For example: 

• “Turtle was right to get revenge on Spider for the way that Spider treated him.” 

• “My friend is like Turtle because they both wipe their feet a lot.” 

• “Mindy is like Turtle because she is friendly.” 

• “On Chip and Dale’s Rescue Rangers, Dale is always selfish.” 

Unsatisfactory 

These responses demonstrate little or no understanding of the character of Spider or 

Turtle. In these responses, students often name a character but do not relate this character 

to Spider or Turtle or provide only inappropriate characteristics. Also, students may 

summarize a story or movie but not relate it to Spider or Turtle in any clear way. For 

example: 

• “My friend is like Turtle.” 

• “Turtle always washed his feet.” 

• “My friend Jeff because he is friendly.” 

• “Someone in my class is friendly like Spider.” 

[Extensive, 14 percent; Essential, 16 percent; Partial, 22 percent; Unsatisfactory, 34 

percent] 

46 
Reading Framework for the 2007 NAEP 

Question 8. Who do you think would make a better friend, Spider or Turtle? 

Explain why. 

Scoring Guide 

Score and Description 

Acceptable 

Acceptable responses mention either Spider or Turtle and cite evidence from the story to 

support the student’s choice. The information cited in the explanation must be appropriate 

within the context of the story. 

For example: 

• “I think Turtle would be a good friend because he isn’t mean to people.” 

Unacceptable 

Unacceptable responses include: 

• “I think Spider, because he shared his food.” 

[Acceptable, 62 percent; Unacceptable, 34 percent] 

Question 10. Do you think Turtle should have done what he did to Spider? Explain 

why or why not. 

Scoring Guide 

Score and Description 

Acceptable 

Acceptable responses either agree or disagree with Turtle’s actions and mention 

something about the fact that Spider was mean to Turtle or that Turtle tricked him and got 

revenge. The information included in the explanation must be appropriate within the 

context of the story. For example: 

• “Turtle was right to get back at Spider because Spider was mean to him.” 

• “Turtle was not right to get back at Spider because it was not a nice thing to do.” 

Unacceptable 

Unacceptable responses include: 

• “Turtle was right to get back at Spider because Turtle was hungry.” 

[Acceptable, 61 percent; Unacceptable, 32 percent] 

47 
Reading Framework for the 2007 NAEP 

Grade 8 Sample Reading Passage: Informational 

THE LOST PEOPLE OF MESA VERDE 

by Elsa Marston 

The Anasazi lived peacefully on the mesa for 800 years. Then they disappeared. 

In the dry land of southwestern Colorado, a beautiful plateau rises. It has so many trees 

that early Spanish explorers called it Mesa Verde, which means “green table.” For about 

eight hundred years Native Americans called the Anasazi lived on this mesa. And then they 

left. Ever since the cliff houses were first discovered a hundred years ago, scientists and 

historians have wondered why. 

Anasazi is a Navajo word meaning “the ancient ones.” When they first settled there, 

around 500 A.D., the Anasazi lived in alcoves in the walls of the high canyons. Later they 

moved to the level land on top, where they built houses of stone and mud mortar. As time 

passed, they constructed more elaborate houses, like apartment buildings, with several 

families living close together. 

The Anasazi made beautiful pottery, turquoise jewelry, fine sashes of woven hair, and 

baskets woven tightly enough to hold water. They lived by hunting and by growing corn 

and squash. Their way of life went on peacefully for several hundred years. 

Then around 1200 A.D. something strange happened, for which the reasons are not quite 

clear. Most of the people moved from the level plateau back down into alcoves in the cliffs. 

The move must have made their lives difficult because they had to climb back up to the 

plateau to do the farming. But it seems the Anasazi planned to stay in the canyon walls, for 

they soon filled the alcoves with amazing cliff dwellings. “Cliff Palace,” the most famous of 

these, had more than two hundred rooms. 

For all the hard work that went into building these new homes, the Anasazi did not live in 

them long. By 1300 A.D., the cliff dwellings were empty. Mesa Verde was deserted and 

remained a ghost country for almost six hundred years. Were the people driven out of their 

homes by enemies? No sign of attack or fighting, or even the presence of other tribes, has 

been found. 

Archaeologists who have studied the place now believe there are other reasons. Mesa 

Verde, the beautiful green table, was no longer a good place to live. For one thing, in the 

second half of the thirteenth century there were long periods of cold, and very little rain 

fell—or else it came at the wrong time of year. Scientists know this from examining the 

wood used in the cliff dwellings. The growth rings in trees show good and bad growing 

seasons. But the people had survived drought and bad weather before, so there must have 

been another reason. 

48 
Reading Framework for the 2007 NAEP 

As the population grew, more land on the mesa top had to be farmed in order to feed the 

people. That meant that trees had to be cut to clear the land and also to use for houses and 

fuel. Without the forests, the rain began to wash away the mesa top. 

How do we know about erosion problems that happened about eight hundred years ago? 

The Anasazi built many low dams across the smaller valleys on the mesa to slow down rain 

runoff. Even so, good soil washed away, and the people could no longer raise enough food. 

As the forests dwindled, the animals, already overhunted, left the mesa for mountainous 

areas with more trees. 

And as the mesa “wore out,” so did the people. It appears that the Anasazi were not 

healthy. Scientists can learn a lot about ancient people’s health by studying the bones and 

teeth found in burials. The mesa dwellers had arthritis, and their teeth were worn down by 

the grit in corn meal, a main part of their diet. 

As food became scarce, people grew weaker. Not many lived beyond their twenties. 

Women died very young, and few babies survived. Living so close together in the cliff 

houses, where everyone was hungry and worried, the people must have suffered from 

emotional strain. They probably quarreled often. 

In the end, the Anasazi must have given up hope that things would get better. Families 

packed up and went away. Of course, the “ancient ones” did not simply disappear. They 

moved southeast to another area and mingled with other peoples. After a while, their 

heritage as the people of the Mesa Verde was forgotten. 

In time the trees grew back, and the plateau became green once more. But, for the 

Anasazi, it was too late. Although they respected nature and tried to farm 

wisely, land that was used too hard could not support them forever. 

Yet in their cliff houses and crafts, the “ancient ones” left us a superb monument. It is 

truly one of the most fascinating pictures of America’s past. 

Used by permission of Highlights for Children, Inc., 

Columbus, OH. Copyright ©1991. 

49 
Reading Framework for the 2007 NAEP 

Questions for “The Lost People of Mesa Verde” 

1. After reading this article, what do you think is the most important information 

about the Anasazi? 

[Aspect, General Understanding; Percent acceptable, 60 percent] 

2. The three moves made by the Anasazi are listed below. Explain the possible 

reasons that were suggested in the article for each move. 

500–1200 A.D.—The Anasazi moved from the alcoves to the top of Mesa Verde. 

1200 A.D.—The Anasazi moved back down into the alcoves in the cliffs. 

1300 A.D.—The Anasazi left Mesa Verde. 

[Aspect, Developing interpretation; Percent extensive, 9 percent] 

3. If you had lived with the Anasazi at Mesa Verde, would you have preferred living 

on the top of the mesa or in the cliff houses built into the alcoves? Explain your 

preference by using information from the article. 

[Aspect, Reader/text connections; Percent full comprehension, 29] 

4. If you could talk to the author of this article, what is one question you could ask 

her about the Anasazi that is not already answered in the article? Explain why you 

would want to know this information? 

[Aspect, Reader/text connections; Percent full comprehension, 15] 

5. Which idea from the text about the Anasazi do the photographs support? 

a. They were able to create many useful objects. 

b. Farming was probably their major source of food. 

c. Wood seems to have been their primary building material. 

d. Their life became much easier when they moved into the cliff dwellings. 

[Aspect, Developing interpretation; Key, A; Percent correct, 70] 

6. Imagine that you are living with the people of Mesa Verde during the 1200s when 

they left the mesa. Some of your friends and neighbors do not want to leave the 

area. Based on information in the article, what would you tell these people to 

convince them to leave? 

[Aspect, Examining content and structure; Percent full comprehension, 41 percent] 

50 
Reading Framework for the 2007 NAEP 

7. The Anasazi’s life before 1200 A.D. was portrayed by the author as being 

a. dangerous and warlike 

b. busy and exciting 

c. difficult and dreary 

d. productive and peaceful 

[Aspect, Developing interpretation; Key, D; Percent correct, 59] 

8. The title and photograph on the first page of the article are probably meant to 

make the disappearance of the Anasazi seem to be 

a. a personal tragedy 

b. a terrible mistake 

c. an unsolved mystery 

d. an important political event 

[Aspect, Developing interpretation; Key, C; Percent correct, 84] 

9. Some people say that the Anasazi’s success as a civilization may have actually 

caused their own decline. Using information in the article, explain why you agree 

or disagree with this statement. 

[Aspect, Developing interpretation; Percent extensive, 12] 

Grade 8—“The Lost People of Mesa Verde” 

Scoring Criteria for Constructed-Response Questions 

Note: Performance results may not total 100 percent due to off-task and omitted responses. 

Question 1. After reading this article, what do you think is the most important 

information about the Anasazi? 

Scoring Guide 

Score and Description 

Acceptable 

These responses provide a specific detail or a general impression from the passage that 

relates to some aspect of the Anasazi portrayed in the article. 

Unacceptable 

These responses contain inaccurate information from the article or inappropriate personal 

opinions about the article. They do not provide any valid information or appropriate interpretation about the Anasazi as they were portrayed in the article. 

[Acceptable, 60 percent; Unacceptable, 40 percent] 

51 
Reading Framework for the 2007 NAEP 

Question 2. The three moves made by the Anasazi are listed below. Explain the 

possible reasons that were suggested in the article for each move. 

500–1200 A.D.—The Anasazi moved from the alcoves to the top of Mesa Verde. 

1200 A.D.—The Anasazi moved back down into the alcoves in the cliffs. 

1300 A.D.—The Anasazi left Mesa Verde. 

Scoring Guide 

Score and Description 

Extensive 

These responses identify a reason for all three moves, even though the reasons for all the 

moves are not explicitly discussed in the article. These responses go beyond simply 

restating the article to interpret some of the information provided in the article as it relates 

to the moves. 

Essential 

These responses identify a reason for three of the moves discussed in the article. The 

reasons may be brief or simple restatements of information in the article as long as they 

are logical and taken from the passage. 

Partial 

These responses discuss reasons for only one or two of the moves described in the article. 

They receive credit for one explanation if they state that the article did not provide 

possible reasons for the first move. 

Unsatisfactory 

These responses do not identify the reasons provided by the article for any of the moves 

that were made by the Anasazi. These responses may provide some facts about the 

Anasazi but do not relate them to any of the moves. 

[Extensive, 9 percent; Essential, 16 percent; Partial, 56 percent; Unsatisfactory, 15 

percent] 

52 
Reading Framework for the 2007 NAEP 

Question 3. If you had lived with the Anasazi at Mesa Verde, would you have 

preferred living on the top of the mesa or in the cliff houses built into the alcoves? 

Explain your preference by using information from the article. 

Scoring Guide 

Score and Description 

Evidence of Full Comprehension 

These responses state a preference and provide an explanation that reflects an appropriate 

interpretation of information in the article. The evidence must logically support the preference and must come directly from the article. 

Evidence of Partial or Surface Comprehension 

These responses state a preference but explain it with a vague or somewhat unclear 

interpretation of the information in the article. Or, they may not state a preference, but 

they may use information from the article to explain the conditions on top of the mesa and 

in the alcoves. Or, they state a preference but use information from the article that does 

not support their preference. 

Evidence of Little or No Comprehension 

These responses contain inappropriate information from the article or personal opinions 

about the article that demonstrate no understanding of life on top of the mesa or in the 

alcoves. They may answer the question but not explain their preference. Or, they may 

only repeat information from the prompt. 

[Full, 29 percent; Partial, 44 percent; Little or no comprehension, 22 percent] 

53 
Reading Framework for the 2007 NAEP 

Question 4. If you could talk to the author of this article, what is one question you 

could ask her about the Anasazi that is not already answered in the article? Explain 

why you would want to know this information. 

Scoring Guide 

Score and Description 

Evidence of Full Comprehension 

These responses pose one unanswered question about the Anasazi and provide a clear 

explanation of how this additional information would be useful. The explanation must be 

noncircular. For example, it may focus on why the question is puzzling or how the answer 

might be useful on a personal level. 

Evidence of Partial or Surface Comprehension 

These responses demonstrate some understanding of the article by posing a question that 

is not answered in the article. However, the question is accompanied with a circular explanation or no explanation. Or, they may ask a question about the Anasazi experience that is 

only vaguely answered in the text and provides essential information about the Anasazi. 

Evidence of Little or No Comprehension 

These responses contain inappropriate information from the article or personal opinions 

about the article but fail to pose any questions concerning the Anasazi. Or, they pose 

questions that are already answered in the article. Or, they pose questions that provide no 

indication that they have read the passage (e.g., questions about the author). 

[Full, 15 percent; Partial, 51 percent; Little or no comprehension, 25 percent] 

54 
Reading Framework for the 2007 NAEP 

Question 6. Imagine that you are living with the people of Mesa Verde during the 

1200s when they left the mesa. Some of your friends and neighbors do not want to 

leave the area. Based on information in the article, what would you tell these people 

to convince them to leave? 

Scoring Guide 

Score and Description 

Evidence of Full Comprehension 

These responses discuss one or more ways of convincing the Anasazi to leave the mesa. 

The arguments are based on appropriate information from the article. 

Evidence of Partial or Surface Comprehension 

These responses discuss one or more ways of convincing the people to leave the mesa. 

They do so, however, with arguments based on personal conjecture rather than 

information from the text. Or, they use broad statements such as “If you stay, you will 

die” rather than specific information from the article. 

Evidence of Little or No Comprehension 

These responses contain inappropriate information from the article or personal opinions 

about the article that fail to address the need to leave the mesa. Or, they address the issue 

using inaccurate information to support their opinion. 

[Full, 41 percent; Partial, 29 percent; Little or no comprehension, 22 percent] 

55 
Reading Framework for the 2007 NAEP 

Question 9. Some people say that the Anasazi’s success as a civilization may have 

actually caused their own decline. Using information in the article, explain why you 

agree or disagree with this statement. 

Scoring Guide 

Score and Description 

Extensive 

These responses assess the statement and provide an explanation that focuses on more 

than one aspect of the Anasazi’s lifestyle. They demonstrate an explicit understanding of 

causal relationships between events and outcomes by connecting and integrating ideas 

across the text with their own ideas about the statement. Or, they must demonstrate their 

understanding of the paradox of success leading to decline. 

Essential 

These responses state whether they agree or disagree with the statement and provide an 

appropriate explanation that is based on information in the article. The explanation must 

demonstrate a clear understanding of the statement. 

Partial 

These responses state whether they agree or disagree with the statement, but their 

explanation is based solely on inappropriate information from the text. Or, they provide 

some information from the article about the Anasazi but do not relate it to why the 

civilization declined. 

Unsatisfactory 

These responses do not discuss the validity of the statement. Or, they simply state their 

agreement with no explanation or an explanation relying on circular reasoning. Or they 

give an elaborate opinion that is not text-based. 

[Extensive, 12 percent; Essential, 16 percent; Partial, 30 percent; Unsatisfactory, 25 

percent] 

56 
Appendix B 

NAEP Reading Framework Panels 

57 
Reading Framework for the 2007 NAEP 

NAEP Reading Framework Panels 

2002 Reading Framework

Advisory Panel 

Phyllis Aldrich (Chair) 

Curriculum Coordinator 

Saratoga-Warren BOCES 

Saratoga Springs, New York 

Marilyn Adams 

Senior Scientist 

BBN Laboratories, Inc. 

Cambridge, Massachusetts 

Peter Afflerbach 

Professor 

University of Maryland 

College Park, Maryland 

Rosalinda Barrera 

Professor 

University of Illinois 

Champaign, Illinois 

Sheila Colson 

English Teacher 

Andrew Hamilton Elementary 

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 

Janet Jones 

Reading Resource Teacher 

Berry Elementary School 

Waldorf, Maryland 

Peggy McCardle 

Associate Chief 

Child Health & Behavior Branch 

National Institute for Child Health and 

Human Development 

Rockville, Maryland 

Patricia McGonegal 

English Teacher 

Mount Mansfield High School 

Jericho, Vermont 

Jane Murray 

English Teacher 

The Levy Curriculum Center 

Manhattan Beach, California 

Peggy Peterson 

Mississippi Department of Education 

Jackson, Mississippi 

Sheila Potter 

Former Michigan Department of 

Education official 

Lansing, Michigan 

Cathy Roller 

Director for Research and Policy 

International Reading Association 

Newark, Delaware 

Mary Rogers Rose 

North Carolina Department of Education 

Raleigh, North Carolina 

Steve Stahl 

Professor 

University of Georgia 

Athens, Georgia 

Consultants 

Suzanne Clewell 

Supervisor of Reading, retired 

Montgomery County Public Schools 

Rockville, Maryland 

Barbara Kapinus 

Reading Consultant 

Hyattsville, Maryland 

59 
Reading Framework for the 2007 NAEP 

1992 Steering and Project

Planning Committees 

Steering Committee 

American Association of School 

Administrators 

Gary Marx, Associate Executive 

Director

Arlington, Virginia 

American Educational Research 

Association 

Carole Perlman, Director of Research 

and Evaluation 

Chicago, Illinois 

American Federation of Teachers 

Marilyn Rauth, Director of Educational 

Issues 

Washington, D.C. 

Association of State Assessment 

Programs 

Edward Roeber, Co-Chairman 

Lansing, Michigan 

Association of Supervision and

Curriculum Development 

Helene Hodges 

Alexandria, Virginia 

Council of Chief State School Officers 

H. Dean Evans, Superintendent of 

Public Instruction 

State Department of Education 

Indianapolis, Indiana 

National Alliance of Business 

Esther Schaeffer 

Washington, D.C. 

National Association of Elementary

School Principals 

Kathleen Holliday, Principal 

Potomac, Maryland 

National Association of Secondary 

School Principals 

Scott Thompson, Executive Director 

Reston, Virginia 

National Association of Test Directors 

Paul LeMahieu 

Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 

National Catholic Education 

Association 

Robert J. Kealey 

Washington, D.C. 

National Education Association 

Ann Smith, Board Member 

Ormond Beach, Florida 

National Governors’ Association 

Mike Cohen 

Washington, D.C. 

National Parent-Teacher Association 

Ann Kahn 

Alexandria, Virginia 

National School Board Association 

Harriet C. Jelnek, Director 

Rhineland, Wisconsin 

Project Planning Committee 

Marilyn Adams 

BBN Laboratories 

Cambridge, Massachusetts 

Marsha Delain 

South Carolina Department of Education 

Columbia, South Carolina 

Lisa Delpit 

Institute for Urban Research 

Morgan State University 

Baltimore, Maryland 

William Feehan 

Chase Manhattan Bank 

New York, New York 

Philip Gough 

Department of Psychology 

University of Texas at Austin 

Austin, Texas 

Edward Haertel 

Stanford University 

Stanford, California 

60 
Reading Framework for the 2007 NAEP 

Elfrieda Hiebert 

School of Education 

University of Colorado 

Boulder, Colorado 

Janet Jones 

Charles County Public Schools 

Waldorf, Maryland 

Judith Langer 

School of Education 

State University of New York 

Albany, New York 

P. David Pearson 

University of Illinois 

College of Education 

Champaign, Illinois 

Charles Peters 

Oakland Schools 

Pontiac, Michigan 

John P. Pikulski 

College of Education 

University of Delaware 

Newark, Delaware 

Keith Stanovich 

Oakland University 

Rochester, Michigan 

Sheila Valencia 

University of Washington 

Seattle, Washington 

Paul Randy Walker 

Maine Department of Education 

Augusta, Maine 

NAEP Reading Project Staff 

Barbara Kapinus 

Framework Author 

Diane Schilder 

Project Associate 

Ramsay W. Selden 

Project Director 

61