Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools Science Grade 8 2009 Public Schools Trial Urba n Dis tr ict Snap sh ot Rep or t 2009 Science Assessment Content Scores at Selected Percentiles Guided by a new framework, the NAEP science assessment was updated in 2009 to keep the content current with key developments in science, curriculum standards, assessments, and research. The 2009 framework organizes science content into three broad content areas. Physical science includes concepts related to properties and changes of matter, forms of energy, energy transfer and conservation, position and motion of objects, and forces affecting motion. Life science includes concepts related to organization and development, matter and energy transformations, interdependence, heredity and reproduction, and evolution and diversity. Earth and space sciences includes concepts related to objects in the universe, the history of the Earth, properties of Earth materials, tectonics, energy in Earth systems, climate and weather, and biogeochemical cycles. The 2009 science assessment was composed of 143 questions at NOTE: Scores at selected percentiles on the NAEP science scale indicate grade 4, 162 at grade 8, and 179 at grade 12. Students responded to how well students at lower, middle, and higher levels performed. only a portion of the questions, which included both multiple-choice questions and questions that required a written response. Overall Results Achievement-Level Percentages and Average Score Results „ In 2009, the average score of eighth-grade students in Charlotte was 141. This was higher than the average score of 134 for public school students in large cities. „ The percentage of students in Charlotte who performed at or above the NAEP Proficient level was 22 percent in 2009. This percentage was greater than large cities (17 percent). „ The percentage of students in Charlotte who performed at or above the NAEP Basic level was 52 percent in 2009. This percentage was greater than large cities (44 percent). * Significantly different (p < .05) from Charlotte. Significance tests were performed using unrounded numbers. NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Large city (public) includes public schools located in the urbanized areas of cities with populations of 250,000 or more. Results for Student Groups in 2009 Score Gaps for Student Groups Percentages at „ In 2009, male students in Charlotte had an average score Percent of Avg. or above Percent at that was not significantly different from female students. Reporting Groups students score Basic Proficient Advanced „ In 2009, Black students had an average score that was 41 Gender points lower than White students. This performance gap Male 49 142 54 24 2 Female 51 140 50 20 1 was not significantly different from large cities (39 points). Race/Ethnicity „ In 2009, Hispanic students had an average score that was White 32 167 83 49 3 36 points lower than White students. This performance gap Black 46 126 34 7 # was not significantly different from large cities (33 points). Hispanic 15 131 40 11 # Asian/Pacific Islander 4 ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ „ In 2009, students who were eligible for free/reduced-price American Indian/Alaska Native 1 ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ school lunch, an indicator of low family income, had an National School Lunch Program average score that was 29 points lower than students who Eligible 47 126 34 7 # were not eligible for free/reduced-price school lunch. This Not eligible 51 155 69 35 2 performance gap was not significantly different from large cities (27 points). # Rounds to zero. ‡ Reporting standards not met. NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding, and because the "Information not available" category for the National School Lunch Program, which provides free/reduced-price lunches, and the "Unclassified" category for race/ethnicity are not displayed. NOTE: Statistical comparisons are calculated on the basis of unrounded scale scores or percentages. SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2009 Science Assessment.