National Summary

**
School and Teacher Demographics
Per pupil expenditures
(CCD, 2000-01, 50 states and D.C. only)

Student Demographics
Public school enrollment (CCD)
Pre-K K-8 9-12 Total (K-12)
○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

Statewide Accountability Information
(Collected from states, January 2002 for 2001-02 school year)

$7,376 14,644

Number of districts
(CCD, 2001-02)

1993-94 557,199 30,898,963 11,874,986 42,773,949
○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

2001-02 701,753 33,169,955 13,765,914 46,935,869
○ ○ ○ ○ ○

Statewide Goal for Schools on State Assessment
Forty-two states have established a goal.

Expected School Improvement on Assessment
Thirty-six states have set a target.

(CCD, 2001-02)


○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

Number of charter schools Number of public schools
Elementary Middle High Combined Total

2,322

Race/ethnicity^
(CCD, 50 states and D.C.)

1993-94 1% 4 17 13 66 —

2001-02 1% 4 17 18 59 — 2001-02 11%
○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

(CCD)

Title I Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) Target for Schools
Seventeen states are using the same goal as the state.

1993-94 50,759 14,255 14,251 2,294 81,559
(CCD)

2001-02 53,364 16,012 17,662 4,746 91,784 2001-02 1,376,504 575,029 767,140 82,001 2,800,674
○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

American Indian/Alaskan Natives Asian/Pacific Islander Black Hispanic White Other

Title I 2001-02
(ED Consolidated Report, 2001-02)

Schoolwide Targeted Total Programs Assistance

Number of schools Schools meeting AYP goal Schools identified for improvement

Title I allocation

$9,322,030,790

(ED/NCBE, 2000-01, 50 states and D.C.)
○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

Percentage of teachers with a major in the main subject taught, grades 7-12 (SASS, 50 states and D.C.)
English Math Science Social Studies 1994 78% 72 74 80 2000 70% 67 75 78

(Includes Basic, Concentration, and LEA grants, Capital Expenditures, Even Start, Migrant Education, and Neglected and Delinquent, ED, 2001-02)

Migratory students (OME)
○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

1993-94 1%
○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

2000-01 3%
○ ○ ○ ○

Sources of funding
District average
(CCD, 2000-01)

All schools by percent of students eligible to participate in the Free and Reduced-Price Lunch Program^ (CCD, 2001-02)

High school dropout rate^ Postsecondary enrollment

1993-94
5% 58%

2000-01
5% 63%

Federal 7% State 50%
KEY: * = Less than 0.5 percent — = Not applicable KEY: n/a = Not available # = Sample size too small to calculate ^ = Interpret with caution, total does not include all states or districts

50-74% 75-100%

17,015 13,721

Local 43% Intermediate ^ ^ *

0-34% 35-49% 13,763

36,471

NAEP National Results
Reading, 2003 Proficient level and above Basic level and above Math, 2003 Proficient level and above Basic level and above
^^

Grade 4 30% 62%

Grade 8 30% 72%

33% 77%

27% 66%

**Totals include 50 states, plus the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico unless otherwise noted. Intermediate is defined in the Common Core of Data. See Sources for more information.

F O R

M O R E

I N F O R M A T I O N ,

R E F E R

T O

S O U R C E S ,

P A G E

1 1 7

Students with limited English proficiency

1993-94 7%

2001-02 8%

Elementary Middle School High School Combined Total
○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

1993-94 1,186,330 473,029 638,884 64,235 2,362,478
○ ○ ○ ○

(OSEP, 2000-01, 50 states and D.C.)

Number of FTE teachers^

Students with disabilities

1993-94 10%

24,685 51% 17,458 48% 4,435 72%

23,853 48,538 49% 100% 18,550 36,008 52% 74% 1,720 6,147 28% 13%


○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

1

Standards and Assessments
Table 1: State Progress toward Development of Accountability System, 2001-02
State
Alabama Alaska Arizona Arkansas California Colorado Connecticut Delaware District of Columbia Florida Georgia Hawaii Idaho Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maine Maryland Massachusetts Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska Nevada

Core Content Standards
M, S, E, SSt M, E/LA, H M, S, LA, SSt M, S, LA, H/SSt M, S, E, SSt M, S, E/LA, SSt M, S, E/LA, SSt M, S, E, SSt M, S, E, SSt M, S, LA, SSt M, S, E/LA, SSt (1999) M, S, LA, SSt M, S, LA, SSt M, S, E/LA, SSt M, S, E/LA, SSt M, S, R (Local Decision) M, S, LA, SSt (Kansas Assessment) M, S, SSt M, S, E/LA, SSt M, S, E/LA, SSt M, S, E/LA, SSt M, S, E, H/SSt M, S, E/LA, SSt M, S, LA, SSt M, S, LA, SSt M, S, LA, SSt M, S, E/LA, SSt M, S, E/LA, SSt, Reading/Writing M, S, E/LA, SSt

State Assessment*

Student Achievement Levels
2 4 4 4 5 4 4 5 4 5 3 3 4 4 4 2 3 5 4 5 4 3 4 3R, 4M and high school 4 4 5 4 2 4 2

Years of Consistent Data
— — — — 2 6 3 4 — — 3 — — — 4 — 2 3 4 — 4 7 3 — 5 — 5 2 — — —

Alabama High School Graduation Exam California Achievement Test Arizona’s Instrument to Measure Standards Arkansas Benchmark Exam California Standards Tests Student Assessment Program CMT/CAPT Delaware Student Testing Program Stanford 9 Florida Comprehensive Assessment Test Georgia Criterion-Referenced Competency Tests Georgia High School Graduation Tests Hawaii Content and Performance Standards II ITBS and TAP Illinois Standards Achievement Test Statewide Testing for Educational Progress Plus Iowa Tests of Basic Skills, Iowa Test of Ed. Dev. Kansas Math/Reading Assessment Kentucky Core Content Test Louisiana Educational Assessment Program Maine Educational Assessment Md. School Performance Assessment Program Massachusetts Comprehensive Assessment System MEAP Essential Skills Minnesota Comprehensive Assessment Mississippi Curriculum Test, Subject Area Test Missouri Assessment Program Iowa Tests of Basic Skills Multiple Assessment Tools Nevada Criterion-Referenced Exam High School Proficiency Exam

KEY:

2

M S E/LA SSt H —

= = = = = =

Mathematics Science English or Language Arts Social Studies History Not applicable

State
New Hampshire New Jersey New Mexico New York North Carolina North Dakota Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Puerto Rico Rhode Island South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Texas Utah Vermont Virginia Washington West Virginia Wisconsin Wyoming Nation (50 states plus
D.C. & P.R.)

Core Content Standards
M, S, E/LA, SSt M, S, LA, SSt M, S, LA, SSt M, S, E/LA, SSt M, S, E/LA M, S, E, SSt M, E M, S, LA, SSt M, S, E M, E/LA M, E/LA M, S, E/LA, SSt M, S, E/LA, SSt M, S, E/LA, SSt M, S, E, SSt, M, S, E/LA, SSt SSt M, S, LA, H/SSt M, SSt M, S, SSt, LA M, S, E, SSt M, S, E/LA, SSt M, S, E/LA, SSt M 51 states, E/LA 48 states S 46 states, SSt/H 46 states

State Assessment*

Student Achievement Levels

Years of Consistent Data

Ed. Improvement and Assessment Program 4 7 New Jersey Proficiency Test 3 4 New Mexico Achievement Assessment — — English Language Arts and Math, Regents 4 — North Carolina End of Grade/Course Test 4 7 North Dakota State Assessment 4 — Ohio Proficiency Test 3 2 Oklahoma Core Curriculum Test 4 3 Oregon Statewide Assessment System 3 2 Pennsylvania System of School Assessment 4 2 Prueba Puertoriquena Competencias 3 — New Standards Reference Exams 5 — Palmetto Achievement Challenge Test 4 4 Stanford Achievement Test, Version 9 4 2 Comprehensive Achiev. Program, Gateway Test 5 — Texas Assessment of Academic Skills 3 7 Utah Criterion Reference Test 4 — New Standards Reference Exams 5 — Virginia Standards of Learning Test 3 5 Washington Assessment of Student Learning 4 2 Stanford Achievement Test, Version 9 — — Wisconsin Knowledge and Concept Examination 5 4 Wyoming Comprehensive Assessment System 4 — 3 levels: 11 states, 4 levels: 28 states < 4 years: 39 states 5 levels: 9 states > = 4 years: 14 states

*More information on assessments can be found in state profiles beginning on page 12. Core Content Standards Source: Key State Education Policies on K-12 Education 2002, CCSSO, 2003. Results from the 2002 CCSSO Policies and Practices Survey. As of spring 2002, Title I requirements for developing content standards for Reading or English Language Arts and Mathematics have been met by 49 states, the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico.

State Assessment; Student Achievement Levels Source: State assessment results submitted in the Consolidated Report, Section B, 2001-02, and follow-up by CCSSO with the State Education Accountability Reports and Indicator Reports: Status of Reports across the States, 2003 Years of Consistent Data Source: State assessment results submitted in the Consolidated Report, Section B, 2001-02, and follow-up by CCSSO. Note: Years of consistent data indicates at least one subject and grade in the state provides a trend. See state profiles beginning on page 12 for more details.

F O R

M O R E

I N F O R M A T I O N ,

R E F E R

T O

S O U R C E S ,

P A G E

1 1 7

3

Student Achievement by Category
Table 2: Availability of Student Achievement Results by Disaggregated Category,* 2001-02
High School Grade 11 10 10 R:11/M:9-12 10 10 10 10 9-11 10 11 10 10 11 10 11 R:11/M:10 R:10/M:11 10 11 — 10 11 — R:9-12 R:11/M:10 11 11 11 10 11 — HS Limited Economically English Disadvantaged Proficient X X — X X X X X X X — X — X X X X X X — X — — X X X X — X X X — X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X — X X X X X X X X X X

State Alabama Alaska Arizona Arkansas California Colorado Connecticut Delaware Dist. of Columbia Florida Georgia Hawaii Idaho Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maine Maryland Massachusetts Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska Nevada New Hampshire New Jersey New Mexico New York

Elementary Grade — 3 3 4 4 R:4/M:5 4 3 3-6 4 4 3 4 3 3 4 R:5/M:4 R:4/M:5 4 4 3 4 4 3 4 3 4 4 3 3 4 — 4

Middle Grade — 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 7-8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 R:8/M:7 R:7/M:8 8 8 8 R:7/M:8 R:7/M:8 — 8 R:7/M:8 8 8 — 6 8 — 8

All Students X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X

Title I — X X — X X X X X X X X X X X — X X — X X — — — — X — — — X X X X

Migratory X X X X X X X X X X X X X X — X X X — X X — — X X X X — X X X — X

Disabled X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X — X X X X X X X X X X

Race/ Ethnicity X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X — X X — X X

Gender X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X — X X — X X

4

State North Carolina North Dakota Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Puerto Rico Rhode Island South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Texas Utah Vermont Virginia Washington West Virginia Wisconsin Wyoming Nation

Elementary Grade 4 4 4 5 3 5 3, 6, 9,11 4 4 4 3-8 4 R:4/M:3 4 3 4 — 4 4 49

Middle Grade 8 8 6 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 7 8 8 7 — 8 8 47

High School Grade 9 12 — R:10 10 11 10 — 11 — 10 11 10 — 10 — 10 11 44

All Students X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 52

Title I X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 42

Limited Economically English Disadvantaged Proficient X X X X — X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 44 X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 51

Migratory X X X X X X X — X X X X X X X X X X X 45

Disabled X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 51

Race/ Ethnicity X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 50

Gender X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 50

(50 states, D.C., P.R.)

Source: U.S. Department of Education, Consolidated Performance Report, Section B, 2001-02, and State Student Assessment Programs Annual Survey 2002, CCSSO. *Note: X indicates the indicator is available; — indicates it is not R:#/M:# indicates results were disaggregated for # grade reading or mathematics only. Reading: R, Mathematics: M. Results published in this table may not represent data reported in the individual state profiles that follow. Differences are due to the fact that although states may have collected achievement data by subgroup, they did not necessarily report the disaggregated data to the U.S. Department of Education in their Consolidated Performance Report as this information was not required for the 2001-02 school year.

F O R

M O R E

I N F O R M A T I O N ,

R E F E R

T O

S O U R C E S ,

P A G E

1 1 7

5

Summary of Student Performance 2001-02
Table 3: Summary by State of Students at Proficient Level or Higher, by State Definition

State
Alabama a Alaska Arizonab Arkansas b California Colorado Connecticut Delaware District of Columbia Florida Georgia Hawaii Idahob Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maine Maryland Massachusetts Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska Nevada New Hampshire

Elementary* Reading Math
— 75% — — 36% 61% 69% 80% 26% 27% 77% 61% — 63% 66% 69% 63% 60% 57% 49% 32% 54% 57% 49% 84% 36% 73% 62% 51% 41% — 71% — — 37% 55% 80% 72% 26% 19% 66% 65% — 74% 70% 72% 67% 36% 50% 23% 29% 39% 65% 48% 72% 38% 69% 78% 50% 39%

Middle School* Reading Math
— 82% — — 32% 65% 78% 72% 21% 17% 80% 54% — 68% 68% 69% 67% 56% 48% 43% 25% 64% 51% — 48% 32% 71% 60% — 28% — 40% — — 20% 39% 77% 48% 11% 22% 65% 52% — 52% 66% 73% 56% 26% 41% 21% 37% 34% 53% — 45% 14% 68% 72% — 28%

State Term for Proficient*
Proficient Meets Standard Proficient Proficient Proficient Proficient Meets Standard Proficient Level 4 Met Standard Proficient Proficient Meets Standards Pass Proficient Level 3 Proficient Basic Proficient Proficient Proficient Satisfactory/Met Standard Level III Proficient Proficient Proficient Proficient Meets Standard Proficient

Key: — indicates the indicator is not available. See applicable footnote for reason. *Please see each state’s profile for the grade and definition of proficient represented in the table. a Due to a change in tests, Alabama’s elementary and middle school assessment results were not reported by proficiency levels in 2001-02. b State did not report elementary or middle school percent proficient in the all students category.

6

State
New Jersey New Mexico b New York North Carolina North Dakota Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Puerto Rico
c

Elementary* Reading Math
79% — 61% 77% 74% 66% 63% 85% 57% 41% 34% 62% — 91% 80% 71% 66% — 79% 44% 68% — 67% 89% 57% 62% 63% 77% 53% 61% 36% 64% — 94% 74% 80% 52% — 69% 43%

Middle School* Reading Math
74% — 44% 85% 67% 56% 70% 64% 58% — 27% 68% — 94% 78% 70% 44% — 74% 38% 58% — 47% 83% 42% 59% 64% 58% 52% — 19% 33% — 93% 40% 70% 30% — 44% 33%

State Term for Proficient*
Proficient Level 3 Level III Proficient Proficient Satisfactory Meets Standard Proficient Proficient Achieved Standard Proficient Proficient Proficient Proficient Near Mastery Achieved Standard Pass/Proficient Meets Standards Proficient Proficient

Rhode Island d South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee b Texas Utah Vermont e Virginia Washington West Virginiaf Wisconsin Wyoming

Puerto Rico combines scores for grades 3, 6, 9, 11 for Reading Language Arts and for Mathematics. Rhode Island Achieved Standard: Grade 4 Reading: Analysis & Interpretation: 60%, Basic Understanding: 74%, Writing Effectiveness: 59%, Writing Conventions: 59%; Mathematical Concepts: 40%, Mathematical Problem Solving: 28%, Mathematical Skills: 66%; Grade 8 English Language Arts: Analysis & Interpretation: 26%, Basic Understanding: 50%, Writing Effectiveness: 55%, Writing Conventions: 45%; Mathematical Concepts: 23%, Mathematical Problem Solving: 27%, Mathematical Skills: 51%. e Vermont Achieved Standard: Grade 4 English & Language Arts: Reading Analysis & Interpretation: 67%, Reading Basic Understanding: 80%; Mathematical Concepts: 45%, Mathematical Problem Solving: 33%, Mathematical Skills: 71%; Grade 8 English & Language Arts: Reading Analysis & Interpretation: 41%, Reading Basic Understanding: 65%; Mathematical Concepts: 38%, Mathematical Problem Solving: 42%, Mathematical Skills: 69%. f West Virginia reported results in percentile ranks until the first administration of the WESTEST in 2003-04, as per their federal agreement.
d

c

F O R

M O R E

I N F O R M A T I O N ,

R E F E R

T O

S O U R C E S ,

P A G E

1 1 7

7

Student Achievement Trends
Table 4: Sample Student Achievement Trends, 1996-2002
Elementary Reading/Language Arts, Middle Grades Mathematics, Percentage of All Students at or Above Proficient by State Definition

State
California Colorado Connecticut Delaware Georgia Illinois Iowa Kansas Kentucky Maine Maryland Massachusetts Michigan Minnesota Missouri Montana

Grade

Test

Subject
English/Language Arts Reading Mathematics Reading Mathematics Reading Mathematics Reading Mathematics Reading Mathematics Reading Mathematics Reading Mathematics Reading Mathematics Reading Mathematics

State Term for Proficient*
Proficient Proficient Proficient Meets Standard Met Standard Meets Standards Proficient Level 3 Proficient Proficient Proficient Proficient Satisfactory Level III Proficient Proficient

1996
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – 35% 43% – – – – – – – –

1997
– 57% – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – 37% 46% – – 49% – – – – –

1998
– 57% – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – 42% 47% – – 59% 35% – 13% – –

1999
– 34% – – – – 36% – – 61% 43% – – – – 32% 33% 47% 19% 41% 49% – – 59% 40% 29% 11% – –

2000
– 60% 33% 71% 77% 77% 41% 65% 54% 62% 47% – – 62% 53% 57% 25% 45% 21% 40% 53% 20% 34% 58% 45% 32% 14% – –

2001
33% 63% 37% 71% 76% 75% 43% 74% 58% 62% 50% 68% 74% 63% 57% 58% 27% 51% 20% 37% 49% 51% 34% 60% 49% 32% 14% 79% 69%

2002
36% 61% 39% 69% 77% 80% 48% 77% 65% 63% 52% 69% 73% 63% 56% 60% 26% 49% 21% 32% 37% 54% 34% 57% 49% 36% 14% 73% 68%

4 California Standards Tests 4 Colo. Student Assmt. Program 8 4 Connecticut Mastery Test 8 3 Del. Student Testing Program 8 4 Criterion-Referenced Comp. Test 8 3 Illinois Standards Achievement Test 8 4 Iowa Tests of Basic Skills 8 5 Kansas Math/Reading Assmt. 7 4 Kentucky Core Content Test 8 4 8 3 8 4 8 4 3 3 8 4 8 School Performance Assmt. Program Maine Educational Assessment

Reading Mathematics Comprehensive Assessment System English Language Arts Mathematics Mich. Educational Assmt. Program Reading Minn. Comprehensive Assessment Reading Missouri Assessment Program Communication Arts Mathematics Iowa Tests of Basic Skills Reading Mathematics

8

State

Grade

Test

Subject

State Term for Proficient*
Proficient Proficient Level III Proficient Satisfactory Meets Standard Proficient Proficient Proficient Proficient Pass/Proficient Meets Standard Proficient

1996
29% 12% – – 69% 68% – – – – – – – – – – – – 78% 68% – – – – – –

1997
30% 11% – – 68% 69% – – – – – – – – – – – – 79% 72% – – – – – –

1998
24% 14% – – 71% 76% – – – – – – – – – – – – 89% 83% 54% – – – – –

1999
27% 15% 57% 62% 71% 78% – – – – – – – – 29% 15% – – 89% 88% 61% – – – 81% 43%

2000
38% 27% 55% 60% 72% 80% – – 68% 65% – – – – 37% 20% – – 91% 91% 61% 61% – – 78% 42%

2001
38% 26% 79% 62% 74% 80% 56% 61% 66% 63% 84% 55% 56% 51% 37% 18% 63% 33% 91% 93% 64% 68% 67% 27% 78% 39%

2002
41% 28% 79% 58% 77% 83% 66% 59% 63% 64% 85% 58% 57% 52% 34% 19% 62% 33% 91% 93% 71% 70% 66% 30% 79% 44%

New Hampshire New Jersey North Carolina Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania South Carolina South Dakota Texas Virginia Washington Wisconsin

3 Ed. Improvement & Assmt. Program English Language Arts 6 Mathematics 4 New Jersey Proficiency Test Language Arts Literacy 8 Mathematics 4 N.C. End of Grade/Course Test Reading 8 Mathematics 4 Ohio Proficiency Test Reading 6 Mathematics 5 Oklahoma Core Curriculum Test Reading 8 Mathematics 3 Oregon Statewide Assmt. System Reading 8 Mathematics 5 Penn. System of School Assmts. Reading 8 Mathematics 4 Palmetto Achiev. Challenge Test English Language Arts 8 Mathematics 4 Stanford 9 Reading 8 Mathematics 4 TAAS Reading 8 Mathematics 3 Virginia Standards of Learning English 8 Mathematics 4 Wash. Assmt. of Student Learning Reading 7 Mathematics 4 Wis. Knowledge and Concepts Exam. Reading 8 Mathematics

*Please see each state’s profile for the definition of proficient represented in the table. Source: Consolidated Performance Reports, 1995-96 through 2001-02, Section B, Submitted by states to the U.S. Department of Education, with edits by states.

F O R

M O R E

I N F O R M A T I O N ,

R E F E R

T O

S O U R C E S ,

P A G E

1 1 7

9

Undoubtedly we have no questions to ask which are unanswerable.
Ralph Waldo Emerson, Nature, 1836

10