Calculators in Testing Situations: Results and Implications from National Assessment

1981 ◽  
Vol 28 (5) ◽  
pp. 34-37
Author(s):  
Thomas P. Carpenter ◽  
Mary Kay Corbitt ◽  
Henry S. Kepner ◽  
Mary Montgomery Lindquist ◽  
Robert E. Reys
Keyword(s):  
Mathematics Curriculum ◽  
Mathematics Assessment ◽  
Educational Progress ◽  
Mathematics Proficiency ◽  
National Assessment ◽  
School Settings ◽  
Widespread Access ◽  
Hand Calculator

Calculators are fast becoming a common and welcome computation tool in our society. The 1977–78 mathematics assessment of the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) revealed that over 75 percent of the 9-year-olds, 80 percent of the 13-year-olds, and 85 percent of the 17-year-olds bad access to at least one hand calculator. Clearly, calculators are available. Despite this widespread access to calculators, many questions regarding their use remain unanswered: How will calculators affect the mathematics proficiency of our youth? Should they be used in school settings? Will they alter the mathematics curriculum? (Suydam 1976, Esty and Payne 1976).

Results and implications of the NAEP mathematics assessment: elementary school

1975 ◽  
Vol 22 (6) ◽  
pp. 438-450
Author(s):  
Thomas P. Carpenter ◽  
Terrence G. Coburn ◽  
Robert E. Reys ◽  
James W. Wilson
Keyword(s):  
Elementary School ◽  
Age Groups ◽  
General Information ◽  
Mathematics Assessment ◽  
Educational Progress ◽  
National Assessment

The National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) has now reported its first mathematics assessment.* This article will examine the NAEP mathematics assessment for the two youngest age groups: 9-year-olds and 13-year-olds. The mathematics assessment was done in 1972-73 and will be repeated each five years, with about half of the exercises repeated from one assessment to the next. Previous articles in the Arithmetic Teacher (Foreman and Mehrens, 1968; Martin and Wilson, 1974) have provided information on the nature of the exercises, the procedures for assessment, the purposes of assessment, and general information on NAEP.

Using research in teaching: Notes from National Assessment: processes used on computational exercises

1976 ◽  
Vol 23 (3) ◽  
pp. 217-222
Author(s):  
Thomas P. Carpenter ◽  
Terrence G. Coburn ◽  
Robert E. Reys ◽  
James W. Wilson
Keyword(s):  
Mathematics Assessment ◽  
Educational Progress ◽  
National Assessment ◽  
Assessment And Evaluation ◽  
Evaluation Measures

Most assessment and evaluation measures check only for the result or answer obtained in a computation or in solving a problem. This note examines exercises from the Mathematics Assessment of the National Assessment of Educational Progress designed to examine some of the processes students use in doing computations, along with measuring their computation performance.

Results of The Second NAEP Mathematics Assessment: Secondary School

1980 ◽  
Vol 73 (5) ◽  
pp. 329-338 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas P. Carpenter ◽  
Mary Kay Corbitt ◽  
Henry S. Kepner ◽  
Mary Montgomery Lindquist ◽  
Robert Reys
Keyword(s):  
Secondary School ◽  
Mathematics Assessment ◽  
Educational Progress ◽  
National Assessment ◽  
School Year ◽  
Educational Attainments ◽  
Comprehensive Data ◽  
Measure Change

The National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) completed its second mathematics assessment during the 197778 school year. The two major goals of the assessment are to make available comprehensive data on specific educational attainments of young Americans and to measure change in their educational attainments.

Secondary School Results for the Fourth NAEP Mathematics Assessment: Discrete Mathematics, Data Organization and Interpretation, Measurement, Number and Operations

1988 ◽  
Vol 81 (4) ◽  
pp. 241-248
Author(s):  
Catherine A. Brown ◽  
Thomas P. Carpenter ◽  
Vicky L. Kouba ◽  
Mary M. Lindquist ◽  
Edward A. Silver ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Elementary School ◽  
Secondary School ◽  
Mathematics Teacher ◽  
Mathematics Assessment ◽  
Discrete Mathematics ◽  
Data Organization ◽  
Seventh Grade ◽  
Educational Progress ◽  
National Assessment

This article is the first of two articles reporting on the seventh-grade and eleventh- grade results of the fourth mathematics assessment of the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) administered in 1986. The elementary school results appear in companion articles in the Arithmetic Teacher (Kouba et al. 1988a, 1988b). Secondary school data from previous national assessments have been reported in the Mathematics Teacher (see, e. g., Carpenter et al. [1980, 1983))

Decimals: Results and Implications from National Assessment

1981 ◽  
Vol 28 (8) ◽  
pp. 34-37
Author(s):  
Thomas P. Carpenter ◽  
Mary Kay Corbitt ◽  
Henry S. Kepner ◽  
Mary Montgomery Lindquist ◽  
Robert E. Reys
Keyword(s):  
Elementary School ◽  
Mathematics Assessment ◽  
School Mathematics ◽  
Educational Progress ◽  
National Assessment ◽  
Elementary School Mathematics ◽  
Formal Instruction ◽  
Common Fractions ◽  
Metric Measurement ◽  
Insight Into

Decimals are receiving more as well as earlier emphasis in today's elementary school mathematics programs. The increased use of calculators and metric measurement coupled with a reexamination of the appropriateness of the scope and sequence of common fractions provide impetus for such a change. The results of the second mathematics assessment of the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) can help us make this change effectively. They give some indication of how 9-year-olds handled decimals prior to much formal instruction and insight into areas of difficulty for 13-year-olds who have received instruction.

Secondary School Results for the Fourth NAEP Mathematics Assessment: Algebra, Geometry, Mathematical Methods, and Attitudes

1988 ◽  
Vol 81 (5) ◽  
pp. 337-397
Author(s):  
Catherine A. Brown ◽  
Thomas P. Carpenter ◽  
Vicky L. Kouba ◽  
Mary M. Lindquist ◽  
Edward A. Silver ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Secondary School ◽  
Mathematics Assessment ◽  
Discrete Mathematics ◽  
Data Organization ◽  
Seventh Grade ◽  
Educational Progress ◽  
Mathematical Methods ◽  
National Assessment ◽  
Mathematics Course

This article is the second of two articles reporting on the seventh-grade and eleventh-grade results of the fourth mathematics assessment of the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) administered in 1986. The first article (Brown et al. 1988) presented the background, methodology, and the results of students' performance on discrete mathematics, data organization and interpretation, number and operations, and measurement. This article reports students' performance on variables and relations, geometry, fundamental methods of mathematics, and attitudes. An analysis of eleventh-grade students' performance by mathematics course background was possible, and these data will be reported here where appropriate.

Soundoff: High School Geometry Should Be a Laboratory Course

1990 ◽  
Vol 83 (1) ◽  
pp. 4-5
Author(s):  
Ernest Woodward
Keyword(s):  
High School ◽  
Mathematics Assessment ◽  
Pythagorean Theorem ◽  
Educational Progress ◽  
National Assessment ◽  
Laboratory Course ◽  
High School Geometry ◽  
School Geometry

Present day instruction in geometry is ineffective. Results of the fourth mathematics assessment of the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) (Brown et al. 1988) indicate that fewer than half the eleventh-grade students who had taken geometry could apply the Pythagorean theorem in a routine problem and that fewer than a third of these students could find the perimeter of a rhombus drawn on grid paper. Eleventh-grade students who had taken geometry performed only slightly better on spatialvisualization tasks than eleventh-grade students who had not taken geometry.

scholarly journals Academic Performance of New Jersey's Public Schools

1994 ◽  
Vol 2 ◽  
pp. 10 ◽  
Author(s):  
Howard Wainer
Keyword(s):  
Academic Performance ◽  
Public Schools ◽  
New Jersey ◽  
Public School ◽  
School Children ◽  
Mathematics Assessment ◽  
Educational Progress ◽  
National Assessment

Data from the 1992 National Assessment of Educational Progress are used to compare the performance of New Jersey public school children with those from other participating states. The comparisons are made with the raw means scores and after standardizing all state scores to a common (National U.S.) demographic mixture. It is argued that for most plausible questions about the performance of public schools the standardized scores are more useful. Also, it is shown that if New Jersey is viewed as an independent nation, its students finished sixth among all the nations participating in the 1991 International Mathematics Assessment.

The Third National Mathematics Assessment: Results and Implications for Elementary and Middle Schools

1983 ◽  
Vol 31 (4) ◽  
pp. 14-19
Author(s):  
Mary Montgomery Lindquist ◽  
Thomas P. Carpenter ◽  
Edward A. Silver ◽  
Westina Matthews
Keyword(s):  
Middle Schools ◽  
Student Performance ◽  
Primary Source ◽  
Mathematics Assessment ◽  
Educational Progress ◽  
National Assessment ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Third ◽  
Assessment Results

The public has renewed interest and concern about education and those of usin the field must be prepared to answer question. One of the question is usually related to student performance. The National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) is a primary source to which we can turn for support of our answer.

Using research in teaching: Subtraction: what do students know?

1975 ◽  
Vol 22 (8) ◽  
pp. 653-657
Author(s):  
Thomas P. Carpenter ◽  
Terrence G. Coburn ◽  
Robert E. Reys ◽  
James W. Wilson
Keyword(s):  
Young Adults ◽  
Age Groups ◽  
Mathematics Assessment ◽  
Educational Progress ◽  
National Assessment ◽  
Performance Levels ◽  
National Performance ◽  
Better Than

How well do pupils subtract? One would expect 13-year-olds to do much better than 9-year-old, but would they make similar errors? How would the performance of 17-year-olds and young adults on subtraction problems compare with other age groups? Are pupils today subtracting better or worse than similar pupils were years ago? These and other questions will be considered in this article that reports national performance levels of various age groups on selected subtraction problems used in the 1972–73 mathematics assessment of the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP).

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document