Report of Student Performance in Writing - · PDF fileReport of Student Performance in Writing on The North Carolina General Writing Assessment Grades 4, 7, 10 North Carolina Checklist

The North Carolina General Writing Assessment Grades 4, 7, 10 North Carolina Checklist of Academic Standards (NCCLAS) Grades 4, 7, 10 NCEXTEND2

NCEXTEND2 EOG Grades 4 and 7 NCEXTEND2 OCS Grade 10 NCEXTEND1 Grades 4, 7, 10

North CarolinaTesting Program

Reportof

Student Performancein

Writing

Published December 2007

Public Schools of North CarolinaState Board of EducationDepartment of Public InstructionAccountability Services/Test Development SectionRaleigh, North Carolina 27601-2825www.ncpublicschools.org/accountability/testing

2006-07

on

STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION HOWARD N. LEE Chairman :: Raleigh WAYNE MCDEVITT Vice Chair :: Asheville BEVERLY PERDUE Lieutenant Governor :: New Bern RICHARD MOORE State Treasurer :: Kittrell

KATHY A. TAFT Greenville KEVIN D. HOWELL Raleigh SHIRLEY E. HARRIS Troy EULADA P. WATT Charlotte

ROBERT “TOM” SPEED Boone MELISSA E. BARTLETT Raleigh JOHN A. TATE III Charlotte PATRICIA N. WILLOUGHBY Raleigh

NC DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION June St. Clair Atkinson, Ed.D., State Superintendent 301 N. Wilmington Street :: Raleigh, North Carolina 27601-2825 In compliance with federal law, NC Public Schools administers all state-operated educational programs, employment activities and admissions without discrimination because of race, religion, national or ethnic origin, color, age, military service, disability, or gender, except where exemption is appropriate and allowed by law.

Inquiries or complaints regarding discrimination issues should be directed to: Robert Logan, Associate State Superintendent :: Office of Innovation and School Transformation 6301 Mail Service Center :: Raleigh, NC 27699-6301 :: Telephone 919-807-3200 :: Fax 919-807-4065

Visit us on the Web:: www.ncpublicschools.org

Report of

Student Performance

in Writing

on The North Carolina General Writing Assessment Grades 4, 7, 10

North Carolina Checklist of Academic Standards (NCCLAS) Grades 4, 7, 10 NCEXTEND2 EOG Grades 4 and 7

NCEXTEND2 OCS Grade 10 NCEXTEND1 Grades 4, 7, 10

2006-07

Published December 2007 Public Schools of North Carolina State Board of Education Department of Public Instruction Accountability Services/Test Development Section Raleigh, North Carolina 27601-2825 www.ncpublicschools.org/accountability/testing

© 2007 All rights reserved. This document may not be reproduced by any means, in whole or in part, without prior written permission from the North Carolina Department of Public Instruction, Division of Accountability Services, Raleigh, North Carolina 27601-2825.

Report of Student Performance in Writing, Grades 4, 7, and 10, 2006-07

Acknowledgments

This report is the collaborative work of many individuals. The North Carolina Testing Program is conducted by the North Carolina Department of Public Instruction (NCDPI), Division of Accountability Services. Mildred Bazemore, Jim Kroening, and Charles Lanier in the North Carolina Test Development Section, directed the design of the report. Technical support services for the program are implemented in collaboration with the Center for Urban Affairs and Community Services at North Carolina State University under the Technical Outreach for Public Schools (TOPS) program. Staff at TOPS conducted the required analyses and report production. At TOPS we thank Erin Bohner, Sheila Brown, Betty Marsh, Amy Powell-Moman, Anthony Wells, and Akia Beverly-Worsley for assistance in creating tables and figures, and Karin Wolfe for verifying data accuracy, and coordinating report editing and production. We also thank the personnel in the state’s Regional Accountability Centers and Local Education Agencies for their conscientious efforts in administering the tests and verifying the data. This publication and the information contained within must not be used for personal or financial gain. North Carolina LEA school officials and teachers, parents, and students may download and duplicate this publication for instructional and educational purposes only. Others may not duplicate this publication without prior written permission from the North Carolina Department of Public Instruction (NCDPI) Division of Accountability Services/Test Development Section.

i

North Carolina Testing Program 2006-07

Report of Student Performance in Writing Grades 4, 7, and 10

Table of Contents

Introduction ......................................................................................................................................... 1 Section I 2006-07 North Carolina Writing Assessment (General), State-Level Summary Statistics, Grade 4 .................................................................................................................................................. 7 Grade 4 Sample Student Responses–North Carolina Writing Assessment (General) ........................ 39 Grade 4 Sample Student Responses–North Carolina Writing Assessment (NCEXTEND2) ............ 55 2006-07 North Carolina Writing Assessment (General), Grade 4, Regional by LEA Performance ............................................................................................................................... 71 Section II 2006-07 North Carolina Writing Assessment (General), State-Level Summary Statistics, Grade 7 ................................................................................................................................................ 87 Grade 7 Sample Student Responses–North Carolina Writing Assessment (General) ...................... 119 Grade 7 Sample Student Responses–North Carolina Writing Assessment (NCEXTEND2) ........... 135 2006-07 North Carolina Writing Assessment (General), Grade 7, Regional by LEA Performance ............................................................................................................................. 153 Section III 2006-07 North Carolina Writing Assessment (General), State-Level Summary Statistics, Grade 10.......................................................................................................................................... ..169 Grade 10 Sample Student Responses–North Carolina Writing Assessment (General) .................... 201 Grade 10 Sample Student Responses–North Carolina Writing Assessment (NCEXTEND2 OCS) ..................................................................................................................... ..217 2006-07 North Carolina Writing Assessment, Grade 10, Regional by LEA Performance............... 231 Section IV Appendices........................................................................................................................................ 247

ii

Section IV (continued) Appendix A: North Carolina Writing Assessment (General) - Grade Levels and Types of Writing by Year ............................................................................................................................ 245 Appendix B: 1992-93 to 2006-07 Percent of Students Scoring At or Above Level III, North Carolina Writing Assessment (General and Alternates), Grade 4 .................................................... 253 Appendix C: 1995-96 to 2006-07 Percent of Students Scoring At or Above Level III, North Carolina Writing Assessment (General and Alternates), Grade 7 .................................................... 257 Appendix D: 1991-92 to 2006-07 Percent of Students Scoring At or Above Level III, North Carolina Writing Assessment (General and Alternates), Grade 10 .................................................. 261 Appendix E: List of North Carolina Charter Schools, 2006-07..................................................... 265 Appendix F: 2006-07 North Carolina Writing Advisory Committee ............................................ 269


1

INTRODUCTION

The North Carolina Department of Public Instruction (NCDPI) Testing Section, NCDPI English/language arts, and North Carolina State University-Technical Outreach for Public Schools (NCSU-TOPS) staff met in September of 2001 and began the process that would result in new writing assessments and scoring procedures for grades 4, 7, and 10. Writing committees for each grade level were established that included general education teachers, ESL teachers, exceptional children teachers, curriculum supervisors, principals, and university faculty. The North Carolina Writing Assessment Scoring Model was developed by NCDPI Testing Section and NCSU-TOPS staff, refined by the Writing Assessment Advisory Committees, and approved by the State Board of Education (SBE) on January 9, 2003.

A pilot administration of the North Carolina Writing Assessment at Grades 4, 7, and 10 was administered in March 2003 to all eligible students. The students in grades 4 and 7 received 75 minutes to respond to the pilot prompt; students in grade 10 received 100 minutes. The writing assessments, the scoring model, and Achievement Level ranges were revised to reflect (1) changes in the English/language arts curriculum emphasis and focus, and (2) the need to enhance the data analysis processes associated with the writing assessments. Changes to the North Carolina Writing Assessment at Grades 4, 7, and 10 were initiated effective with the 2002-03 school year to reflect the revisions to the English/language arts curriculum adopted by the SBE (1999), the recommendations of the Writing Assessment Task Force (2001), and the recommendations of the SBE Ad Hoc Writing Committee (2002). In response to the Reauthorization of Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), the North Carolina Testing Program added a system of assessments for students with disabilities effective with the 2000–01 school year. Initially, the system focused on a portfolio for students with significant cognitive disabilities and was later expanded to include a checklist, the North Carolina Alternate Assessment Academic Inventory (NCAAAI), for other students with disabilities who, due to the nature of their disability, were not able to access the general assessment with the approved accommodations. For students with disabilities, the NCAAAI was used as either an on-grade-level or off-grade-level assessment. In January 2002, President Bush signed into law the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB) which requires students identified as limited English proficient (LEP) to participate in the state assessment program using grade-level assessments. Subsequently, the State Board of Education designated the NCAAAI, administered on grade level, as the alternate assessment for students identified as LEP who met eligibility criteria based on language proficiency and years in U.S. schools. Effective with the 2005–06 school year, the state implemented several changes in the North Carolina Testing Program as a result of changes in regulations and impending decisions by the United States Department of Education (USED). Because the USED no longer permitted students to be assessed off-grade level, the NCAAAI was discontinued. The North Carolina Checklist of Academic Standards (NCCLAS) was created to fulfill the requirements mandated by IDEA and NCLB. In 2006-07 the NCAAP was also discontinued and the NCEXTEND1 assessment was created under federal NCLB mandates.


2

Introduction (continued) In 2005-06, in response to guidance from the USED, the NCDPI created an additional assessment, the NCEXTEND2. The NCEXTEND2 is designed to measure student performance for some students with disabilities based on grade-level modified achievement standards. The NCEXTEND2 may be used as an assessment for writing at grades 4, 7 and grade 10 Occupational Course of Study (OCS). Students are permitted to use approved accommodations during the administration of the NCEXTEND2 Writing Assessment. NCCLAS Writing Assessment at Grades 4, 7 and 10 The North Carolina Checklist of Academic Standards (NCCLAS) for writing is a grade-level academic assessment in which teachers utilize a checklist to evaluate student performance on grade-level specific writing standards. Student work samples are collected throughout the academic year and are evaluated based on a scoring rubric during the final scoring assessment period completed during the final thirty (30) calendar days of school. Final overall goal scores are recorded and are submitted in an online format during the final thirty (30) calendar days of school. Student profiles are completed at the beginning of the assessment period and during the final assessment period. Final goal scoring is completed by two assessors. This process (1) involves a representative and deliberate collection of student work/information, (2) allows the assessor to make judgments about what a student knows and is able to do, and (3) measures student performance based on specific objectives from the North Carolina Standard Course of Study (NCSCS). The NCCLAS Writing Assessment is available to students with disabilities and NCSCS students with limited English proficiency who meet specific eligibility requirements. NCEXTEND2 Writing Assessment at Grades 4 and 7 The NCEXTEND2 Writing Assessment is based on a modified assessment format and measures student performance on grade-level modified achievement standards. All students who participate in the NCEXTEND2 Writing Assessment at grades 4 and 7 are expected to receive instruction under the NCSCS. Students with disabilities who do not have a significant cognitive disability may participate in NCEXTEND2. It is important to recognize that although the scoring rubrics and the features of writing assessed on the NCEXTEND2 Writing Assessment at grades 4 and 7 do not differ from the General Writing Assessment, it is in the application of those rubrics when applied to student responses that results in a grade-level modified achievement standard. Students who participate in the NCEXTEND2 Writing Assessment at Grades 4 and 7 receive the same prompt and administration time as the students who participate in the General Writing Assessment at Grades 4 and 7. All student responses are scored by two independent raters on two scoring components: Content (focus, organization, support and elaboration, and style) and Conventions (sentence formation, standard usage, and mechanics, including spelling).


3

NCEXTEND2 OCS Writing Assessment at Grade 10 for Occupational Course of Study The NCEXTEND2 OCS Writing Assessment at Grade 10 is a timed assessment given only to students in grade 10 receiving instruction under the NCOCS. Students who take the NCEXTEND2 OCS Writing Assessment receive a prompt specifically designed to assess the writing competency goals from Occupational English I and Occupational English II of the NCOCS. All student responses are scored by two independent raters on two scoring components: Content (focus, organization, and support and elaboration) and Conventions (sentence formation, standard usage, and mechanics, including spelling). While the scoring rubrics are the same as the Grade 10 General Writing Assessment with the exception of removing the style component, it is in the application of those rubrics when applied to student responses that results in a modified standard. The first operational administration of the NCEXTEND2 OCS Writing Assessment at Grade 10 occurred in March, 2007. Interim standards were approved by the State Board of Education (SBE) on June 7, 2007.

NCEXTEND1 Writing Assessment at Grades 4, 7, and 10 The NCEXTEND1 is a performance-based writing assessment designed to assess students with significant cognitive disabilities. Students are assessed in writing at grades 4, 7, and 10. Writing tasks for the NCEXTEND1 are grade-level, content-specific performance tasks based on the extensions of the NCSCS. These tasks are not scored using the North Carolina Writing Assessment Scoring Model, but are scored using the NCEXTEND1 Scoring Rubric (4-16). Students are assessed on designated tasks during a testing window in the spring. Student performance on the assessment tasks is submitted online. NCEXTEND1 is only available to students who meet all of the eligibility requirements as stipulated in the Test Administrator’s Manual for NCEXTEND1. Types of Writing Assessed, Scoring Procedures, Achievement Level Ranges

Table 1. Type of Writing Assessed by Grade Level for General Writing Assessment

Grade Level Type of Writing

4 Extended narrative response (personal or imaginative) 7 Extended argumentative response (problem/solution or evaluative) 10 Extended informational response (definition or cause/effect)

Table 2. Type of Writing Assessed by Grade Level for NCEXTEND2 Writing Assessment

Grade Level Type of Writing 4 Extended narrative response (personal or imaginative) 7 Extended argumentative response (problem/solution or evaluative)

10 OCS Extended expressive response (work skills, life skills, or personal skills) Appendix A displays a complete list of the types of writing by grade level and year.


4

Scoring Procedure Student responses were scored using the North Carolina Writing Assessment Scoring Model which consists of the following:

• a content component with a 1-4 score scale, and • a conventions component with a 0-2 score scale.

All student responses are scored by two independent readers. The total writing score for each student is computed by combining the content and conventions scores in the following manner: Total Writing Assessment Score = sum of the (content component scores from the two independent readers multiplied by 2) + the sum of the (conventions component scores from the two independent readers multiplied by 1). The Total Writing Assessment Score may be a minimum of 4 and a maximum of 20 for a given student. Students received the following information from the writing assessments: (a) point totals for content, (b) point totals for conventions, (c) total writing scores, (d) Achievement Level, and (e) their imaged responses were returned. A review procedure was incorporated into the scoring process for those students whose Total Writing Assessment Score fell within one point of the cut line at Achievement Level III. This procedure precluded an LEA appeal mechanism, as conducted under the previous focused holistic scoring system. Writing Assessment Achievement Level Ranges After carefully examining all data associated with the “Body of Work” and “Contrasting Groups” standard-setting methods, pilot administration data, and the North Carolina Writing Assessment Scoring Model, the North Carolina Department of Public Instruction (NCDPI) Accountability Services, Instructional Services – English/language arts, and Exceptional Children’s Division staff recommended the following Achievement Level ranges for approval by the SBE.

Table 3. SBE Adopted Achievement Level Ranges for the North Carolina General Writing Assessment at Grades 4, 7, and 10 (October, 2003)

Level I Level II Level III Level IV Grades 4, 7, 10

4-7 8-11 12-16 17-20


5

Table 4. SBE Adopted Achievement Level Ranges for the

NCCLAS Writing Assessment at Grades 4, 7 and 10 (May, 2007)

Level I Level II Level III Level IV

Grades 4, 7, and 10

4-6 7-9 10-13 14-16

Table 5. SBE Adopted Achievement Level Ranges for the NCEXTEND2 Writing Assessment at Grades 4 and 7 (August, 2006)

Level I Level II Level III Level IV Grades 4 and 7

4-7 8-13 14-17 18-20

Table 6. SBE Adopted Interim Achievement Level Ranges for the NCEXTEND2 OCS Writing Assessment at Grade 10 (June, 2007)

Level I Level II Level III Level IV Grade 10 OCS

4-6 7-11 12-16 17-20

Table 7. SBE Adopted Interim Achievement Level Ranges for the NCEXTEND1 Writing Assessment at Grades 4, 7, and 10 (June, 2007)

Level I Level II Level III Level IV Grades 4, 7, and 10

4-6 7-10 11-14 15-16


9

The North Carolina General Writing Assessment - Grade 4

Results of the North Carolina General Writing Assessment at Grade 4 Observations

The prompt for the 2007 Grade 4 North Carolina General Writing Assessment asked students to write an imaginative narrative response to the following prompt: Imagine a friend gave you a funny-looking watch. When you put the watch on, something very surprising happened. Write a story about what happened the time a friend gave you a funny-looking watch. Contracted readers scored 104,687 public school responses for grade 4 from the 2006-07 The North Carolina General Writing Assessment. The scores show that 52.7 percent of the fourth graders wrote well enough to score at or above Level III. This represents an increase of 2.8 percent from the 49.9 percent who achieved this level in 2005-06 assessment and a 14.1 percent increase from the pilot administration in 2002-03. Less than 5.0 percent of the fourth graders in the 2006-07 North Carolina General Writing Assessment received the highest scores (Level IV) and 8.4 percent received the lowest scores (Level I). In 2006-07, less than one percent (0.3) of the papers had problems which made them non-scorable. Non-scorable papers receive Achievement Level I ratings and are included in the state results as Level I scores. The average weighted content score for fourth graders participating in the North Carolina General Writing Assessment in 2006-07 was 8.6 on a scale of four to twenty. The average conventions score was 2.7 on a scale of zero to four. The average Total Writing Assessment Score was 11.4 of a possible 20. The following observations were noted during the scoring process:

• The funny-looking watch provided an effective prompt to an imaginative story. The most common topics were dinosaur encounters, time travel, and invisibility. The students seemed to understand and respond well to this prompt.

• Successful responses tended to establish a topic and provide support for that

topic; less successful responses introduced a series of loosely-connected events and ideas, thus weakening the focus. For example, “Then . . . then . . . then . . , ” “It was my turn . . . It was my turn again”.

• While responses often provided support, many unsuccessful responses

consisted of details presented in a list-like fashion. Often there were major weaknesses in elaboration supporting the events in the story and insufficiency of detail characterized by redundancy or repetitious paraphrasing of the same point or language.

• Many responses left missing links that the reader was forced to supply. A

typical student response may have stated “I saw a T-Rex. I ran through the jungle.” rather than stating “I saw a gigantic T-Rex who frightened me because I was afraid that he would want to eat me. I ran through the jungle


10

Observations (continued) Performance of Subgroups at Grade 4

hoping I could find a place to hide.”

• Other papers related a series of loosely-connected events with a great deal of action and descriptive detail, reminiscent of a video game or action movie. The responses provided a great deal of descriptions, but lacked elaboration of the action and events presented in the story.

• The most common sentence formation errors were run-on sentences.

• The most common usage errors were verb tense inconsistency, and the

failure to use a word according to its standard meaning (they’re/their/there, were/where). Phrases or clauses used incorrectly were also apparent, but most frequently appeared as a missing word in a sentence.

• Mechanics errors were predominantly misspellings of simple words.

Dialogue punctuation was often handled correctly by the students. Gender Approximately 59.7 percent of the female students scored at or above Level III compared to 45.8 percent for male students. Ethnicity About 69.4 percent of Asian students scored at or above Level III compared to 61.4 percent of the White students, 53.4 percent of Multi-Racial students, 39.4 percent of Black students, 39.4 percent of American Indian students, and 37.4 percent of Hispanic students. There were 104,687 fourth grade public school student responses scored by two independent readers. The inter-rater reliability rates (agreement rates) of the readers are shown below in Table 8. The 70.0 percent criterion rate for perfect agreement based upon industry standards was exceeded and the resolutions required were few.

Table 8. North Carolina General Writing Assessment

Fourth Grade Reader Agreement Statistics

Total Public

Perfect

Agreement

Adjacent

Agreement

Resolution

Required School Papers Percent Percent Percent

Content 104,687 72.4 26.4 5.4 Conventions 104,687 72.9 26.0 5.4


11

Performance of Subgroups at Grade 4 (continued)

The following pages, and Appendix B, present data for the Grade 4 North Carolina General Writing Assessments. Figure 1 indicates that a substantial change occurred in the percentage of students scoring at or above Achievement Level III on the general assessment between the pilot year and the current year (0.1% increase between 2002-03 and 2003-04, 11.2% increase between 2003-04 and 2005-06, and a 2.8% increase between 2005-06 and 2006-07. Table 15a, a table of Achievement Levels by subgroup, demonstrates that females outperformed males. Also, Asian, White, and Multi-Racial students performed at a higher level than the Black, Hispanic, and American Indian subgroups. Table 17a, the frequency distribution, shows that less than three percent of fourth graders reached Achievement Level IV, while about 49.7 percent of the students received a III, about 38.9 percent received a II, and 8.4 percent received Achievement Level I.


12

The North Carolina Writing Assessment (NCEXTEND2) - Grade 4

Results of the North Carolina Writing Assessment (NCEXTEND2) at Grade 4 Observations

The prompt for the 2007 Grade 4 North Carolina Writing Assessment (NCEXTEND2) asked students to write an imaginative narrative response to the following prompt: Imagine a friend gave you a funny-looking watch. When you put the watch on, something very surprising happened. Write a story about what happened the time a friend gave you a funny-looking watch. Contracted readers scored 2,559 public school responses for grade 4 from the 2006-07 North Carolina Writing Assessment (NCEXTEND2). The scores show that 8.1 percent of the fourth graders scored at or above Level III. This represents a 6.7 percent decrease from the 14.8 percent who achieved this level in 2005-06 assessment. Less than 5.0 percent of the fourth graders in the 2006-07 North Carolina Writing Assessment (NCEXTEND2) received Level IV scores, and 51.5 percent received Level I scores. In 2006-07, 10.1 percent of the papers had problems which made them non-scorable. Non-scorable papers receive Achievement Level I ratings and are included in the state results as Level I scores. The average weighted content score for fourth graders participating in the North Carolina Writing Assessment (NCEXTEND2) in 2006-07 was 6.3 on a scale of four to twenty. The average conventions score was 0.8 on a scale of zero to two. The average Total Writing Score was 7.9 of a possible 20. The following additional observations were noted during the scoring process:

• Most of the students were able to address the prompt in some manner, but were unable to establish or maintain a focus on the topic. The majority of the students related to the prompt, in that they had some familiarity with what a watch was, though there was evidence of some confusion about the meaning of “funny-looking.”

• Most of the papers at Level I took a literal approach to the prompt and

wrote about the friend who gave them the watch or wrote about unconnected, random ideas about watches like setting the time, the color of the watch, or fixing a broken watch.

• There were also many papers at the upper end of the score point range that

addressed the subject of the watch imaginatively, in that the watch became a vehicle or a portal to teleport or transport by allowing them to travel in time or to some distant place. In most cases, those papers were brief and did not establish enough connection between and among ideas and events to be considered a story.

• Sentence formation errors followed the same pattern as the general writing

assessment with the most common type of error being run-on sentences.


13

NCEXTEND2 Observations (continued) Performance of NCEXTEND2 Subgroups at Grade 4

Fragment errors tended to take the form of dropped words which distorted the meaning of sentences. Many students randomly placed periods and question marks at the end of lines or in a vertical pattern throughout the response, clearly demonstrating that they did not know proper end punctuation.

• Incorrect verb agreement was the most common usage error encountered.

• Mechanics errors, particularly misspellings of grade-level vocabulary words

were the most common conventions errors in this assessment. Spelling errors fell into two categories: those that were phonetic and could be easily read in context to surrounding words, and those that were non-phonetic with a severity and density that impeded the readers’ understanding of content.

Gender Approximately 8.0 percent of the female students scored at or above Level III compared to 8.2 percent for male students. Ethnicity About 14.3 percent of Asian students scored at or above Level III compared to 10.4 percent of the White students, 9.3 percent of Multi-Racial students, 9.6 percent of American Indian students, 6.3 percent of Black students, and less than or equal to 5.0 percent of Hispanic students There were 2,559 fourth grade public school student responses scored by two independent readers. The inter-rater reliability rates (agreement rates) of the readers are shown below in Table 9. The 70.0 percent criterion rate for perfect agreement based upon industry standards was exceeded and the resolutions required were few.

Table 9. North Carolina Writing Assessment (NCEXTEND2)

Fourth Grade Reader Agreement Statistics

Total Public

Perfect

Agreement

Adjacent

Agreement

Resolution




14

Performance of NCEXTEND2 Subgroups at Grade 4 (continued)

The following pages, and Appendix B, present data for the Grade 4 North Carolina Writing Assessment (NCEXTEND2). Table 15c, a table of Achievement Levels by subgroup, demonstrates that males outperformed females slightly. Also, Asian, White, and American Indian students performed at a higher level than the Multi-Racial, Hispanic, and Black subgroups. Table 17c, the frequency distribution, shows that less than one percent of fourth graders reached Achievement Level IV, 7.3 percent of the students received a III, 40.3 percent received a II, and 51.5 percent received Achievement Level I.


The vertical line indicates the NCAAAI was discontinued and replaced by NCCLAS, and NCCLAS and NCEXTEND2 were operationalized in 2005-06. NCEXTEND1, a newly developed writing assessment for students with severe cognitive disabilies, replaces the NCAAP in 2006-07. Data received from LEAs and charter schools after August 21, 2007 are not included in this figure.

15

Notes: 1The writing standard, scale, and scoring model changed effective with the 2002-03 school year. The data from 2002-03 are reported from the pilot test administration.

Prepared by the NCDPI Division of Accountability Services/Test Development Section.

Figure 1. North Carolina Testing ProgramNorth Carolina Writing Assessments, 2002-03 to 2006-07

Percent of Students Scoring At or Above Level IIIGrade 4

52.756.4

71.1

32.8

8.1

81.7

49.9

38.6 38.7

49.4

12.18.1

9.7

50.7

68.2

22.314.8

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07

Perc

ent o

f Stu

dent

s

GENERAL ASSESSMENT

NCAAAI

NCAAP

1

NCCLAS

NCEXTEND2

NCEXTEND1


Notes: *N counts equal the number of students who participated in the North Carolina General Writing Assessment. When summed, gender/ethnicity N counts may not match the state N counts because a gender/ethnicity category may not have been coded on some student answer sheets. Data received from LEAs and charter schools after August 21, 2007 are not included in this figure. Prepared by the NCDPI Division of Accountability Services/Test Development Section.

Percent of Students

Figure 2. North Carolina Testing ProgramNorth Carolina Writing Assessment (General), 2006-07,

Percent of Students At or Above Level III,Grade 4, By Gender and Ethnicity

52.7%

31.8%

32.0%

32.2%

43.2%

54.3%

60.5%

62.8%

68.6%

75.7%

46.7%

46.1%

46.2%

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

State

Hispanic Male

American Indian Male

Black Male

Hispanic Female

American Indian Female

Multi-Racial Male

Black Female

White Male

Multi-Racial Female

Asian Male

White Female

Asian Female

Percent of Students

*N=1,248

*N=28,670

*N=1,211

*N=1,943

*N=29,666

*N=14,220

*N=1,932

*N=760

*N=4,986

*N=14,216

*N=687

*N=5,148

Stat

e Pe

rcen

t

*N=104,687

16


Notes: *N counts equal the number of students who participated in the NCCLAS Writing Assessment operationalized in 2005-06. **Performance data are not reported when number tested is fewer than five. Performance data that are less than or equal to 5.0 percent, or greater than or equal to 95.0 percent, are not displayed. When summed, gender/ethnicity N counts may not match the state N counts because a gender/ethnicity category may not have been coded on some student answer sheets. Data received from LEAs and charter schools after August 21, 2007 are not included in this figure. Prepared by the NCDPI Division of Accountability Services/Test Development Section.

Percent of Students

Figure 3. North Carolina Testing ProgramNorth Carolina Writing Assessment (NCCLAS), 2006-07,


27.3%

40.6%

42.4%

66.7%

28.6%

71.0%

50.0%

**

23.6%

**

**

32.8%

35.7%

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

State



Multi-Racial Female

Hispanic Male

White Female

Hispanic Female

Black Male

Asian Female

Asian Male

Black Female

Multi-Racial Male

White Male

Percent of Students

*N=31

*N=6

*N=10

*N=32

*N=14

*N=147

*N=11

*N=165

*N=451

*N=0

*N=0

*N=0

Stat

e Pe

rcen

t

*N=33

17


Notes: *N counts equal the number of students who participated in the NCEXTEND2 Writing Assessment operationalized in 2005-06. **Performance data are not reported when number tested is fewer than five. Performance data that are less than or equal to 5.0 percent, or greater than or equal to 95.0 percent, are not displayed. When summed, gender/ethnicity N counts may not match the state N counts because a gender/ethnicity category may not have been coded on some student answer sheets. Data received from LEAs and charter schools after August 21, 2007 are not included in this figure. Prepared by the NCDPI Division of Accountability Services/Test Development Section.

Percent of Students

Figure 4. North Carolina Testing ProgramNorth Carolina Writing Assessment (NCEXTEND2 ), 2006-07,


16.7%

10.8%

7.5%

8.1%

<=5.0%

5.6%

13.3%

6.7%

11.1%

11.1%

10.2%

<=5.0%

<=5.0%

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

State

Multi-Racial Female

Hispanic Female

Hispanic Male

Black Female

Black Male


White Male

White Female

Asian Female

Multi-Racial Male


Asian Male

Percent of Students

*N=12

*N=30

*N=63

*N=9

*N=342

*N=728

*N=53

*N=719

*N=306

*N=168

*N=106

*N=23

Stat

e Pe

rcen

t

*N=2,559

18



Percent of Students



83.5%

>=95.0%

70.0%

78.4%

81.8%

83.5%

85.7%

81.8%

>=95.0%

78.9%

**

81.7%

82.6%

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

State

Asian Female

Asian Male

White Female

Multi-Racial Male


Black Male

White Male

Black Female

Hispanic Female

Hispanic Male

Multi-Racial Female


Percent of Students

*N=5

*N=12

*N=42

*N=28

*N=85

*N=214

*N=207

*N=11

*N=19

*N=125

*N=10

*N=2 Stat

e Pe

rcen

t

*N=774

19

Report of Student Performance in Writing, Grades, 4, 7, and 10, 2006-07

Membership1Number Partici-pating

Percent Partici-pating

All Students 109,281 104,687 100.0 11.4 52.7 3,784 3.5 26.1 810 0.7 108,471 99.3Female 53,465 51,827 49.5 11.8 59.7 1,273 2.4 26.7 365 0.7 53,100 99.3Male 55,799 52,860 50.5 10.9 45.8 2,495 4.5 25.8 444 0.8 55,355 99.2American Indian 1,560 1,447 1.4 10.5 39.4 99 6.3 22.2 14 0.9 1,546 99.1Asian 2,638 2,459 2.3 12.7 69.4 98 3.7 39.8 81 3.1 2,557 96.9Black 29,911 28,436 27.2 10.5 39.4 1,341 4.5 23.6 134 0.4 29,777 99.6Hispanic 11,073 10,134 9.7 10.4 37.4 656 5.9 23.5 283 2.6 10,790 97.4Multi-Racial/Other 4,027 3,875 3.7 11.4 53.4 123 3.1 31.7 29 0.7 3,998 99.3White 60,055 58,336 55.7 11.9 61.4 1,451 2.4 28.4 268 0.4 59,787 99.6Free and Reduced Lunch 50,462 47,481 45.4 10.5 39.2 2,573 5.1 23.6 408 0.8 50,054 99.2No Free and Reduced Lunch 58,819 57,206 54.6 12.1 63.9 1,211 2.1 31.5 402 0.7 58,417 99.3Title I 58,669 56,608 54.1 10.9 45.4 2,060 3.5 25.4 1 0.0 58,668 100.0Not Title I 50,612 48,079 45.9 11.9 61.2 1,724 3.4 26.9 809 1.6 49,803 98.4Schoolwide Title I 55,578 53,578 51.2 10.9 45.9 1,999 3.6 25.7 1 0.0 55,577 100.0Targeted Assistance 2,800 2,744 2.6 10.5 37.5 56 2.0 19.6 0 0.0 2,800 100.0Migrant 802 768 0.7 9.6 28.5 34 4.2 23.5 0 0.0 802 100.0Not migrant 108,479 103,919 99.3 11.4 52.9 3,750 3.5 26.1 810 0.7 107,669 99.3Limited English Proficient (LEP) 7,105 6,255 6.0 9.8 26.9 565 8.0 24.4 285 4.0 6,820 96.0Not Limited English Proficient 102,176 98,432 94.0 11.5 54.3 3,219 3.2 26.4 525 0.5 101,651 99.5Students with Disabilities 16,732 13,251 12.7 9.3 24.0 3,372 20.2 26.0 109 0.7 16,623 99.3Students without Disabilities 92,549 91,436 87.3 11.7 56.8 412 0.4 27.2 701 0.8 91,848 99.2Students with IEPs 14,462 10,981 10.5 9.1 21.5 3,372 23.3 26.0 109 0.8 14,353 99.2Students without IEPs 94,819 93,706 89.5 11.6 56.3 412 0.4 27.2 701 0.7 94,118 99.3Not Exceptional 77,875 76,788 73.4 11.2 50.6 409 0.5 27.1 678 0.9 77,197 99.1Academically Gifted 14,215 14,209 13.6 14.0 89.3 6 0.0 66.7 0 0.0 14,215 100.0Behaviorally-Emotionally Disabled 665 527 0.5 8.6 18.8 127 19.1 11.0 11 1.7 654 98.3Hearing Impaired 170 123 0.1 9.5 29.3 47 27.6 10.6 0 0.0 170 100.0Educable Mentally Disabled 1,505 469 0.4 6.8 <=5% 1,019 67.7 16.3 17 1.1 1,488 98.9Deaf-Blind 3 3 0.0 * * 0 0.0 * 0 0.0 3 100.0Visually Impaired 48 41 0.0 10.2 31.7 6 12.5 16.7 1 2.1 47 97.9Other Health Impaired 2,610 2,125 2.0 9.0 20.2 467 17.9 15.8 18 0.7 2,592 99.3Orthopedically Impaired 83 52 0.0 9.8 32.7 25 30.1 52.0 6 7.2 77 92.8Traumatic Brain Injured 31 16 0.0 9.0 12.5 15 48.4 53.3 0 0.0 31 100.0Severely/Profoundly Mentally Disabled 46 1 0.0 * * 44 95.7 50.0 1 2.2 45 97.8Multihandicapped 147 3 0.0 * * 140 95.2 62.1 4 2.7 143 97.3Speech-Language Impaired 2,209 2,152 2.1 10.3 36.6 33 1.5 15.2 24 1.1 2,185 98.9Specific Learning Disabled 6,071 5,167 4.9 8.8 16.2 885 14.6 15.7 19 0.3 6,052 99.7Trainable Mentally Disabled 220 2 0.0 * * 216 98.2 76.9 2 0.9 218 99.1Autistic 654 300 0.3 9.9 39.3 348 53.2 50.6 6 0.9 648 99.1Section 504 2,270 2,270 2.2 10.3 35.7 0 0.0 * 0 0.0 2,270 100.0

Notes: 1"Membership" is the total number of students on the 2006-07 Disag_Students data file who were present on the first day of March, 2007. 2"Number Tested" is the number of students who participated in the General Writing Assessment. *Performance data are not reported when number tested is fewer than five. Performance data that are less than or equal to 5.0 percent, or greater than or equal to 95.0 percent, are not displayed. Data received from LEAs and charter schools after August 21, 2007 are not included in this table. Prepared by the NCDPI Division of Accountability Services/Test Development Section.

20

Category

Not Tested

Number Absent or

Other

Percent Absent or

Other

Table 10. North Carolina Testing Program

Percent Alternate

Assessments

Number Alternate

Assessments

Percent Proficient Alternate

Assessments

North Carolina Writing Assessments, 2006-07 Statewide Number of Students Participating in the General Assessment, Taking Alternate Assessments, and Number Not Tested,

Grade 4

Percent Proficient General Writing

Number Tested2

(General Writing)

Percent Tested

(General Writing)

Mean General Writing Score


Grade 4 Number Tested Level I Level II Level III Level IV

1992-93 84,686 16,727 47,597 17,929 2,43319.8 56.2 22.1 2.8

1993-94 84,982 13,956 41,610 24,432 4,78116.4 49.0 28.7 5.6

1994-95 87,339 3,773 36,793 39,865 6,3674.3 42.1 45.6 7.3

1995-96 88,441 4,894 37,996 39,318 6,2335.5 43.0 44.5 7.0

1996-97 90,638 3,627 42,945 40,994 3,0724.0 47.4 45.2 3.4

1997-98 94,386 3,307 42,243 44,979 3,8573.5 44.8 47.7 4.1

1998-99 96,649 1,933 41,388 48,020 5,308 2.0 42.8 49.7 5.5

1999-00 99,038 1,783 40,175 52,390 4,6901.8 40.6 52.9 4.7

2000-01 100,930 2,309 29,200 64,555 4,860

2.3 28.9 64.0 4.8

2001-02 101,554 2,155 51,827 44,530 3,039

2.1 51.0 43.8 3.0 2002-031 99,382 11,210 49,846 35,507 2,819

11.3 50.2 35.7 2.8

2003-04 102,121 9,841 52,765 37,732 1,7839.6 51.7 36.9 1.7

2004-05 101,726 9,920 41,599 48,500 *9.8 40.9 47.7 <=5%

2005-06 100,774 7,871 42,587 48,972 *7.8 42.3 48.6 <=5%

2006-07 104,687 8,828 40,717 52,064 *8.4 38.9 49.7 <=5%

are less than or equal to 5.0 percent, or greater than or equal to 95.0 percent, are not displayed.

Grade 4

Table 11. North Carolina Testing ProgramNorth Carolina Writing Assessment (General), 1992-93 to 2006-07,

Distribution of Achievement Levels Across Years,

Notes: 1The writing standard, scale, and scoring model changed effective with the 2002-03 school year.

Data received from LEAs and charter schools after August 21, 2007 are not included in this table. Prepared by the NCDPI Division of Accountability Services/Test Development Section.

Achievement Levels

*Performance data are not reported when number tested is fewer than five. Performance data that

21



2005-06 457 231 124 99 *50.5 27.1 21.7 <=5%

2006-07 451 176 127 140 *39.0 28.2 31.0 <=5%


2005-06 1,949 820 840 248 *42.1 43.1 12.7 <=5%

2006-07 2,559 1,319 1,032 188 *51.5 40.3 7.3 <=5%


2006-07 774 119 * 150 48215.4 <=5% 19.4 62.3

Notes: *Performance data are not reported when number tested is fewer than five. Performance data that are less thanor equal to 5.0 percent, or greater than or equal to 95.0 percent, are not displayed.

Number in levels may not add to total because level was not reported for some students. Data received from LEAs and charter schools after August 21, 2007 are not included in this table. Prepared by the NCDPI Division of Accountability Services/Test Development Section.

Achievement Levels

Achievement Levels

Grade 4Distribution of Achievement Levels Across Years,

North Carolina Writing Assessment (NCEXTEND2 ), 2006-07,Table 13. North Carolina Testing Program

Table 12. North Carolina Testing ProgramNorth Carolina Writing Assessment (NCCLAS), 2006-07,

Distribution of Achievement Levels Across Years,Grade 4

Grade 4

Achievement Levels

Table 14. North Carolina Testing ProgramNorth Carolina Writing Assessment (NCEXTEND1 ), 2006-07,


22


Number PercentAt or At or Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Number PercentAbove Above At At At At At At At At

Level III Level III Level I Level I Level II Level II Level III Level III Level IV Level IV

All Students 104,687 100.0 55,142 52.7 8,828 8.4 40,717 38.9 52,064 49.7 * <=5%Female 51,827 49.5 30,939 59.7 2,947 5.7 17,941 34.6 29,048 56.0 * <=5%Male 52,860 50.5 24,203 45.8 5,881 11.1 22,776 43.1 23,016 43.5 * <=5%American Indian 1,447 1.4 570 39.4 158 10.9 719 49.7 555 38.4 * <=5%Asian 2,459 2.3 1,706 69.4 * <=5% 661 26.9 1,522 61.9 184 7.5Black 28,436 27.2 11,205 39.4 3,458 12.2 13,773 48.4 10,954 38.5 * <=5%Hispanic 10,134 9.7 3,789 37.4 1,301 12.8 5,044 49.8 3,686 36.4 * <=5%Multi-Racial/Other 3,875 3.7 2,069 53.4 300 7.7 1,506 38.9 1,956 50.5 * <=5%White 58,336 55.7 35,803 61.4 3,519 6.0 19,014 32.6 33,391 57.2 * <=5%Free and Reduced Lunch 47,481 45.4 18,599 39.2 5,923 12.5 22,959 48.4 18,155 38.2 * <=5%No Free and Reduced Lunch 57,206 54.6 36,543 63.9 2,905 5.1 17,758 31.0 33,909 59.3 * <=5%Title I 56,608 54.1 25,718 45.4 6,023 10.6 24,867 43.9 24,631 43.5 * <=5%Not Title I 48,079 45.9 29,424 61.2 2,805 5.8 15,850 33.0 27,433 57.1 * <=5%Schoolwide Title I 53,578 51.2 24,617 45.9 5,616 10.5 23,345 43.6 23,560 44.0 * <=5%Targeted Assistance 2,744 2.6 1,028 37.5 338 12.3 1,378 50.2 1,000 36.4 * <=5%Migrant 768 0.7 219 28.5 164 21.4 385 50.1 213 27.7 * <=5%Not migrant 103,919 99.3 54,923 52.9 8,664 8.3 40,332 38.8 51,851 49.9 * <=5%Limited English Proficient (LEP) 6,255 6.0 1,685 26.9 1,057 16.9 3,513 56.2 1,654 26.4 * <=5%Not Limited English Proficient 98,432 94.0 53,457 54.3 7,771 7.9 37,204 37.8 50,410 51.2 * <=5%Students with Disabilities 13,251 12.7 3,174 24.0 3,129 23.6 6,948 52.4 3,073 23.2 * <=5%Students without Disabilities 91,436 87.3 51,968 56.8 5,699 6.2 33,769 36.9 48,991 53.6 * <=5%Students with IEPs 10,981 10.5 2,364 21.5 2,814 25.6 5,803 52.8 2,296 20.9 * <=5%Students without IEPs 93,706 89.5 52,778 56.3 6,014 6.4 34,914 37.3 49,768 53.1 * <=5%Not Exceptional 76,788 73.4 38,828 50.6 5,606 7.3 32,354 42.1 37,520 48.9 * <=5%Behaviorally-Emotionally Disabled 527 0.5 99 18.8 183 34.7 245 46.5 95 18.0 * <=5%Hearing Impaired 123 0.1 36 29.3 26 21.1 61 49.6 35 28.5 * <=5%Educable Mentally Disabled 469 0.4 * <=5% 269 57.4 180 38.4 * <=5% * <=5%Deaf-Blind 3 0.0 * * * * * * * * * *Visually Impaired 41 0.0 13 31.7 3 7.3 25 61.0 12 29.3 * <=5%Other Health Impaired 2,125 2.0 430 20.2 576 27.1 1,119 52.7 418 19.7 * <=5%Orthopedically Impaired 52 0.0 17 32.7 11 21.2 24 46.2 15 28.8 * <=5%Traumatic Brain Injured 16 0.0 2 12.5 5 31.3 9 56.3 1 6.3 1 6.3

*Performance data are not reported when membership is fewer than five. Performance data that are less than or equal to 5.0 percent, or greater than or equal to 95.0 percent, are not displayed. The total for "All Students with Disabilities" includes Section 504. Some categories may not add up to the total due to missing coding. Data received from LEAs and charter schools after August 21, 2007 are not included in this table.

2"Percent" is calculated based on the number tested in the "All Students" category.


CategoryNumber Tested1

(General)Percent2

(General)

23

Table 15a. North Carolina Testing ProgramNorth Carolina General Writing Assessment, 2006-07,

Grade 4Performance of Exceptional, Limited English Proficient, and Title I Students

Notes: 1"Number Tested" is the number of students who participated in the North Carolina General Writing Assessment




All Students with Disabilities (continued)Severely/Profoundly Mentally Disabled 1 0.0 * * * * * * * * * *Multihandicapped 3 0.0 * * * * * * * * * *Speech-Language Impaired 2,152 2.1 788 36.6 332 15.4 1,032 48.0 759 35.3 * <=5%Specific Learning Disabled 5,167 4.9 837 16.2 1,336 25.9 2,994 57.9 826 16.0 * <=5%Learning Disabled-Reading 4,466 4.3 726 16.3 1,190 26.6 2,550 57.1 704 15.8 * <=5%Learning Disabled-Mathematics 1,922 1.8 301 15.7 551 28.7 1,070 55.7 296 15.4 * <=5%Learning Disabled-Written Expression 3,371 3.2 554 16.4 886 26.3 1,931 57.3 547 16.2 * <=5%Learning Disabled-Other 184 0.2 32 17.4 52 28.3 100 54.3 32 17.4 * <=5%Trainable Mentally Disabled 2 0.0 * * * * * * * * * *Autistic 300 0.3 118 39.3 69 23.0 113 37.7 112 37.3 * <=5%Section 504 2,270 2.2 810 35.7 315 13.9 1,145 50.4 777 34.2 * <=5%Academically/Intellectually Gifted 14,209 13.6 12,684 89.3 * <=5% 1,424 10.0 11,050 77.8 1,634 11.5AIG Reading 11,774 11.2 10,710 91.0 * <=5% 998 8.5 9,221 78.3 1,489 12.6AIG Mathematics 11,140 10.6 9,975 89.5 * <=5% 1,092 9.8 8,632 77.5 1,343 12.1AccommodationsBraille Edition 3 0.0 * * * * * * * * * *Large Print 42 0.0 12 28.6 6 14.3 24 57.1 11 26.2 * <=5%Assistive Technology 62 0.1 17 27.4 15 24.2 30 48.4 16 25.8 * <=5%Braille Writer 2 0.0 * * * * * * * * * *Cranmer Abacus 1 0.0 * * * * * * * * * *Dictation to Scribe 1,476 1.4 317 21.5 272 18.4 887 60.1 317 21.5 * <=5%Interpreter Signs Test 11 0.0 2 18.2 3 27.3 6 54.5 2 18.2 * *Magnification Devices 10 0.0 5 50.0 1 10.0 4 40.0 5 50.0 * *Student Marks in Test Book 2,036 1.9 346 17.0 614 30.2 1,076 52.8 342 16.8 * <=5%Test Administrator Reads Test Aloud 6,903 6.6 1,042 15.1 1,969 28.5 3,892 56.4 1,026 14.9 * <=5%Use Of Typewriter or Word Processor 111 0.1 52 46.8 21 18.9 38 34.2 42 37.8 10 9.0Hospital/Home Testing 5 0.0 * * 1 20.0 4 80.0 * * * *Multiple Test Sessions 3,738 3.6 739 19.8 976 26.1 2,023 54.1 716 19.2 * <=5%Scheduled Extended Time 12,554 12.0 2,681 21.4 2,991 23.8 6,882 54.8 2,606 20.8 * <=5%Testing in a Separate Room 11,143 10.6 2,145 19.2 2,817 25.3 6,181 55.5 2,096 18.8 * <=5%English/Native Lang. Dictionary/Electronic Translator 437 0.4 89 20.4 96 22.0 252 57.7 87 19.9 * <=5%One Item per Page 28 0.0 4 14.3 7 25.0 17 60.7 4 14.3 * <=5%Read Test Aloud to Self 319 0.3 53 16.6 78 24.5 188 58.9 52 16.3 * <=5%


24


Notes: 1"Number Tested" is the number of students who participated in the North Carolina General Writing Assessment 2"Percent" is calculated based on the number tested in the "All Students" category.

Number Tested1

(General)Percent2

(General)


Performance of Exceptional, Limited English Proficient, and Title I StudentsGrade 4 (continued)

Category




All Students 451 100.0 148 32.8 176 39.0 127 28.2 140 31.0 * <=5%Female 200 44.3 63 31.5 80 40.0 57 28.5 62 31.0 * <=5%Male 249 55.2 84 33.7 96 38.6 69 27.7 77 30.9 * <=5%American Indian 0 0.0 * * * * * * * * * *Asian 65 14.4 27 41.5 21 32.3 17 26.2 25 38.5 * <=5%Black 24 5.3 10 41.7 7 29.2 7 29.2 10 41.7 * <=5%Hispanic 312 69.2 81 26.0 141 45.2 90 28.8 78 25.0 * <=5%Multi-Racial/Other 6 1.3 4 66.7 1 16.7 1 16.7 4 66.7 * *White 42 9.3 25 59.5 6 14.3 11 26.2 22 52.4 3 7.1Free and Reduced Lunch 325 72.1 94 28.9 143 44.0 88 27.1 91 28.0 * <=5%No Free and Reduced Lunch 126 27.9 54 42.9 33 26.2 39 31.0 49 38.9 * <=5%Title I 2 0.4 * * * * * * * * * *Not Title I 449 99.6 148 33.0 174 38.8 127 28.3 140 31.2 * <=5%Schoolwide Title I 2 0.4 * * * * * * * * * *Targeted Assistance 0 0.0 * * * * * * * * * *Migrant 0 0.0 * * * * * * * * * *Not migrant 451 100.0 148 32.8 176 39.0 127 28.2 140 31.0 * <=5%Limited English Proficient (LEP) 324 71.8 98 30.2 132 40.7 94 29.0 93 28.7 * <=5%Not Limited English Proficient 127 28.2 50 39.4 44 34.6 33 26.0 47 37.0 * <=5%Students with Disabilities 48 10.6 37 77.1 4 8.3 7 14.6 35 72.9 * <=5%Students without Disabilities 403 89.4 111 27.5 172 42.7 120 29.8 105 26.1 * <=5%Students with IEPs 48 10.6 37 77.1 4 8.3 7 14.6 35 72.9 * <=5%Students without IEPs 403 89.4 111 27.5 172 42.7 120 29.8 105 26.1 * <=5%Not Exceptional 401 88.9 110 27.4 171 42.6 120 29.9 105 26.2 * <=5%Behaviorally-Emotionally Disabled 5 1.1 * * * * * * * * * *Hearing Impaired 0 0.0 * * * * * * * * * *Educable Mentally Disabled 4 0.9 * * * * * * * * * *Deaf-Blind 0 0.0 * * * * * * * * * *Visually Impaired 0 0.0 * * * * * * * * * *Other Health Impaired 9 2.0 4 44.4 2 22.2 3 33.3 4 44.4 * *Orthopedically Impaired 0 0.0 * * * * * * * * * *Traumatic Brain Injured 1 0.2 * * * * * * * * * *Severely/Profoundly Mentally Disabled 0 0.0 * * * * * * * * * *Multihandicapped 0 0.0 * * * * * * * * * *Speech-Language Impaired 2 0.4 * * * * * * * * * *Specific Learning Disabled 21 4.7 18 85.7 2 9.5 * <=5% 17 81.0 * <=5%Trainable Mentally Disabled 1 0.2 * * * * * * * * * *Autistic 5 1.1 4 80.0 * * 1 20.0 4 80.0 * *Section 504 0 0.0 * * * * * * * * * *

*Performance data are not reported when membership is fewer than five. Performance data that are less than or equal to 5.0 percent, or greater than or equal to 95.0 percent, are not displayed. The total for "All Students with Disabilities" includes Section 504. Some categories may not add up to the total due to missing coding. Data received from LEAs and charter schools after August 21, 2007 are not included in this table. Prepared by the NCDPI Division of Accountability Services/Test Development Section.

Notes: 1"Number Tested" is the number of students who participated in the NCCLAS Writing Assessment. 2"Percent" is calculated based on the number tested in the "All Students" category.

25

Table 15b. North Carolina Testing ProgramNorth Carolina Writing Assessment (NCCLAS), 2006-07,

Performance of Exceptional, Limited English Proficient, and Title I StudentsGrade 4


(NCCLAS)Percent2

(NCCLAS)




All Students 2,559 100.0 208 8.1 1,319 51.5 1,032 40.3 188 7.3 * <=5%Female 816 31.9 65 8.0 400 49.0 351 43.0 57 7.0 * <=5%Male 1,743 68.1 143 8.2 919 52.7 681 39.1 131 7.5 * <=5%American Indian 83 3.2 8 9.6 39 47.0 36 43.4 7 8.4 * <=5%Asian 21 0.8 3 14.3 13 61.9 5 23.8 3 14.3 * <=5%Black 1,025 40.1 65 6.3 551 53.8 409 39.9 62 6.0 * <=5%Hispanic 274 10.7 * <=5% 144 52.6 117 42.7 * <=5% * <=5%Multi-Racial/Other 86 3.4 8 9.3 36 41.9 42 48.8 8 9.3 * <=5%White 1,070 41.8 111 10.4 536 50.1 423 39.5 96 9.0 * <=5%Free and Reduced Lunch 1,807 70.6 141 7.8 923 51.1 743 41.1 129 7.1 * <=5%No Free and Reduced Lunch 752 29.4 67 8.9 396 52.7 289 38.4 59 7.8 * <=5%Title I 1,603 62.6 143 8.9 775 48.3 685 42.7 127 7.9 * <=5%Not Title I 956 37.4 65 6.8 544 56.9 347 36.3 61 6.4 * <=5%Schoolwide Title I 1,550 60.6 140 9.0 742 47.9 668 43.1 124 8.0 * <=5%Targeted Assistance 48 1.9 3 6.3 29 60.4 16 33.3 3 6.3 * <=5%Migrant 26 1.0 * <=5% 12 46.2 13 50.0 * <=5% * <=5%Not migrant 2,533 99.0 207 8.2 1,307 51.6 1,019 40.2 187 7.4 * <=5%Limited English Proficient (LEP) 207 8.1 13 6.3 101 48.8 93 44.9 13 6.3 * <=5%Not Limited English Proficient 2,352 91.9 195 8.3 1,218 51.8 939 39.9 175 7.4 * <=5%Students with Disabilities 2,551 99.7 208 8.2 1,315 51.5 1,028 40.3 188 7.4 * <=5%Students without Disabilities 8 0.3 * * 4 50.0 4 50.0 * * * *Students with IEPs 2,551 99.7 208 8.2 1,315 51.5 1,028 40.3 188 7.4 * <=5%Students without IEPs 8 0.3 * * 4 50.0 4 50.0 * * * *Not Exceptional 7 0.3 * * 4 57.1 3 42.9 * * * *Behaviorally-Emotionally Disabled 119 4.7 7 5.9 54 45.4 58 48.7 7 5.9 * <=5%Hearing Impaired 40 1.6 * <=5% 29 72.5 11 27.5 * <=5% * <=5%Educable Mentally Disabled 860 33.6 * <=5% 598 69.5 243 28.3 * <=5% * <=5%Deaf-Blind 0 0.0 * * * * * * * * * *Visually Impaired 5 0.2 * * 3 60.0 2 40.0 * * * *Other Health Impaired 434 17.0 49 11.3 178 41.0 207 47.7 43 9.9 * <=5%Orthopedically Impaired 13 0.5 1 7.7 8 61.5 4 30.8 1 7.7 * *Traumatic Brain Injured 7 0.3 * * 5 71.4 2 28.6 * * * *


Grade 4

Category Number Tested1

(NCEXTEND2 )Percent2

(NCEXTEND2 )

26

Notes: 1"Number Tested" is the number of students who participated in the North Carolina Writing Assessment (NCEXTEND2 ). 2"Percent" is calculated based on the number tested in the "All Students" category.


Table 15c. North Carolina Testing ProgramNorth Carolina Writing Assessment (NCEXTEND2 ), 2006-07,

Performance of Exceptional, Limited English Proficient, and Title I Students


27

Table 15c. North Carolina Testing Program



All Students with Disabilities (continued)Severely/Profoundly Mentally Disabled 0 0.0 * * * * * * * * * *Multihandicapped 11 0.4 1 9.1 9 81.8 1 9.1 1 9.1 * *Speech-Language Impaired 31 1.2 5 16.1 10 32.3 16 51.6 4 12.9 * <=5%Specific Learning Disabled 860 33.6 117 13.6 301 35.0 442 51.4 107 12.4 * <=5%Learning Disabled-Reading 848 33.1 108 12.7 312 36.8 428 50.5 100 11.8 * <=5%Learning Disabled-Mathematics 490 19.1 47 9.6 196 40.0 247 50.4 45 9.2 * <=5%Learning Disabled-Written Expression 773 30.2 97 12.5 292 37.8 384 49.7 89 11.5 * <=5%Learning Disabled-Other 37 1.4 2 5.4 23 62.2 12 32.4 * <=5% * <=5%Trainable Mentally Disabled 23 0.9 * <=5% 21 91.3 2 8.7 * <=5% * <=5%Autistic 148 5.8 9 6.1 99 66.9 40 27.0 9 6.1 * <=5%Section 504 0 0.0 * * * * * * * * * *Academically/Intellectually Gifted 6 0.2 4 66.7 2 33.3 * * 4 66.7 * *AIG Reading 2 0.1 * * * * * * * * * *AIG Mathematics 5 0.2 3 60.0 2 40.0 * * 3 60.0 * *AccommodationsBraille Edition 1 0.0 * * * * * * * * * *Large Print 14 0.5 * * 11 78.6 3 21.4 * * * *Assistive Technology 23 0.9 * <=5% 11 47.8 12 52.2 * <=5% * <=5%Braille Writer 0 0.0 * * * * * * * * * *Cranmer Abacus 1 0.0 * * * * * * * * * *Dictation to Scribe 775 30.3 67 8.6 303 39.1 405 52.3 67 8.6 * <=5%Interpreter Signs Test 25 1.0 * <=5% 21 84.0 4 16.0 * <=5% * <=5%Magnification Devices 4 0.2 * * * * * * * * * *Student Marks in Test Book 679 26.5 41 6.0 373 54.9 265 39.0 38 5.6 * <=5%Test Administrator Reads Test Aloud 1,892 73.9 147 7.8 1,005 53.1 740 39.1 134 7.1 * <=5%Use Of Typewriter or Word Processor 13 0.5 2 15.4 8 61.5 3 23.1 2 15.4 * *Hospital/Home Testing 0 0.0 * * * * * * * * * *Multiple Test Sessions 970 37.9 76 7.8 487 50.2 407 42.0 70 7.2 * <=5%Scheduled Extended Time 2,186 85.4 182 8.3 1,117 51.1 887 40.6 164 7.5 * <=5%Testing in a Separate Room 2,294 89.6 189 8.2 1,181 51.5 924 40.3 170 7.4 * <=5%English/Native Lang. Dictionary/Electronic Translator 4 0.2 * * * * * * * * * *One Item per Page 10 0.4 * * 7 70.0 3 30.0 * * * *Read Test Aloud to Self 78 3.0 * <=5% 56 71.8 19 24.4 * <=5% * <=5%


Notes: 1"Number Tested" is the number of students who participated in the North Carolina Writing Assessment (NCEXTEND2 ).


27




(NCEXTEND2 )


Percent2

(NCEXTEND2 )




All Students 774 100.0 632 81.7 119 15.4 * <=5% 150 19.4 482 62.3Female 257 33.2 212 82.5 34 13.2 * <=5% 55 21.4 157 61.1Male 503 65.0 416 82.7 76 15.1 * <=5% 93 18.5 323 64.2American Indian 16 2.1 14 87.5 1 6.3 1 6.3 2 12.5 12 75.0Asian 12 1.6 9 75.0 2 16.7 1 8.3 * * 9 75.0Black 292 37.7 242 82.9 45 15.4 * <=5% 45 15.4 197 67.5Hispanic 70 9.0 60 85.7 8 11.4 * <=5% 17 24.3 43 61.4Multi-Racial/Other 31 4.0 27 87.1 4 12.9 * <=5% 9 29.0 18 58.1White 339 43.8 276 81.4 50 14.7 * <=5% 75 22.1 201 59.3Free and Reduced Lunch 441 57.0 372 84.4 57 12.9 * <=5% 91 20.6 281 63.7No Free and Reduced Lunch 333 43.0 260 78.1 62 18.6 * <=5% 59 17.7 201 60.4Title I 455 58.8 381 83.7 59 13.0 * <=5% 85 18.7 296 65.1Not Title I 319 41.2 251 78.7 60 18.8 * <=5% 65 20.4 186 58.3Schoolwide Title I 447 57.8 373 83.4 59 13.2 * <=5% 81 18.1 292 65.3Targeted Assistance 8 1.0 * * * * * * 4 50.0 4 50.0Migrant 8 1.0 7 87.5 1 12.5 * * 4 50.0 3 37.5Not migrant 766 99.0 625 81.6 118 15.4 * <=5% 146 19.1 479 62.5Limited English Proficient (LEP) 34 4.4 27 79.4 5 14.7 2 5.9 8 23.5 19 55.9Not Limited English Proficient 740 95.6 605 81.8 114 15.4 * <=5% 142 19.2 463 62.6Students with Disabilities 773 99.9 631 81.6 119 15.4 * <=5% 150 19.4 481 62.2Students without Disabilities 1 0.1 * * * * * * * * * *Students with IEPs 773 99.9 631 81.6 119 15.4 * <=5% 150 19.4 481 62.2Students without IEPs 1 0.1 * * * * * * * * * *Not Exceptional 1 0.1 * * * * * * * * * *Behaviorally-Emotionally Disabled 3 0.4 * * * * * * * * * *Hearing Impaired 7 0.9 5 71.4 1 14.3 1 14.3 * * 5 71.4Educable Mentally Disabled 155 20.0 143 92.3 9 5.8 * <=5% 42 27.1 101 65.2Deaf-Blind 0 0.0 * * * * * * * * * *Visually Impaired 1 0.1 * * * * * * * * * *Other Health Impaired 24 3.1 21 87.5 3 12.5 * <=5% 4 16.7 17 70.8Orthopedically Impaired 12 1.6 * * * * * * 6 50.0 6 50.0Traumatic Brain Injured 7 0.9 * * * * * * 3 42.9 4 57.1Severely/Profoundly Mentally Disabled 44 5.7 22 50.0 21 47.7 * <=5% * <=5% 20 45.5Multihandicapped 129 16.7 86 66.7 35 27.1 8 6.2 25 19.4 61 47.3Speech-Language Impaired 0 0.0 * * * * * * * * * *Specific Learning Disabled 4 0.5 * * * * * * * * * *Trainable Mentally Disabled 192 24.8 165 85.9 21 10.9 * <=5% 41 21.4 124 64.6Autistic 195 25.2 163 83.6 28 14.4 * <=5% 26 13.3 137 70.3Section 504 0 0.0 * * * * * * * * * *


Notes: 1"Number Tested" is the number of students who participated in the NCEXTEND1 Writing Assessment. 2"Percent" is calculated based on the number tested in the "All Students" category.


28

Table 15d. North Carolina Testing ProgramNorth Carolina Writing Assessment (NCEXTEND1 ), 2006-07,




(NCEXTEND1 )


Average AverageAverage Total Weighted Conventions Number PercentWriting Score Content Score Score Non-scorable Non-scorable

All Students 104,687 100.0 11.4 8.6 2.7 362 0.3Female 51,827 49.5 11.8 8.9 3.0 128 0.1Male 52,860 50.5 10.9 8.4 2.5 234 0.2American Indian 1,447 1.4 10.5 8.1 2.4 2 0.0Asian 2,459 2.3 12.7 9.4 3.2 8 0.0Black 28,436 27.2 10.5 8.0 2.4 109 0.1Hispanic 10,134 9.7 10.4 8.1 2.3 79 0.1Multi-Racial/Other 3,875 3.7 11.4 8.6 2.8 15 0.0White 58,336 55.7 11.9 9.0 2.9 149 0.1Free and Reduced Lunch 47,481 45.4 10.5 8.1 2.4 214 0.2No Free and Reduced Lunch 57,206 54.6 12.1 9.1 3.0 148 0.1Title I 56,608 54.1 10.9 8.3 2.5 213 0.2Not Title I 48,079 45.9 11.9 9.0 2.9 149 0.1Schoolwide Title I 53,578 51.2 10.9 8.3 2.6 202 0.2Targeted Assistance 2,744 2.6 10.5 8.1 2.3 10 0.0Migrant 768 0.7 9.6 7.6 2.0 5 0.0Not migrant 103,919 99.3 11.4 8.6 2.7 357 0.3Limited English Proficient (LEP) 6,255 6.0 9.8 7.7 2.0 70 0.1Not Limited English Proficient 98,432 94.0 11.5 8.7 2.8 292 0.3Students with Disabilities 13,251 12.7 9.3 7.6 1.6 112 0.1Students without Disabilities 91,436 87.3 11.7 8.8 2.9 250 0.2Students with IEPs 10,981 10.5 9.1 7.5 1.5 97 0.1Students without IEPs 93,706 89.5 11.6 8.8 2.9 265 0.3Not Exceptional 76,788 73.4 11.2 8.5 2.7 235 0.2Behaviorally-Emotionally Disabled 527 0.5 8.6 7.0 1.5 8 0.0Hearing Impaired 123 0.1 9.5 7.4 1.8 3 0.0Educable Mentally Disabled 469 0.4 6.8 5.9 0.7 17 0.0Deaf-Blind 3 0.0 * * * * *Visually Impaired 41 0.0 10.2 8.3 1.9 0 0.0Other Health Impaired 2,125 2.0 9.0 7.4 1.5 18 0.0Orthopedically Impaired 52 0.0 9.8 8.2 1.7 0 0.0Traumatic Brain Injured 16 0.0 9.0 7.8 1.3 0 0.0

*Performance data are not reported when number tested is fewer than five. The total for "All Students with Disabilities" includes Section 504. Some categories may not add up to the total due to missing coding. Data received from LEAs and charter schools after August 21, 2007 are not included in this table.

Table 16a. North Carolina Testing ProgramNorth Carolina General Writing Assessment, 2006-07

Average Score,Grade 4

Notes: 1"Number Tested" is the number of students who partricipated in the North Carolina General Writing Assessment. 2"Percent" is calculated based on the number tested in the "All Students" category.


Category Percent2

(General)

Number Tested1

(General)

29



All Students with Disabilities (continued)Severely/Profoundly Mentally Disabled 1 0.0 * * * * *Multihandicapped 3 0.0 * * * * *Speech-Language Impaired 2,152 2.1 10.3 8.0 2.3 5 0.0Specific Learning Disabled 5,167 4.9 8.8 7.5 1.3 38 0.0 Learning Disabled-Reading 4,466 4.3 8.8 7.5 1.3 36 0.0 Learning Disabled-Mathematics 1,922 1.8 8.7 7.3 1.3 22 0.0 Learning Disabled-Written Expression 3,371 3.2 8.8 7.5 1.2 31 0.0 Learning Disabled-Other 184 0.2 8.9 7.2 1.6 2 0.0Trainable Mentally Disabled 2 0.0 * * * * *Autistic 300 0.3 9.9 7.8 1.8 8 0.0Section 504 2,270 2.2 10.3 8.1 2.1 15 0.0Academically/Intellectually Gifted 14,209 13.6 14.0 10.3 3.7 12 0.0 AIG Reading 11,774 11.2 14.2 10.4 3.7 10 0.0 AIG Mathematics 11,140 10.6 14.0 10.3 3.7 8 0.0AccommodationsBraille Edition 3 0.0 * * * * *Large Print 42 0.0 9.7 8.0 1.7 0 0.0Assistive Technology 62 0.1 9.4 7.7 1.5 1 0.0Braille Writer 2 0.0 10.5 7.0 3.5 0 0.0Cramner Abacus 1 0.0 * * * * *Dictation to Scribe 1,476 1.4 8.9 8.8 0.0 17 0.0Interpreter Signs Test 11 0.0 8.6 7.5 1.2 0 0.0Magnification Devices 10 0.0 10.1 8.0 2.1 0 0.0Student Marks in Test Book 2,036 1.9 8.7 7.2 1.4 28 0.0Test Administrator Reads Test Aloud 6,903 6.6 8.7 7.3 1.3 87 0.1Use Of Typewriter or Word Processor 111 0.1 10.9 8.5 2.5 0 0.0Hospital/Home Testing 5 0.0 8.2 7.6 0.6 0 0.0Multiple Test Sessions 3,738 3.6 9.0 7.4 1.5 41 0.0Scheduled Extended Time 12,554 12.0 9.2 7.5 1.6 119 0.1Testing in a Separate Room 11,143 10.6 9.0 7.5 1.5 116 0.1English/Native Lang. Dictionary/Electronic Translator 437 0.4 9.3 7.4 1.7 8 0.0One Item per Page 28 0.0 9.0 7.4 1.2 1 0.0Read Test Aloud to Self 319 0.3 8.9 7.4 1.4 5 0.0

*Performance data are not reported when number tested is fewer than five. The total for "All Students with Disabilities" includes Section 504. Some categories may not add up to the total due to missing coding Data received from LEAs and charter schools after August 21, 2007 are not included in this table

Notes: 1"Number Tested" is the number of students who participated in the North Carolina Writing Assessment. 2"Percent" is calculated based on the number tested in the "All Students" category.

Table 16a. North Carolina Testing ProgramNorth Carolina General Writing Assessment, 2006-07

Average Score,Grade 4 (continued)


Category Percent2

(General)

Number Tested1

(General)

30


Average TotalWriting Score

All Students 451 100.0 7.8Female 200 44.3 7.7Male 249 55.2 7.9American Indian 0 0.0 *Asian 65 14.4 8.4Black 24 5.3 8.2Hispanic 312 69.2 7.3Multi-Racial/Other 6 1.3 10.3White 42 9.3 9.8Free and Reduced Lunch 325 72.1 7.5No Free and Reduced Lunch 126 27.9 8.7Title I 2 0.4 *Not Title I 449 99.6 7.8Schoolwide Title I 2 0.4 *Targeted Assistance 0 0.0 *Migrant 0 0.0 *Not migrant 451 100.0 7.8Limited English Proficient (LEP) 324 71.8 7.7Not Limited English Proficient 127 28.2 8.2Students with Disabilities 48 10.6 10.6Students without Disabilities 403 89.4 7.5Students with IEPs 48 10.6 10.6Students without IEPs 403 89.4 7.5Not Exceptional 401 88.9 7.5Behaviorally-Emotionally Disabled 5 1.1 12Hearing Impaired 0 0.0 *Educable Mentally Disabled 4 0.9 *Deaf-Blind 0 0.0 *Visually Impaired 0 0.0 *Other Health Impaired 9 2.0 8.4Orthopedically Impaired 0 0.0 *Traumatic Brain Injured 1 0.2 *Severely/Profoundly Mentally Disabled 0 0.0 *Multihandicapped 0 0.0 *Speech-Language Impaired 2 0.4 *Specific Learning Disabled 21 4.7 11Trainable Mentally Disabled 1 0.2 *Autistic 5 1.1 11.2Section 504 0 0.0 *


Percent2

(NCCLAS)

Notes: 1"Number Tested" is the number of students who participated in the NCCLAS Writing Assessment.

31




(NCCLAS)

Table 16b. North Carolina Testing ProgramNorth Carolina Writing Assessment (NCCLAS), 2006-07




All Students 2,559 100.0 7.9 6.3 0.8 258 10.1Female 816 31.9 8.1 6.4 0.9 82 3.2Male 1,743 68.1 7.8 6.3 0.7 176 6.9American Indian 83 3.2 8.3 6.8 0.9 7 0.3Asian 21 0.8 8.1 6.0 1.0 3 0.1Black 1,025 40.1 7.5 6.1 0.8 88 3.4Hispanic 274 10.7 7.9 6.0 0.7 41 1.6Multi-Racial/Other 86 3.4 8.7 6.7 0.8 11 0.4White 1,070 41.8 8.2 6.6 0.8 108 4.2Free and Reduced Lunch 1,807 70.6 7.9 6.4 0.7 169 6.6No Free and Reduced Lunch 752 29.4 8.0 6.2 0.8 89 3.5Title I 1,603 62.6 8.1 6.6 0.8 131 5.1Not Title I 956 37.4 7.6 5.8 0.8 127 5.0Schoolwide Title I 1,550 60.6 8.1 6.7 0.8 125 4.9Targeted Assistance 48 1.9 7.4 6.0 0.6 5 0.2Migrant 26 1.0 8.0 6.5 0.5 3 0.1Not migrant 2,533 99.0 7.9 6.3 0.8 255 10.0Limited English Proficient (LEP) 207 8.1 8.0 6.3 0.7 26 1.0Not Limited English Proficient 2,352 91.9 7.9 6.3 0.8 232 9.1Students with Disabilities 2,551 99.7 7.9 6.3 0.8 257 10.0Students without Disabilities 8 0.3 7.6 6.0 0.6 1 0.0Students with IEPs 2,551 99.7 7.9 6.3 0.8 257 10.0Students without IEPs 8 0.3 7.6 6.0 0.6 1 0.0Not Exceptional 7 0.3 7.2 5.4 0.7 1 0.0Behaviorally-Emotionally Disabled 119 4.7 7.9 6.3 1.0 8 0.3Hearing Impaired 40 1.6 6.4 4.1 0.5 12 0.5Educable Mentally Disabled 860 33.6 6.5 5.0 0.5 132 5.2Deaf-Blind 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0Visually Impaired 5 0.2 7.0 5.6 0.0 1 0.0Other Health Impaired 434 17.0 8.6 7.2 0.9 22 0.9Orthopedically Impaired 13 0.5 6.8 5.8 0.5 1 0.0Traumatic Brain Injured 7 0.3 6.0 5.4 0.6 0 0.0


Grade 4

Notes: 1"Number Tested" is the number of students who partricipated in the North Carolina Writing Assessment (NCEXTEND2 ). 2"Percent" is calculated based on the number tested in the "All Students" category.



(NCEXTEND2 )Tested1

(NCEXTEND2 )

Table 16c. North Carolina Testing ProgramNorth Carolina Writing Assessment (NCEXTEND2 ), 2006-07

Average Score,

32



All Students with Disabilities (continued)Severely/Profoundly Mentally Disabled 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0Multihandicapped 11 0.4 6.1 4.2 0.3 3 0.1Speech-Language Impaired 31 1.2 9.0 7.7 1.0 1 0.0Specific Learning Disabled 860 33.6 9.0 7.7 1.0 36 1.4 Learning Disabled-Reading 848 33.1 8.9 7.5 1.0 37 1.4 Learning Disabled-Mathematics 490 19.1 8.5 7.1 0.9 30 1.2 Learning Disabled-Written Expression 773 30.2 8.9 7.5 1.0 36 1.4 Learning Disabled-Other 37 1.4 7.6 6.1 0.9 3 0.1Trainable Mentally Disabled 23 0.9 5.7 1.7 0.1 16 0.6Autistic 148 5.8 7.1 5.0 0.9 25 1.0Section 504 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0Academically/Intellectually Gifted 6 0.2 12.8 9.3 1.3 1 0.0 AIG Reading 2 0.1 16.0 12.0 4.0 0 0.0 AIG Mathematics 5 0.2 12.0 8.8 0.8 1 0.0AccommodationsBraille Edition 1 0.0 12.0 12.0 0.0 0 0.0Large Print 14 0.5 5.6 4.3 0.1 3 0.1Assistive Technology 23 0.9 7.9 6.0 0.6 4 0.2Braille Writer 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0Cramner Abacus 1 0.0 10.0 10.0 0.0 0 0.0Dictation to Scribe 775 30.3 8.2 7.7 0.0 51 2.0Interpreter Signs Test 25 1.0 5.7 2.9 0.3 11 0.4Magnification Devices 4 0.2 6.0 3.0 0.0 2 0.1Student Marks in Test Book 679 26.5 7.7 5.9 0.7 91 3.6Test Administrator Reads Test Aloud 1,892 73.9 7.8 6.2 0.7 208 8.1Use Of Typewriter or Word Processor 13 0.5 8.1 5.7 1.2 2 0.1Hospital/Home Testing 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0Multiple Test Sessions 970 37.9 7.9 6.4 0.8 93 3.6Scheduled Extended Time 2,186 85.4 8.0 6.4 0.8 220 8.6Testing in a Separate Room 2,294 89.6 7.9 6.4 0.8 221 8.6English/Native Lang. Dictionary/Electronic Translator 4 0.2 7.5 7.5 0.0 0 0.0One Item per Page 10 0.4 7.0 6.0 0.3 1 0.0Read Test Aloud to Self 78 3.0 6.6 5.1 0.7 10 0.4

*Performance data are not reported when number tested is fewer than five. The total for "All Students with Disabilities" includes Section 504. Some categories may not add up to the total due to missing coding Data received from LEAs and charter schools after August 21, 2007 are not included in this table

Percent2 (NCEXTEND2 )



Category Number Tested1 (NCEXTEND2 )

North Carolina Writing Assessment (NCEXTEND2 ), 2006-07Average Score,

Grade 4 (continued)

Table 16c. North Carolina Testing Program

33



All Students 774 100.0 13.2Female 257 33.2 13.3Male 503 65.0 13.3American Indian 16 2.1 14.3Asian 12 1.6 13.3Black 292 37.7 13.4Hispanic 70 9.0 13.5Multi-Racial/Other 31 4.0 13.3White 339 43.8 13.1Free and Reduced Lunch 441 57.0 13.5No Free and Reduced Lunch 333 43.0 12.8Title I 455 58.8 13.5Not Title I 319 41.2 12.8Schoolwide Title I 447 57.8 13.5Targeted Assistance 8 1.0 14.0Migrant 8 1.0 12.5Not migrant 766 99.0 13.2Limited English Proficient (LEP) 34 4.4 12.9Not Limited English Proficient 740 95.6 13.2Students with Disabilities 773 99.9 13.2Students without Disabilities 1 0.1 *Students with IEPs 773 99.9 13.2Students without IEPs 1 0.1 *Not Exceptional 1 0.1 *Behaviorally-Emotionally Disabled 3 0.4 *Hearing Impaired 7 0.9 13.1Educable Mentally Disabled 155 20.0 14.2Deaf-Blind 0 0.0 *Visually Impaired 1 0.1 *Other Health Impaired 24 3.1 13.8Orthopedically Impaired 12 1.6 14Traumatic Brain Injured 7 0.9 14.3Severely/Profoundly Mentally Disabled 44 5.7 10Multihandicapped 129 16.7 11.5Speech-Language Impaired 0 0.0 *Specific Learning Disabled 4 0.5 *Trainable Mentally Disabled 192 24.8 13.6Autistic 195 25.2 13.6Section 504 0 0.0 *


Table 16d. North Carolina Testing ProgramNorth Carolina Writing Assessment (NCEXTEND1 ), 2006-07


34





(NCEXTEND1 )

Notes: 1"Number Tested" is the number of students who participated in the NCEXTEND1 Writing Assessment.


104,687 HIGH SCORE 20LOW SCORE 4

TOTAL104,325 PERCENTILES SCORE

90 16MEAN 11.4 75 13

50 (median) 12STANDARD 25 10DEVIATION 3.0 10 8

VARIANCE 8.8

ACH WRITING CUMULATIVE CUMULATIVELEVEL SCORE FREQUENCY FREQUENCY PERCENT PERCENT

20 894 104,687 0.9 100.019 6 103,793 0.0 99.118 2,029 103,787 1.9 99.117 149 101,758 0.1 97.2

16 9,074 101,609 8.7 97.115 1,356 92,535 1.3 88.414 11,172 91,179 10.7 87.113 4,560 80,007 4.4 76.412 25,902 75,447 24.7 72.1

11 2,088 49,545 2.0 47.310 26,456 47,457 25.3 45.39 6,139 21,001 5.9 20.18 6,034 14,862 5.8 14.2

7 2,344 8,828 2.2 8.46 2,715 6,484 2.6 6.25 962 3,769 0.9 3.64 2,445 2,807 2.3 2.7

NS 362 362 0.3 0.3

Notes: Data received from LEAs and charter schools after August 21, 2007 are not included in this table. Prepared by the NCDPI Division of Accountability Services/Test Development Section.

NUMBER OF STUDENTS WITH VALID SCORES

NUMBER OF STUDENTS TESTED

IV

III


Distribution of Total Scores,Grade 4

II

I

35

FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION


NUMBER OF HIGH SCORE 16STUDENTS TESTED 451

LOW SCORE 4

MEAN 7.8 TOTALPERCENTILES SCORE

STANDARD 90 12DEVIATION 3.0 75 10

50 (median) 825 5

VARIANCE 8.9 10 4


16 2 451 0.4 100.015 3 449 0.7 99.614 3 446 0.7 98.9

13 2 443 0.4 98.212 66 441 14.6 97.811 32 375 7.1 83.110 40 343 8.9 76.1

9 11 303 2.4 67.28 93 292 20.6 64.77 23 199 5.1 44.1

6 54 176 12.0 39.05 15 122 3.3 27.14 107 107 23.7 23.7

Carolina Writing Assessment. Data received from LEAs and charter schools after August 21, 2007 are not included in this table. Prepared by the NCDPI Division of Accountability Services/Test Development Section.

II

I

36


Notes: The range used for the NCCLAS Writing Assessment is different than the range used for the North

IV

III




NUMBER OF HIGH SCORE 20STUDENTS TESTED 2,559

LOW SCORE 4


90 12MEAN 7.9 75 10


VARIANCE 12.5


20 10 2,559 0.4 100.019 1 2,549 0.0 99.618 9 2,548 0.4 99.6

16 70 2,539 2.7 99.215 17 2,469 0.7 96.514 101 2,452 3.9 95.8

13 1 2,351 0.0 91.912 187 2,350 7.3 91.811 90 2,163 3.5 84.510 289 2,073 11.3 81.09 112 1,784 4.4 69.78 353 1,672 13.8 65.3

7 93 1,319 3.6 51.56 206 1,226 8.1 47.95 118 1,020 4.6 39.94 644 902 25.2 35.2

NS 258 258 10.1 10.1

Notes: Students with level scores reported but no total score reported are not included in this table. The range used for the NCEXTEND2 Writing Assessment is different than the range used for the North Carolina Writing Assessment. Data received from LEAs and charter schools after August 21, 2007 are not included in this table. Prepared by the NCDPI Division of Accountability Services/Test Development Section.


IV

III



I

II

37




LOW SCORE 4



50 (median) 1625 12

VARIANCE 18.9 10 4


16 482 774 62.3 100.015 0 292 0.0 37.7

14 16 292 2.1 37.713 0 276 0.0 35.712 134 276 17.3 35.711 0 142 0.0 18.3

10 6 142 0.8 18.39 0 136 0.0 17.68 17 136 2.2 17.67 0 119 0.0 15.4

6 0 119 0.0 15.45 0 119 0.0 15.44 119 119 15.4 15.4

Notes: Students with level scores reported but no total score reported are not included in this table. The range used for the NCEXTEND1 Writing Assessment is different than the range used for the North Carolina Writing Assessment. Data received from LEAs and charter schools after August 21, 2007 are not included in this table. Prepared by the NCDPI Division of Accountability Services/Test Development Section.




I

III

IV

II

38

39

2006-07

North Carolina General Writing Assessment

Grade 4

Copies of Grade 4

Sample Student Responses The North Carolina Writing Assessment Scoring Model is comprised of a content component with a 1-4 score range and a conventions component with a 0-2 score range. To report a total writing score for each student, the score is computed by combining the content and conventions scores using the following model: Total Writing Assessment Score = sum of the (content component scores from two independent readers multiplied by 2) + the sum of the (conventions component scores from two independent readers multiplied by 1). The following pages provide copies of sample student responses from the North Carolina Writing Assessment at grade 4. The total content score, total conventions score, total writing score, Achievement Level, and annotated explanations of the scores are provided for each response.

41


42

Grade 4 – North Carolina General Writing Assessment - Sample Student Response #1 Rubric Content Score: 1 Rubric Convention Score: 0 Total Content Score: 4 Total Writing Score: 4 Total Conventions Score: 0 Achievement Level: I

Content Annotation: This response has a topic (the student’s friend makes a new watch that stops things from moving), but does not establish or maintain a focus. Details are sparse and elaboration fails to support the topic (I took my scoter with me…me J____ started playing video game until it was 8:00). Any precise or purposeful use of vocabulary is lacking. The response does not demonstrate sentence fluency. Conventions Annotation: This response demonstrates a lack of control of grammatical conventions due to the many errors in a small sample of writing, which impede the reader’s understanding. Errors include run-on sentences (MoM can I go to J___’s house yes but come back at 8:00…left out the door when go to his house I Knocked on the his door), fragments (Whenver I needed it), missing pronouns (When got to his house), and misspelling of common words (said).

43

44


45

Grade 4-North Carolina General Writing Assessment - Sample Student Response #2

Rubric Content Score: 2 Rubric Convention Score: 1 Total Content Score: 8 Total Writing Score: 10 Total Conventions Score: 2 Achievement Level: II

Content Annotation: Although this response establishes a focus regarding finding a diamond and determining its worth, the logical progression of ideas and events is minimally complete (there was a huge dimond in it and I asked my friend if that was soppost to be in there and she said no she had never seen that befor. After that we went back to the store). The elaboration in the response has major weaknesses relating to and supporting the topic (their could be a dimond or a rubie in it…We did’ent belive what we saw so we had to prove owr self rong!). The student provides details which are general or undeveloped (there was a huge dimond…we took it to a lady and we asked her if it was reall…she got out a myshen and she taped it to the dimond and she said yes…we told our parents the whole story and they said wow to!). The undeveloped details leave questions for the reader (why is the diamond in the watch; why hadn’t the friend seen it before; is the diamond a part of the watch or a separate element?). The use of precise and purposeful vocabulary is minimal and transitions are repetitive (After that We went back to the store…we told her the hole story. After that she got out a myshen…After that we took the dimond back home…After we told our parents the whole story). Sentence fluency is obstructed by frequent use of conjoined clauses (I opend it up and there was a huge dimond in it and I asked my friend if that was soppost to be in there and she said no she had never seen that befor…We Whent into one of them and we took it to a lady and we asked her if it was reall and she asked us were we got it). Conventions Annotation: This response exhibits minimal control of grammatical conventions. This student demonstrates reasonable control of sentence formations (I opend it up and there was a huge dimond in it and I asked my friend if that was soppost to be in there and she said no she had never seen that before), however several excerpts demonstrate a lack of control in mechanics. There is a capitalization error that occurs frequently (went back home and got the dimond And brought it…whole story And they said). The student frequently misspells simple words (could’t/couldn’t, opend/opened, befor/before, whent/went). Usage errors include the failure to use a word according to its standard meaning (there/their, whole/hole, where/wear).

46

47


48

Grade 4-North Carolina General Writing Assessment - Sample Student Response #3 Rubric Content Score: 2 Rubric Convention Score: 2 Total Content Score: 8 Total Writing Score: 12 Total Conventions Score: 4 Achievement Level: III

Content Annotation: Although this response establishes a topic, the writer exhibits major lapses in focus on the subject of the paper. The organizational structure establishes little relationship between and among ideas or events. The random progression of ideas and events is minimally complete (we figured out that it had a built-in radio, so when it was halftime we turned it on and danced. After the game because we we’re droped of we couldn’t go anywhere. Luckely we had the watch. We tried picking up people on the radio, no good. Finally we figured out that the watch also had a built-in cellphone. We first called a person to pick us up and second ordered some takeout Chinesse. That night we went for a stroll down Maine Street . . . . time froze but we could still move . . . . We froze time and put her out of the room so she couldn’t teach. When we got home we payed for some dinner and went to bed. The next day was our vaction so went to the beach . . . . We made some prank calls . . . We went to an island). Transitions are abrupt. Elaboration in this response has major weaknesses in relatedness and support of the topic (We went to an island and someone said to me, “What a stylish watch that is”. And I said, “Thank you for the compliment sir.” We decided that the beach was so cool that we moved there. So I fineshied college at the beach and that’s where I am today). The paper consists of some specific details (time froze but we could still move. It was amazing! If the dog was jumping it froze in mid-air. Then we unfroze time and everything went back to normal). This student demonstrates reasonable use of sentence fluency, showing a variety of sentence styles. Conventions Annotaton: This response exhibits reasonable control of grammatical conventions appropriate to the writing task. The errors that are present do not impede the reader’s understanding.

49

50


51

Grade 4-North Carolina General Writing Assessment - Sample Student Response #4 Rubric Content Score: 3 Rubric Convention Score: 2 Total Content Score: 12 Total Writing Score: 16 Total Conventions Score: 4 Achievement Level: III

Content Annotation: The topic of this response is clear and focused (exploring Candyland). The organizational structure establishes relationships between ideas and events, and includes effective transitions between paragraphs, building narrative progression (As I walked down the sidewalk . . . . As I looked around there was candy every where . . . . Full of exhastion I slowly tried to eat more candy). Specific details engage the reader (I was zaped straight in the odd looking thing. With an aking back I slowly got up . . . . jumped in a large pool of taffy! I have to admit it was sticky but it sure was yummy to my tummy!). The student’s purposeful vocabulary (Caustionshly I put the watch on . . . . Without hesitation I dove in) exhibits reasonable control, although there are minor lapses in phrasing (layed down on the candy smelling gras and drifted to sleep with good dreams). Sentence fluency is reasonable throughout the response. Conventions Annotations: The student presents overall reasonable control of grammatical conventions although there are errors, mostly misspellings (whene/when, emty/empty) in this longer response.

52

53


54

Grade 4-North Carolina General Writing Assessment - Sample Student Response #5 Rubric Content Score: 4 Rubric Convention Score: 2 Total Content Score: 16 Total Writing Score: 20 Total Conventions Score: 4 Achievement Level: IV

Content Annotation: The focus of this paper is clear (traveling into the distant past and distant future) and is maintained throughout the response. The organizational structure establishes relationships between and among events (a bright beam of light spread across the land . . . . Streams of hot lava spued in the sky . . . One was coming toward me! I screamed then another white light spread. I found myself in the futer . . . . a metior fell from the sky but just in time, the light came) and demonstrates a progression that is unified and complete. Elaboration and specific developed details support the topic (a round, red sun held high across the clouds makeng the water gleam with beautey and grace . . . . Then I heard a rumble. My peaceful cliff was really an active Volcano . . . . Flying cars grunted through the sky and teenagers were walking out of stores with strange clothes of neon colors on. Tall, white buildings hung below a green sky.) The student demonstrates skillful use of precise and purposeful vocabulary (There, nestled on a piece of soft, black velvet was a 7 carrot gold watch. The top was like polished crystal and the watch made it seem as if you were a princesse) and of sentence fluency (A tarodactol shoot up threw the sky and flew back down like a rocket. I took a breath of the salty air and sighed). Conventions Annotation: This paper exhibits reasonable control of sentence formation, word usage, and mechanics. The errors that are present are largely minor misspellings (peice/piece, princesse/princess, gorgeuse/gorgeous, spued/spewed, futer/future, sparkely/sparkly, ruffled/ruffeld/ruffled, metior/meteor, makeing/making, beautey/beauty, erged/urged, giggeled/giggled) and failure to use a word according to its standard meaning (threw/through) which do not impede the reader’s understanding.

55

2006-07

North Carolina Writing Assessment

Grade 4 – NCEXTEND2

Copies of Grade 4

Sample Student Responses The North Carolina Writing Assessment Scoring Model is comprised of a content component with a 1-4 score range and a conventions component with a 0-2 score range. To report a total writing score for each student, the score is computed by combining the content and conventions scores using the following model: Total Writing Assessment Score = sum of the (content component scores from two independent readers multiplied by 2) + the sum of the (conventions component scores from two independent readers multiplied by 1). The following pages provide copies of sample student responses from the North Carolina Writing Assessment (NCEXTEND2) at grade 4. The total content score, total conventions score, total writing score, Achievement Level, and annotated explanations of the scores are provided for each response.

57


58

Grade 4-North Carolina Writing Assessment ( NCEXTEND2) - Sample Student Response #1

Rubric Content Score: 1 Rubric Convention Score: 0 Total Content Score: 4 Total Writing Score: 4 Total Conventions Score: 0 Achievement Level: I

Content Annotation: Although this response establishes a topic (getting a watch from a friend, getting a milkshake and going to a dog show) it provides only a sparse series of events with little attempt at elaboration. Ideas and events are presented in a random fashion (One day at a park my frind was playing a game….one of them gave me a watch….It was funny suprise….my frind n___ she is my best frind.). Details are sparse (We got tird so we got a milkshake….i got choclet…she got villnai.). Conventions Annotation: This response demonstrates a lack of control of sentence formation, as many sentences are run-ons (One day at a park my frind was playing a game one of them gave me a watch….Then we went to the dog show my dog was there he won the contest.). There are some misspellings of common words (frind/friend, suprise/surprise, tird/tired, togther/together). Errors are dense in a brief paper.

59

60


61

Grade 4-North Carolina Writing Assessment (NCEXTEND2) - Sample Student Response #2


Content Annotation: Although this response establishes a focus (getting a watch from a friend, putting it on), the organizational structure establishes little relationship between ideas and events and there are major lapses in the logical progression of events (I shorted you can come over to my house….He shorted OK….Before long, I took the watch home…. I put the watch on…. It went into my skin.), and little support or elaboration is offered (A moment later, my friend was at the door….He munblend it took you to 1900’s….I shorted cool.). Detail is general and undeveloped (The watch was red, blue, black and green. So the numbers was black. They was chian numbers.). Conventions Annotation: This response exhibits minimal control of grammatical conventions. Although sentence formation is mostly correct, there are some run-on sentences. There are usage errors present (to/who, gave/giving, think/thank, was/were) and misspelling of common words (shorted/shouted, munblend/mumbled) in a relatively small sample of writing.

62

63


64

Grade 4-North Carolina Writing Assessment (NCEXTEND2) – Sample Student Response #3


Content Annotation: This response establishes a focus (getting a watch from a friend and keeping the watch), however the organizational structure establishes little relationship between ideas and events. Progression of events is logical, but each event is unrelated and unconnected to the next event (Then I opened it a birthday cake came out of it….Then I told my mom and dad once more…But they did not tell me give it back…. So they bought me another watch and I threw the other one away). This response also consists of undeveloped details presented in a list-like fashion (When I opened that I seen some balloons and party hats….So I told my mama and daddy again and again….But they say stop worrying….So I stop worrying….I went outside until they came outside.). Conventions Annotations: This response exhibits reasonable control for grammatical conventions. The response demonstrates control of sentence formation and mechanics, but there are a couple of usage errors (seen/saw, come/came).

65

66


67


Rubric Content Score: 3 Rubric Convention Score: 2 Total Content Score: 12 Total Writing Score: 16 Total Conventions Score: 4 Achievement Level: III

Content Annotation: The topic in this response is generally clear (getting the watch off) and remains consistently focused throughout. The organizational structure establishes a clear progression of related ideas and events. Support and elaboration consists of some specific details and development that support the topic of how to get the watch off (“I put the watch on my arm….Something surprising happenend I was so anxious….I tried to take it off….But it would not come off….I tried to get it off….But it did not work…”I said T___” something is wrong with it “he said I don’t know how to get it off…. I tried pulling it off my arm….I said to myself “how can I get this funny-watch off.”….I said I will try putting it on some water and try to slide it off But that did not work….I no I will try to step on it.). Conventions Annotations: This response demonstrates overall reasonable control of grammatical conventions with a few errors in sentence formation, usage, and mechanics (no/know, happenend/happened, tryed/tried).

68

69


70

Grade 4 –North Carolina Writing Assessment (NCEXTEND2)-Sample Student Response #5

Rubric Content Score: 4 Rubric Convention Score: 1 Total Content Score: 16 Total Writing Score: 18 Total Conventions Score: 2 Achievement Level: IV

Content Annotation: The focus of this paper is clearly established (being teleported to the ice age and encountering a saber-tooth tiger) and is maintained throughout. The organizational structure establishes connected relationships between ideas and events, consists of a logical progression or series of ideas, and is unified and complete. The writer supports the topic with related elaboration and provides many specific, developed details (As I wholed [whirled] away slolle [slowly] the capertoth chast me….I looked for a huge rock I was save for the capertoth….Later on I got down from the huge rock the capertoth spoit [spotted] me….I was runing from the capertoth agin….The capertoth chast me back in the kafe [cave] ….I was about to hit the funny looking watch it was goon [gone] of my rest [wrist]....I lost the watch.). Conventions Annotations: The response exhibits minimal control of grammatical conventions in a relatively long paper. Although this response has many sentences formed correctly, there are a number of run-ons. There are quite a few spelling errors of common words (kafe/cave, ma/me, nobers/numbers, frist/first, hans/hands, throuy/throw, awaye/away, scered/scared).

71

2006-07


Grade 4

Regional by LEA Performance

Tables 20a through 20l provide the number of students participating and the percent of students at or above Achievement Level III for each of the LEAs by region (former six Technical Assistance Centers configurations). Performance by ethnicity, gender, Title I, and migrant students is also provided for each LEA.


State Percent†2007 LEA Performance

* Metrolina** ... 94 Magellan** ... 91 Lincoln Charter** ...

88 Union Academy** 87 Quest Academy** 86 Greensboro Academy** ... 80 Carolina International**, Summit Charter** 79 Surry 78 Mountain Community**, Sterling Montessori** 77 Franklin Academy**, The Learning Center** ... 75 Chapel Hill-Carrboro City, Success Institute** ... 70 Haywood

2001 State 69 Children's Community**, Queen's Grant**, Transylvania, Woods Charter** ... 67 Phoenix Academy** ... 64 Elkin City, Gates 63 Millennium**, Polk 62 Cleveland, Wake, Watauga 61 Cape Fear Center**, Hyde 60 Catawba, Crossnore Academy**, F Delany New School** 59 Buncombe, Davie, Iredell-Statesville

2000 State 58 Henderson, Lincoln, Mooresville City 57 Avery, Camden, Piedmont Community** 56 American Renaissance**, Bethel Hill**, Caldwell, Charlotte/Mecklenburg, Cumberland, Davidson Haliwa-Saponi Tribal**, Onslow, Two Rivers Community School**, Winston-Salem/Forsyth

1999 State 55 Alexander, Currituck, Gaston, Madison, River Mill Academy**, Tyrrell 54 Anson, Arapahoe Charter**, Asheville City, Burke, Guilford, Harnett, Johnston, Pender, Rutherford, Union, Wayne, Yancey

1995, 2007 State 53 Casa Esperanza**, Caswell, Clover Garden**, Hickory City, Orange, Stokes1996, 1998 State 52 Carteret, Forsyth Academies**, Moore, Perquimans, Stanly

51 Alamance-Burlington, Beaufort, Dare2006 State 50 Brunswick, Cabarrus, Charter Day School**, Craven, Evergreen Community**, Franklin, McDowell

Orange Charter**, Warren, Washington Montessori**, Whiteville City1997, 2005 State 49 Alleghany, Arts Based Elementary**, New Hanover, Scotland

48 Ashe, Central Park School**, Durham, Mount Airy City, Northampton, STARS**2002 State 47 New Dimensions**, Rockingham, Rowan-Salisbury

46 Asheboro City, Chatham, Cherokee County, Granville, Lee, Macon, Vance Charter**, Wilkes, Yadkin 45 Kannapolis City, Lenoir, Nash-Rocky Mount, PreEminent**, Quality Education**, Sampson, Swain 44 Clinton City, Guilford Prep Academy**, Roanoke Rapids City, Wilson 43 Duplin, Halifax, Hoke, Kinston Charter Academy**, Montgomery, Person, Pitt 42 Carter Community**, East Wake Academy**, Jackson, Martin, Pamlico, Randolph 41 Mitchell, Washington 40 Jones, Mountain Discovery**

2003, 2004 State 39 Bridges**, Chatham Charter**, Elizabeth City/Pasquotank, Healthy Start**, Vance 38 Newton-Conover City 37 ArtSpace Charter**, Clay, Richmond, Torchlight Academy**, Weldon City 36 Bladen, Brevard Academy**, Columbus 35 Community Charter**, Robeson

1994 State 34 Hertford, Sugar Creek** 33 Bertie, Edenton/Chowan 32 Research Triangle**, Rocky Mount Prep Sch**, S.B. Howard** 31 Lexington City 30 C.G. Woodson** ... 27 Academy of Moore County**, Edgecombe, Greene ...

1993 State 24 Thomasville City ... 20 Crosscreek Charter School**, Graham 19 Tiller School**

... 17 Maureen Joy**, Omuteko Gwamaziima**, SPARC Academy** ... 15 Hope Elementary** ... 13 Alpha Academy** ... 6 Children's Village Academy** * Dillard Academy**, Grandfather Academy** Notes: †Percents are rounded to the nearest whole percent. *Performance data are not reported when number tested is fewer than five. Performance data that are less than or equal to 5.0 percent, or greater than or equal to 95.0 percent, are not displayed. **Denotes a charter school. For reporting purposes the charter school name has been abbreviated; the complete charter school name can be found in the Appendix. Beginning in 2003, data are reported using the revised standard and are generated using the new scoring model. Data for 2003 are from the pilot test administration. Data received from LEAs and charter schools after August 21, 2007 are not included in this table. Prepared by the NCDPI Division of Accountability Services/Test Development Section.

Grade 4

North Carolina General Writing Assessment, 2006-07,Percent of Students Scoring At or Above Level III, by LEA

Table 18. North Carolina Testing Program,

73


State Mean Score† 2007 LEA Performance 14.9 Magellan** ... 14.5 Metrolina** 14.3 Quest Academy**, Summit Charter** ... 14.0 Mountain Community** 13.9 Lincoln Charter** 13.7 Surry 13.5 Greensboro Academy** 13.3 Union Academy** ... 13.0 Carolina International**, Chapel Hill-Carrboro City, Haywood 12.9 Crossnore Academy**, Sterling Montessori** 12.7 Children's Community**, Transylvania 12.5 Millennium**, Phoenix Academy** 12.3 Franklin Academy**, Success Institute**, The Learning Center**, Watauga 12.1 Catawba, Polk, Tyrrell 12.0 Buncombe, Hyde, Wake 11.9 Avery, Bethel Hill**, Camden, Cape Fear Center**, Cleveland, Currituck, Gates, Henderson, Iredell-Statesville, Queen's Grant** 11.7 Arapahoe Charter**, Asheville City, Charlotte/Mecklenburg, Clover Garden**, F Delany New School**, Lincoln, Mooresville City, Orange, Pender, Stokes, Winston-Salem/Forsyth, Yancey

2007 State 11.5 Alexander, American Renaissance**, Anson, Beaufort, Burke, Caldwell, Carteret, Caswell, Cumberland, Dare, Davidson, Davie, Elkin City, Gaston, Guilford, Harnett, Hickory City, Johnston, Kinston Charter Academy**, Moore, Mount Airy City, Onslow, Piedmont Community**, Rutherford, Stanly, Union, Wayne, Woods Charter** 11.3 Carter Community**, Charter Day School**, Chatham, Craven, Evergreen Community**, Madison, Orange Charter**, River Mill Academy**, STARS**, Scotland, Two Rivers Community School**, Vance Charter**, Warren, Whiteville City

2005, 2006 State 11.1 Alamance-Burlington, Arts Based Elementary**, Cabarrus, Casa Esperanza**, Durham, Forsyth Academies**, Franklin, McDowell, New Hanover, Perquimans, Roanoke Rapids City, Washington Montessori** 11.0 Cherokee County, Lee, Mitchell, Nash-Rocky Mount, Wilson

2003, 2004 State 10.9 Alleghany, Brunswick, Central Park School**, Clinton City, Duplin, Granville, Halifax, Kannapolis City, Lenoir, Macon, Martin, Montgomery, Northampton, Pitt, Rockingham, Rowan-Salisbury, Sampson, Wilkes, Yadkin 10.7 ArtSpace Charter**, Ashe, Asheboro City, Brevard Academy**, Bridges**, Guilford Prep Academy**, Jackson, New Dimensions**, Pamlico, Person, Quality Education**, Randolph, Swain, Washington, Weldon City 10.5 Bladen, Chatham Charter**, Clay, Elizabeth City/Pasquotank, Hoke, Jones, Newton-Conover City, Vance 10.3 Bertie, Columbus, East Wake Academy**, Healthy Start**, Hertford, PreEminent**, Richmond, Robeson, Sugar Creek**, Tiller School** 10.1 Haliwa-Saponi Tribal**, S.B. Howard** 10.0 Lexington City, Rocky Mount Prep Sch** 9.9 C.G. Woodson**, Edenton/Chowan, Maureen Joy**, Omuteko Gwamaziima** 9.7 Community Charter**, Research Triangle**, Torchlight Academy** 9.5 Edgecombe, Mountain Discovery** 9.3 Academy of Moore County**, Crosscreek Charter School**, Graham, Greene, Thomasville City 9.1 Children's Village Academy** 9.0 Grandfather Academy** ... 8.7 Hope Elementary** 8.5 Alpha Academy** ... 7.7 SPARC Academy** 7.5 Dillard Academy**

Notes: †Scale scores are rounded up to the nearest two-tenths of a point. *Performance data are not reported when number tested is fewer than five. **Denotes a charter school. For reporting purposes the charter school name has been abbreviated; the complete charter school name can be found in the Appendix. Beginning in 2003, data are reported using the revised standard and are generated using the new scoring model. Data for 2003 are from the pilot test administration. Data received from LEAs and charter schools after August 21, 2007 are not included in this table. Prepared by the NCDPI Division of Accountability Services/Test Development Section.

North Carolina General Writing Assessment, 2006-07,Average Total Writing Score, by LEA

Grade 4


74

Number Tested

Percent At or Above Level III

Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


State 104,687 52.7 1,447 39.4 2,459 69.4 28,436 39.4 10,134 37.4 3,875 53.4 58,336 61.4Western Region 6,929 55.3 92 43.5 73 68.5 353 42.5 421 37.5 242 55.0 5,748 57.4Asheville City 255 54.1 0 * 6 50.0 88 38.6 13 30.8 20 30.0 128 71.1Buncombe 1,835 59.0 8 50.0 25 84.0 87 46.0 127 38.6 100 49.0 1,488 61.8Cherokee 270 45.6 2 * 4 * 4 * 3 * 1 * 256 45.7Clay 98 36.7 0 * 1 * 0 * 2 * 2 * 93 37.6Graham 84 20.2 11 18.2 1 * 0 * 1 * 1 * 70 20.0Haywood 520 69.8 9 66.7 1 * 4 * 16 56.3 9 88.9 481 70.3Henderson 894 58.3 6 33.3 9 55.6 29 44.8 104 40.4 40 70.0 706 61.0Jackson 287 42.2 26 38.5 3 * 4 * 12 8.3 5 80.0 237 43.0Macon 310 45.8 3 * 3 * 2 * 19 36.8 5 40.0 278 46.8Madison 177 54.8 2 * 0 * 1 * 3 * 6 33.3 165 55.8McDowell 476 50.2 0 * 8 50.0 10 40.0 43 25.6 5 40.0 410 53.2Mitchell 138 41.3 0 * 2 * 0 * 7 * 2 * 127 42.5Polk 171 62.6 0 * 0 * 8 62.5 17 41.2 5 80.0 141 64.5Rutherford 688 54.1 0 * 4 * 95 36.8 32 50.0 24 62.5 533 56.8Swain 122 45.1 22 54.5 2 * 1 * 3 * 0 * 94 40.4Transylvania 252 69.4 1 * 0 * 10 * 5 60.0 12 58.3 224 69.2Yancey 166 53.6 0 * 0 * 2 * 12 33.3 1 * 151 56.3ArtSpace Charter** 43 37.2 0 * 1 * 1 * 0 * 0 * 41 36.6Brevard Academy** 22 36.4 0 * 1 * 2 * 1 * 0 * 18 44.4Evergreen Community** 40 50.0 0 * 1 * 0 * 1 * 1 * 37 45.9F Delany New School** 15 60.0 0 * 0 * 4 * 0 * 1 * 10 60.0Mountain Community** 18 77.8 0 * 0 * 0 * 0 * 0 * 18 77.8Mountain Discovery** 15 40.0 2 * 1 * 0 * 0 * 1 * 11 45.5Summit Charter** 20 80.0 0 * 0 * 0 * 0 * 0 * 20 80.0The Learning Center** 13 76.9 0 * 0 * 1 * 0 * 1 * 11 72.7

Notes: *Performance data are not reported when number tested is fewer than five. Performance data that are less than or equal to 5.0 percent, or greater than or equal to 95.0 percent, are not displayed. The ethnic categories may not sum to total number tested because ethnic category may not have been coded on some student answer sheets. **Denotes a charter school. For reporting purposes the charter school name has been abbreviated; the complete name can be found in the Appendix. Alternate assessment data by LEA school are available at http://report.ncsu.edu/ncpublicschools.


Grade 4, by LEA and Ethnicity,Western Region

Total



American Indian WhiteAsian Black Hispanic Multi-Racial

75

Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


State 104,687 52.7 51,827 59.7 52,860 45.8 56,608 45.4 48,079 61.2 53,578 45.9 2,744 37.5 768 28.5Western Region 6,929 55.3 3,461 63.2 3,468 47.5 5,891 53.3 1,038 67.1 5,730 53.4 161 48.4 14 50.0Asheville City 255 54.1 123 55.3 132 53.0 253 54.2 2 * 253 54.2 0 * 0 *Buncombe 1,835 59.0 926 66.8 909 50.9 1,338 54.8 497 70.2 1,256 54.5 82 58.5 1 *Cherokee County 270 45.6 110 56.4 160 38.1 268 45.9 2 * 268 45.9 0 * 0 *Clay 98 36.7 48 37.5 50 36.0 97 36.1 1 * 97 36.1 0 * 0 *Graham 84 20.2 44 27.3 40 12.5 84 20.2 0 * 84 20.2 0 * 0 *Haywood 520 69.8 275 76.7 245 62.0 516 70.0 4 * 516 70.0 0 * 0 *Henderson 894 58.3 456 65.6 438 50.7 661 54.2 233 70.0 661 54.2 0 * 9 33.3Jackson 287 42.2 136 46.3 151 38.4 282 42.6 5 20.0 282 42.6 0 * 0 *Macon 310 45.8 154 56.5 156 35.3 286 45.8 24 45.8 286 45.8 0 * 0 *Madison 177 54.8 88 63.6 89 46.1 177 54.8 0 * 177 54.8 0 * 0 *McDowell 476 50.2 237 58.6 239 41.8 476 50.2 0 * 476 50.2 0 * 0 *Mitchell 138 41.3 63 47.6 75 36.0 138 41.3 0 * 138 41.3 0 * 0 *76 Polk 171 62.6 87 72.4 84 52.4 42 42.9 129 69.0 0 * 42 42.9 0 *Rutherford 688 54.1 332 63.6 356 45.2 686 54.1 2 * 686 54.1 0 * 1 *Swain 122 45.1 60 50.0 62 40.3 120 45.0 2 * 120 45.0 0 * 0 *Transylvania 252 69.4 137 77.4 115 60.0 251 69.7 1 * 251 69.7 0 * 0 *Yancey 166 53.6 86 61.6 80 45.0 166 53.6 0 * 166 53.6 0 * 3 *ArtSpace Charter** 43 37.2 22 45.5 21 28.6 0 * 43 37.2 0 * 0 * 0 *Brevard Academy** 22 36.4 11 54.5 11 18.2 22 36.4 0 * 0 * 22 36.4 0 *Evergreen Community** 40 50.0 21 57.1 19 42.1 10 30.0 30 56.7 0 * 10 30.0 0 *F Delany New School** 15 60.0 11 72.7 4 * 4 * 11 72.7 0 * 4 * 0 *Mountain Community** 18 77.8 8 75.0 10 80.0 0 * 18 77.8 0 * 0 * 0 *Mountain Discovery** 15 40.0 9 22.2 6 66.7 1 * 14 42.9 0 * 1 * 0 *Summit Charter** 20 80.0 10 90.0 10 70.0 0 * 20 80.0 0 * 0 * 0 *The Learning Center** 13 76.9 7 * 6 50.0 13 76.9 0 * 13 76.9 0 * 0 *

Notes: *Performance data are not reported when number tested is fewer than five. Performance data that are less than or equal to 5.0 percent, or greater than or equal to 95.0 percent, are not displayed. The gender, Title I, and Migrant categories may not sum to total number tested because these categories may not have been coded on some student answer sheets. **Denotes a charter school. For reporting purposes the charter school name has been abbreviated; the complete name can be found in the Appendix. Alternate assessment data by LEA school are available at http://report.ncsu.edu/ncpublicschools.



Table 20b. North Carolina Testing ProgramNorth Carolina General Writing Assessment, 2006-07,

Grade 4, by LEA, Gender, Title I, and Migrant StudentsWestern Region

Total Female Male Not Served by Title ISchoolwide Title I

Program Targeted Assistance MigrantServed by Title I

Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


State 104,687 52.7 1,447 39.4 2,459 69.4 28,436 39.4 10,134 37.4 3,875 53.4 58,336 61.4Northwest Region 15,853 55.3 33 54.5 363 56.7 2,110 41.8 1,585 36.7 502 53.0 11,260 60.5Alexander 441 55.1 1 * 9 44.4 16 37.5 20 45.0 8 50.0 387 56.6Alleghany 104 49.0 0 * 0 * 1 * 16 37.5 1 * 86 50.0Ashe 248 47.6 1 * 0 * 2 * 14 42.9 7 28.6 224 49.1Avery 162 57.4 1 * 2 * 1 * 7 14.3 0 * 151 59.6Burke 981 53.6 0 * 74 45.9 48 37.5 56 35.7 41 39.0 762 57.5Caldwell 956 56.0 0 * 8 87.5 75 37.3 60 48.3 32 50.0 781 58.3Catawba 1,259 60.2 6 83.3 87 50.6 86 47.7 84 44.0 46 58.7 950 63.6Davidson 1,531 56.2 4 * 18 66.7 29 58.6 62 48.4 19 57.9 1,399 56.4Davie 467 59.3 2 * 6 * 20 30.0 47 42.6 16 50.0 376 62.5Elkin City 77 63.6 0 * 0 * 6 33.3 9 22.2 1 * 61 72.1Hickory City 293 53.2 1 * 13 46.2 63 42.9 50 34.0 16 18.8 150 68.7Iredell-Statesville 1,548 58.5 5 80.0 42 61.9 216 43.5 128 43.8 28 82.1 1,129 62.2Lexington City 224 31.3 1 * 8 50.0 79 27.8 57 33.3 17 23.5 62 33.9Mount Airy City 121 47.9 0 * 5 * 13 7.7 20 25.0 8 37.5 75 65.3Newton-Conover City 198 37.9 0 * 8 25.0 32 21.9 39 25.6 13 46.2 106 47.2Stokes 531 53.1 2 * 1 * 17 35.3 18 55.6 13 38.5 480 54.4Surry 627 78.8 2 * 2 * 13 92.3 89 68.5 16 68.8 505 81.0Thomasville City 197 23.9 1 * 2 * 84 20.2 46 19.6 13 23.1 51 33.3Watauga 313 61.7 0 * 2 * 3 * 7 14.3 4 * 297 62.6Wilkes 766 46.3 0 * 5 * 27 25.9 60 33.3 19 52.6 655 47.8Winston-Salem/Forsyth 3,673 55.5 5 60.0 58 74.1 1,100 44.5 593 30.9 148 64.2 1,769 69.1Yadkin 436 45.6 0 * 1 * 20 35.0 67 25.4 11 27.3 337 51.0American Renaissance** 55 56.4 0 * 1 * 4 * 3 * 0 * 47 55.3Arts Based Elementary** 33 48.5 0 * 3 * 8 75.0 3 * 1 * 18 38.9Bridges** 18 38.9 0 * 0 * 0 * 1 * 2 * 15 40.0C.G. Woodson** 27 29.6 0 * 0 * 21 33.3 5 20.0 1 * 0 *Crossnore Academy** 5 60.0 0 * 0 * 0 * 0 * 0 * 5 60.0Forsyth Academies** 77 51.9 0 * 0 * 45 53.3 6 16.7 1 * 25 56.0Grandfather Academy** 2 * 0 * 0 * 0 * 0 * 0 * 2 *Millennium** 40 62.5 0 * 0 * 1 * 1 * 1 * 37 64.9New Dimensions** 15 46.7 0 * 0 * 2 * 0 * 1 * 12 50.0Quality Education** 20 45.0 0 * 0 * 17 41.2 3 * 0 * 0 *Success Institute** 8 75.0 0 * 0 * 6 83.3 0 * 1 * 1 *Two Rivers Community Sch.* 9 55.6 1 * 0 * 0 * 0 * 1 * 7 42.9

Notes: *Performance data are not reported when number tested is fewer than five. Performance data that are less than or equal to 5.0 percent, or greater than or equal to 95.0 percent, are not displayed. The ethnic categories may not sum to total number tested because ethnic category may not have been coded on some student answer sheets. **Denotes a charter school. For reporting purposes the charter school name has been abbreviated; the complete name can be found in the Appendix. Alternate assessment data by LEA school are available at http://report.ncsu.edu/ncpublicschools


Northwest Region


Table 20c. North Carolina Testing ProgramNorth Carolina General Writing Assessment, 2006-07,

Grade 4, by LEA and Ethnicity,

Hispanic Multi-Racial WhiteTotal American Indian Asian Black

77

Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


State 104,687 52.7 51,827 59.7 52,860 45.8 56,608 45.4 48,079 61.2 53,578 45.9 2,744 37.5 768 28.5Northwest Region 15,853 55.3 7,802 62.4 8,051 48.4 8,684 49.3 7,169 62.6 8,194 50.2 489 32.9 3 *Alexander 441 55.1 217 61.8 224 48.7 103 35.0 338 61.2 43 41.9 60 30.0 0 *Alleghany 104 49.0 52 57.7 52 40.4 104 49.0 0 * 104 49.0 0 * 1 *Ashe 248 47.6 118 51.7 130 43.8 248 47.6 0 * 248 47.6 0 * 0 *Avery 162 57.4 76 64.5 86 51.2 133 56.4 29 62.1 133 56.4 0 * 0 *Burke 981 53.6 498 60.8 483 46.2 980 53.6 1 * 980 53.6 0 * 0 *Caldwell 956 56.0 502 63.7 454 47.4 953 56.0 3 * 953 56.0 0 * 1 *Catawba 1,259 60.2 613 68.7 646 52.2 499 55.9 760 63.0 493 56.6 6 * 0 *Davidson 1,531 56.2 756 65.5 775 47.1 75 20.0 1,456 58.0 0 * 75 20.0 0 *Davie 467 59.3 234 68.4 233 50.2 82 37.8 385 63.9 0 * 82 37.8 0 *Elkin City 77 63.6 44 72.7 33 51.5 11 27.3 66 69.7 0 * 11 27.3 0 *Hickory City 293 53.2 147 63.9 146 42.5 290 53.1 3 * 290 53.1 0 * 0 *Iredell-Statesville 1,548 58.5 778 65.7 770 51.2 869 51.8 679 67.0 869 51.8 0 * 0 *Lexington City 224 31.3 101 36.6 123 26.8 224 31.3 0 * 224 31.3 0 * 0 *Mooresville City 391 58.1 203 62.6 188 53.2 0 * 391 58.1 0 * 0 * 0 *Mount Airy City 121 47.9 55 49.1 66 47.0 121 47.9 0 * 121 47.9 0 * 0 *Newton-Conover City 198 37.9 88 50.0 110 28.2 124 33.9 74 44.6 124 33.9 0 * 0 *Stokes 531 53.1 263 63.9 268 42.5 353 52.4 178 54.5 353 52.4 0 * 0 *Surry 627 78.8 301 82.7 326 75.2 546 76.2 81 >=95% 545 76.1 0 * 1 *Thomasville City 197 23.9 107 32.7 90 13.3 196 24.0 1 * 196 24.0 0 * 0 *Watauga 313 61.7 143 67.1 170 57.1 82 56.1 231 63.6 60 63.3 22 36.4 0 *Wilkes 766 46.3 372 53.8 394 39.3 765 46.4 1 * 704 44.9 61 63.9 0 *Winston-Salem/Forsyth 3,673 55.5 1,788 61.5 1,885 49.8 1,455 40.4 2,218 65.3 1,362 41.7 93 21.5 0 *Yadkin 436 45.6 190 47.9 246 43.9 358 43.6 78 55.1 358 43.6 0 * 0 *American Renaissance** 55 56.4 27 63.0 28 50.0 0 * 55 56.4 0 * 0 * 0 *Arts Based Elementary** 33 48.5 17 58.8 16 37.5 4 * 29 51.7 0 * 4 * 0 *Bridges** 18 38.9 8 62.5 10 20.0 0 * 18 38.9 0 * 0 * 0 *C.G. Woodson** 27 29.6 15 40.0 12 16.7 27 29.6 0 * 0 * 27 29.6 0 *Crossnore Academy** 5 60.0 2 * 3 * 5 60.0 0 * 5 60.0 0 * 0 *Forsyth Academies** 77 51.9 51 58.8 26 38.5 48 37.5 29 75.9 0 * 48 37.5 0 *Grandfather Academy** 2 * 0 * 2 * 2 * 0 * 2 * 0 * 0 *Millennium** 40 62.5 20 55.0 20 70.0 0 * 40 62.5 0 * 0 * 0 *New Dimensions** 15 46.7 3 * 12 58.3 0 * 15 46.7 0 * 0 * 0 *Quality Education** 20 45.0 7 28.6 13 53.8 20 45.0 0 * 20 45.0 0 * 0 *Success Institute** 8 75.0 4 * 4 * 7 71.4 1 * 7 71.4 0 * 0 *Two Rivers Community School** 9 55.6 2 * 7 57.1 0 * 9 55.6 0 * 0 * 0 *

Notes: *Performance data are not reported when number tested is fewer than five. Performance data that are less than or equal to 5.0 percent, or greater than or equal to 95.0 percent, are not displayed. The gender, Title I, and Migrant categories may not sum to total number tested because these categories may not have been coded on some student answer sheets. **Denotes a charter school. For reporting purposes the charter school name has been abbreviated; the complete name can be found in the Appendix. Alternate assessment data by LEA school are available at http://report.ncsu.edu/ncpublicschools. Data received from LEAs and charter schools after August 21, 2007 are not included in this table. Prepared by the NCDPI Division of Accountability Services/Test Development Section.

Northwest Region


Table 20d. North Carolina Testing ProgramNorth Carolina General Writing Assessment, 2006-07

Grade 4, by LEA, Gender, Title I, and Migrant Students

Schoolwide Title I Program Targeted Assistance MigrantTotal Female Male Not Served by Title IServed by Title I

78

Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


State 104,687 52.7 1,447 39.4 2,459 69.4 28,436 39.4 10,134 37.4 3,875 53.4 58,336 61.4Southwest Region 24,702 53.5 254 37.4 651 69.4 7,255 40.0 2,519 38.8 859 51.8 13,164 63.4Anson 276 53.6 0 * 9 66.7 154 39.6 8 37.5 5 20.0 100 77.0Cabarrus 1,883 49.8 4 * 34 61.8 321 37.1 189 27.0 99 50.5 1,236 56.4Charlotte/Mecklenburg 9,624 55.5 51 37.3 422 70.4 3,979 42.0 1,270 41.0 373 59.0 3,529 74.0Cleveland 1,259 61.5 4 * 6 50.0 355 51.8 40 52.5 40 50.0 814 66.8Gaston 2,286 55.2 2 * 30 73.3 480 39.8 158 46.2 48 64.6 1,568 60.1Hoke 544 43.0 72 29.2 5 80.0 214 37.9 64 34.4 24 58.3 165 55.8Kannapolis City 362 45.3 1 * 8 62.5 93 35.5 61 42.6 22 45.5 177 50.3Lincoln 852 58.1 4 * 4 * 52 34.6 87 44.8 25 32.0 680 62.5Montgomery 310 43.2 2 * 2 * 81 27.2 89 40.4 4 * 132 55.3Moore 855 51.8 11 63.6 8 75.0 168 35.7 76 31.6 34 58.8 558 58.4Richmond 624 36.9 23 21.7 4 * 236 27.5 35 25.7 13 7.7 313 47.3Rowan-Salisbury 1,540 46.5 7 42.9 22 50.0 304 32.6 129 31.8 59 37.3 1,019 53.0Scotland 513 48.7 64 42.2 9 88.9 242 37.2 5 20.0 12 50.0 181 65.2Stanly 591 51.6 1 * 29 51.7 80 30.0 29 41.4 17 35.3 435 57.0Union 2,659 54.1 5 60.0 42 81.0 366 35.2 269 33.8 70 35.7 1,907 60.6Academy of Moore County** 11 27.3 1 * 0 * 8 25.0 0 * 0 * 2 *Carolina International** 40 80.0 0 * 5 80.0 5 60.0 1 * 2 * 27 81.5Children's Community** 87 69.0 0 * 0 * 0 * 4 * 1 * 82 69.5Community Charter** 23 34.8 0 * 0 * 12 33.3 0 * 6 50.0 5 20.0Lincoln Charter** 44 90.9 0 * 0 * 3 * 0 * 1 * 40 92.5Metrolina** 20 >=95% 0 * 5 * 1 * 1 * 0 * 13 *Piedmont Community** 69 56.5 1 * 1 * 13 53.8 1 * 3 * 50 56.0Queen's Grant** 78 69.2 0 * 5 80.0 5 40.0 0 * 1 * 67 70.1STARS** 23 47.8 1 * 0 * 10 30.0 2 * 0 * 10 50.0Sugar Creek** 64 34.4 0 * 0 * 63 33.3 1 * 0 * 0 *Union Academy** 65 87.7 0 * 1 * 10 80.0 0 * 0 * 54 88.9 Notes: *Performance data are not reported when number tested is fewer than five. Performance data that are less than or equal to 5.0 percent, or greater than or equal to 95.0 percent, are not displayed. The ethnic categories may not sum to total number tested because ethnic category may not have been coded on some student answer sheets. **Denotes a charter school. For reporting purposes the charter school name has been abbreviated; the complete name can be found in the Appendix. Alternate assessment data by LEA school are available at http://report.ncsu.edu/ncpublicschools.



Table 20e. North Carolina Testing ProgramNorth Carolina General Writing Assessment, 2006-07


Hispanic Multi-Racial

Southwest Region

Total American Indian WhiteAsian Black

79

Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


State 104,687 52.7 51,827 59.7 52,860 45.8 56,608 45.4 48,079 61.2 53,578 45.9 2,744 37.5 768 28.5Southwest Region 24,702 53.5 12,303 60.7 12,399 46.4 9,279 42.0 15,423 60.4 8,817 42.0 461 43.6 21 9.5

Anson 276 53.6 165 63.6 111 38.7 205 46.3 71 74.6 205 46.3 0 * 0 *Cabarrus 1,883 49.8 943 57.5 940 42.1 980 42.8 903 57.5 980 42.8 0 * 0 *Charlotte/Mecklenburg 9,624 55.5 4,752 62.7 4,872 48.4 2,082 33.7 7,542 61.5 1,952 33.9 130 30.8 4 *Cleveland 1,259 61.5 619 68.2 640 55.0 379 58.6 880 62.7 349 61.0 30 30.0 0 *Gaston 2,286 55.2 1,141 62.1 1,145 48.3 1,087 46.4 1,199 63.1 939 44.3 148 59.5 0 *Hoke 544 43.0 280 48.6 264 37.1 444 41.7 100 49.0 444 41.7 0 * 4 *Kannapolis City 362 45.3 177 54.2 185 36.8 361 45.4 1 * 361 45.4 0 * 0 *Lincoln 852 58.1 412 64.8 440 51.8 521 53.6 331 65.3 521 53.6 0 * 0 *Montgomery 310 43.2 167 50.3 143 35.0 305 43.9 5 * 305 43.9 0 * 4 *Moore 855 51.8 441 59.6 414 43.5 581 45.8 274 64.6 581 45.8 0 * 4 *Richmond 624 36.9 289 44.6 335 30.1 431 33.4 193 44.6 431 33.4 0 * 1 *Rowan-Salisbury 1,540 46.5 777 52.8 763 40.1 663 39.8 877 51.5 604 42.5 58 12.1 3 *Scotland 513 48.7 272 53.3 241 43.6 352 45.2 161 56.5 352 45.2 0 * 0 *Stanly 591 51.6 298 59.4 293 43.7 218 42.2 373 57.1 218 42.2 0 * 0 *Union 2,659 54.1 1,301 61.9 1,358 46.6 488 37.1 2,171 57.9 488 37.1 0 * 0 *Academy of Moore County** 11 27.3 3 * 8 37.5 0 * 11 27.3 0 * 0 * 0 *Carolina International** 40 80.0 20 75.0 20 85.0 0 * 40 80.0 0 * 0 * 0 *Children's Community** 87 69.0 52 71.2 35 65.7 0 * 87 69.0 0 * 0 * 0 *Community Charter** 23 34.8 9 33.3 14 35.7 9 33.3 14 35.7 0 * 9 33.3 1 *Lincoln Charter** 44 90.9 30 93.3 14 85.7 0 * 44 90.9 0 * 0 * 0 *Metrolina** 20 >=95% 5 * 15 * 0 * 20 >=95% 0 * 0 * 0 *Piedmont Community** 69 56.5 33 69.7 36 44.4 8 * 61 63.9 0 * 8 * 0 *Queen's Grant** 78 69.2 39 84.6 39 53.8 78 69.2 0 * 0 * 78 69.2 0 *STARS** 23 47.8 12 66.7 11 27.3 23 47.8 0 * 23 47.8 0 * 0 *Sugar Creek** 64 34.4 31 38.7 33 30.3 64 34.4 0 * 64 34.4 0 * 0 *Union Academy** 65 87.7 35 85.7 30 90.0 0 * 65 87.7 0 * 0 * 0 *



Southwest Region

Total Female


Table 20f. North Carolina Testing ProgramNorth Carolina General Writing Assessment, 2006-07


MigrantMale Not Served by Title ISchoolwide Title I

Program Targeted AssistanceServed by Title I

80

Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


State 104,687 52.7 1,447 39.4 2,459 69.4 28,436 39.4 10,134 37.4 3,875 53.4 58,336 61.4Northeast Region 6,026 43.1 20 50.0 44 54.5 2,802 31.7 286 32.2 177 54.8 2,697 55.1Beaufort 515 50.5 0 * 3 * 162 33.3 55 47.3 16 56.3 279 60.6Bertie 214 33.2 1 * 2 * 186 28.5 4 * 0 * 21 66.7Camden 137 56.9 1 * 0 * 17 52.9 0 * 0 * 119 57.1Currituck 263 54.8 0 * 1 * 15 40.0 3 * 16 62.5 228 54.8Dare 361 51.2 0 * 5 40.0 8 37.5 32 18.8 5 60.0 311 55.0Edenton/Chowan 204 33.3 0 * 0 * 99 19.2 4 * 6 33.3 95 48.4Edgecombe 515 26.8 0 * 2 * 276 19.2 32 25.0 9 33.3 196 37.8Elizabeth City/Pasquotank 428 39.3 1 * 0 * 183 27.9 4 * 23 60.9 217 46.5Gates 129 63.6 0 * 0 * 37 56.8 2 * 7 71.4 83 67.5Halifax 311 43.4 12 58.3 1 * 273 44.0 2 * 3 * 20 35.0Hertford 199 34.2 0 * 1 * 166 31.9 1 * 0 * 31 48.4Hyde 36 61.1 0 * 0 * 11 81.8 6 50.0 1 * 18 55.6Martin 290 42.1 0 * 2 * 147 29.9 9 * 5 60.0 127.0 58.3Northampton 218 47.7 0 * 0 * 178 47.2 4 * 2 * 34 55.9Perquimans 104 51.9 0 * 2 * 31 48.4 1 * 4 * 66 51.5Pitt 1,623 42.6 4 * 23 56.5 785 27.8 111 30.6 69 52.2 631 61.6Roanoke Rapids City 192 43.8 0 * 1 * 47 23.4 2 * 4 * 138 48.6Tyrrell 42 54.8 0 * 0 * 15 53.3 5 60.0 3 * 19 52.6Washington 149 40.9 0 * 1 * 98 33.7 8 25.0 3 * 39 61.5Weldon City 68 36.8 1 * 0 * 65 38.5 0 * 0 * 2 *Washington Montessori** 28 50.0 0 * 0 * 3 * 1 * 1 * 23 56.5

Notes: *Performance data are not reported when number tested is fewer than five. Performance data that are less than or equal to 5.0 percent, or greater than or equal to 95.0 percent, are not displayed. The ethnic categories may not sum to total number tested because ethnic category may not have been coded on some student answer sheets. **Denotes a charter school. For reporting purposes the charter school name has been abbreviated; the complete name can be found in the Appendix. Alternate assessment data by LEA school are available at http://report.ncsu.edu/ncpublicschools.



Table 20g. North Carolina Testing ProgramNorth Carolina General Writing Assessment, 2006-07



Northeast Region


81

Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


State 104,687 52.7 51,827 59.7 52,860 45.8 56,608 45.4 48,079 61.2 53,578 45.9 2,744 37.5 768 28.5Northeast Region 6,026 43.1 2,989 49.4 3,037 36.9 4,290 39.7 1,736 51.4 3,440 41.3 573 37.2 504 26.4Beaufort 515 50.5 259 56.0 256 44.9 512 50.8 3 * 512 50.8 0 * 0 *Bertie 214 33.2 107 41.1 107 25.2 213 32.9 1 * 213 32.9 0 * 2 *Camden 137 56.9 74 60.8 63 52.4 23 21.7 114 64.0 0 * 23 21.7 0 *Currituck 263 54.8 132 62.9 131 46.6 69 58.0 194 53.6 0 * 69 58.0 0 *Dare 361 51.2 186 56.5 175 45.7 35 11.4 326 55.5 0 * 35 11.4 0 *Edenton/Chowan 204 33.3 97 32.0 107 34.6 203 33.0 1 * 203 33.0 0 * 1 *Edgecombe 515 26.8 255 30.6 260 23.1 501 26.3 14 42.9 227 27.3 0 * 492 26.6Elizabeth City/Pasquotank 428 39.3 221 48.4 207 29.5 427 39.3 1 * 427 39.3 0 * 0 *Gates 129 63.6 58 79.3 71 50.7 127 63.0 2 * 127 63.0 0 * 0 *Halifax 311 43.4 160 48.1 151 38.4 311 43.4 0 * 311 43.4 0 * 1 *Hertford 199 34.2 110 40.9 89 25.8 198 34.3 1 * 198 34.3 0 * 0 *Hyde 36 61.1 17 64.7 19 57.9 26 69.2 10 40.0 26 69.2 0 * 0 *Martin 290 42.1 139 48.2 151 36.4 290 42.1 0 * 290 42.1 0 * 0 *Northampton 218 47.7 102 53.9 116 42.2 216 47.7 2 * 216 47.7 0 * 1 *Perquimans 104 51.9 56 60.7 48 41.7 104 51.9 0 * 104 51.9 0 * 0 *Pitt 1,623 42.6 769 48.4 854 37.5 584 31.8 1,039 48.7 327 32.1 254 31.5 7 14.3Roanoke Rapids City 192 43.8 101 49.5 91 37.4 192 43.8 0 * 0 * 192 43.8 0 *Tyrrell 42 54.8 20 75.0 22 36.4 42 54.8 0 * 42 54.8 0 * 0 *Washington 149 40.9 69 50.7 80 32.5 149 40.9 0 * 149 40.9 0 * 0 *Weldon City 68 36.8 39 53.8 29 13.8 68 36.8 0 * 68 36.8 0 * 0 *Washington Montessori** 28 50.0 18 61.1 10 30.0 0 * 28 50.0 0 * 0 * 0 *



Northeast Region

Total Female


Table 20h. North Carolina Testing ProgramNorth Carolina General Writing Assessment, 2006-07


MigrantMale Not Served by Title ISchoolwide Title I

Program Targeted AssistanceServed by Title I

82

Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


State 104,687 52.7 1,447 39.4 2,459 69.4 28,436 39.4 10,134 37.4 3,875 53.4 58,336 61.4Southeast Region 17,403 48.8 909 36.2 212 71.7 5,586 39.5 1,510 38.3 728 51.5 8,458 57.5Bladen 369 35.8 7 42.9 0 * 174 31.6 28 32.1 7 14.3 153 41.8Brunswick 839 49.5 9 55.6 7 71.4 141 44.7 60 33.3 29 48.3 593 51.9Carteret 551 52.1 2 * 5 40.0 43 41.9 16 43.8 14 42.9 471 53.7Clinton City 224 43.8 13 38.5 5 60.0 88 34.1 26 23.1 7 42.9 85 60.0Columbus 465 36.1 31 38.7 0 * 146 26.7 35 22.9 5 20.0 248 43.5Craven 1,085 50.0 3 * 13 69.2 352 35.8 68 42.6 46 54.3 603 58.2Cumberland 3,947 56.0 68 48.5 91 72.5 1,795 48.7 268 54.5 177 61.0 1,548 63.4Duplin 669 42.6 1 * 0 * 195 36.9 190 36.3 16 43.8 267 50.9Greene 238 26.9 0 * 1 * 98 16.3 52 15.4 10 40.0 77 46.8Jones 90 40.0 0 * 0 * 41 29.3 4 * 2 * 43 46.5Lenoir 669 44.5 1 * 5 80.0 318 32.4 53 35.8 12 66.7 280 58.6New Hanover 1,775 48.7 6 83.3 20 75.0 448 28.3 100 27.0 89 53.9 1,112 57.8Onslow 1,686 56.2 15 60.0 27 77.8 288 45.1 89 53.9 176 51.1 1,091 59.6Pamlico 97 42.3 0 * 1 * 23 30.4 2 * 2 * 69 47.8Pender 585 54.4 1 * 3 * 135 43.0 42 31.0 14 50.0 390 60.8Robeson 1,692 34.7 732 33.6 13 69.2 466 30.0 138 26.1 42 38.1 301 46.5Sampson 589 44.7 8 12.5 1 * 154 32.5 165 36.4 13 46.2 248 58.9Wayne 1,387 53.6 3 * 19 78.9 536 46.1 159 40.9 50 42.0 620 63.5Whiteville City 208 50.0 7 28.6 1 * 78 34.6 11 36.4 10 70.0 101 63.4Alpha Academy** 16 12.5 0 * 0 * 12 8.3 0 * 0 * 4 *Arapahoe Charter** 26 53.8 1 * 0 * 0 * 1 * 1 * 23 60.9Cape Fear Center** 43 60.5 0 * 0 * 4 * 1 * 2 * 36 66.7Charter Day School** 90 50.0 1 * 0 * 5 40.0 0 * 4 * 80 50.0Children's Village Academy** 18 5.6 0 * 0 * 18 5.6 0 * 0 * 0 *Dillard Academy** 15 * 0 * 0 * 15 * 0 * 0 * 0 *Kinston Charter Academy** 14 42.9 0 * 0 * 12 41.7 2 * 0 * 0 *Tiller School** 16 18.8 0 * 0 * 1 * 0 * 0 * 15 20.0 Notes: *Performance data are not reported when number tested is fewer than five. Performance data that are less than or equal to 5.0 percent, or greater than or equal to 95.0 percent, are not displayed. The ethnic categories may not sum to total number tested because ethnic category may not have been coded on some student answer sheet **Denotes a charter school. For reporting purposes the charter school name has been abbreviated; the complete name can be found in the Appendix. Alternate assessment data by LEA school are available at http://report.ncsu.edu/ncpublicschools.


Southeast Region


Table 20i. North Carolina Testing ProgramNorth Carolina General Writing Assessment, 2006-07



83

Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


State 104,687 52.7 51,827 59.7 52,860 45.8 56,608 45.4 48,079 61.2 53,578 45.9 2,744 37.5 768 28.5Southeast Region 17,403 48.8 8,673 55.7 8,730 42.0 14,302 45.8 3,101 62.9 13,744 46.1 557 39.7 172 33.7Bladen 369 35.8 185 43.8 184 27.7 366 35.8 3 * 366 35.8 0 * 0 *Brunswick 839 49.5 428 59.6 411 38.9 833 49.3 6 66.7 833 49.3 0 * 0 *Carteret 551 52.1 259 64.1 292 41.4 424 50.9 127 55.9 424 50.9 0 * 0 *Clinton City 224 43.8 116 47.4 108 39.8 224 43.8 0 * 224 43.8 0 * 0 *Columbus 465 36.1 251 41.0 214 30.4 459 36.2 6 33.3 376 35.6 83 38.6 17 5.9Craven 1,085 50.0 515 58.4 570 42.3 1,082 50.0 3 * 1,082 50.0 0 * 0 *Cumberland 3,947 56.0 1,951 62.6 1,996 49.4 3,339 53.1 608 71.5 3,339 53.1 0 * 0 *Duplin 669 42.6 330 49.7 339 35.7 667 42.6 2 * 667 42.6 0 * 3 *Greene 238 26.9 131 32.8 107 19.6 235 26.4 3 * 235 26.4 0 * 0 *Jones 90 40.0 51 43.1 39 35.9 89 40.4 1 * 89 40.4 0 * 0 *Lenoir 669 44.5 337 49.9 332 39.2 668 44.6 1 * 668 44.6 0 * 5 20.0New Hanover 1,775 48.7 915 55.4 860 41.6 1,326 43.0 449 65.7 1,326 43.0 0 * 0 *Onslow 1,686 56.2 852 62.8 834 49.5 1,153 53.1 533 63.0 1,086 54.6 67 28.4 0 *Pamlico 97 42.3 44 40.9 53 43.4 97 42.3 0 * 97 42.3 0 * 0 *Pender 585 54.4 286 58.4 299 50.5 465 51.0 120 67.5 464 51.1 0.0 * 10 20.0Robeson 1,692 34.7 841 41.9 851 27.6 1,596 32.5 96 70.8 1,596 32.5 0 * 116 41.4Sampson 589 44.7 306 47.7 283 41.3 583 44.6 6 50.0 583 44.6 0 * 8 25.0Wayne 1,387 53.6 669 62.3 718 45.5 330 40.9 1,057 57.6 33 45.5 297 40.4 1 *Whiteville City 208 50.0 96 55.2 112 45.5 208 50.0 0 * 208 50.0 0 * 12 33.3Alpha Academy** 16 12.5 9 11.1 7 14.3 16 12.5 0 * 1 * 15 13.3 0 *Arapahoe Charter** 26 53.8 18 61.1 8 37.5 5 60.0 21 52.4 0 * 5 60.0 0 *Cape Fear Center** 43 60.5 17 82.4 26 46.2 0 * 43 60.5 0 * 0 * 0 *Charter Day School** 90 50.0 34 67.6 56 39.3 90 50.0 0 * 0 * 90 50.0 0 *Children's Village Academy** 18 5.6 10 10.0 8 * 18 5.6 0 * 18 6 0 * 0 *Dillard Academy** 15 * 5 * 10 * 15 * 0 * 15 * 0 * 0 *Kinston Charter Academy** 14 42.9 9 44.4 5 40.0 14 42.9 0 * 14 42.9 0 * 0 *Tiller School** 16 18.8 8 25.0 8 12.5 0 * 16 18.8 0 * 0 * 0 * Notes: *Performance data are not reported when number tested is fewer than five. Performance data that are less than or equal to 5.0 percent, or greater than or equal to 95.0 percent, are not displayed. The gender, Title I, and Migrant categories may not sum to total number tested because these categories may not have been coded on some student answer sheets. **Denotes a charter school. For reporting purposes the charter school name has been abbreviated; the complete name can be found in the Appendix. Alternate assessment data by LEA school are available at http://report.ncsu.edu/ncpublicschools.


Southeast Region


Table 20j. North Carolina Testing ProgramNorth Carolina General Writing Assessment, 2006-07



84

Number Tested

Percent At or Above Level

IIINumber Tested


IIINumber Tested


IIINumber Tested


IIINumber Tested


IIINumber Tested


IIINumber Tested


IIIState 104,687 52.7 1,447 39.4 2,459 69.4 28,436 39.4 10,134 37.4 3,875 53.4 58,336 61.4Central Region 33,774 54.0 139 56.1 1,116 73.7 10,330 40.5 3,813 36.7 1,367 55.1 17,009 64.7Alamance-Burlington 1,641 50.8 4 * 23 78.3 344 39.5 318 34.3 65 36.9 887 61.4Asheboro City 183 46.4 0 * 5 60.0 27 37.0 43 32.6 10 40.0 98 55.1Caswell 222 53.2 1 * 2 * 82 48.8 12 41.7 2 * 123 56.1Chapel Hill-Carrboro City 799 74.7 2 * 90 86.7 99 44.4 73 28.8 45 82.2 490 84.7Chatham 542 46.3 0 * 2 * 77 28.6 132 24.2 23 30.4 308 61.4Durham 2,298 48.0 5 40.0 45 73.3 1,290 41.8 369 36.3 101 57.4 488 69.1Franklin 616 50.0 2 * 2 * 224 35.7 49 34.7 21 52.4 318 62.9Granville 676 45.7 1 * 10 80.0 232 39.2 50 30.0 16 56.3 367 50.4Guilford 5,101 54.1 21 61.9 290 62.4 2,052 41.2 436 42.4 248 58.5 2,054 67.7Harnett 1,360 53.5 11 54.5 8 50.0 324 42.0 148 40.5 88 54.5 781 60.7Johnston 2,163 54.3 8 50.0 15 66.7 350 43.1 304 35.5 88 50.0 1,398 61.4Lee 680 46.3 8 12.5 7 57.1 141 34.0 179 41.3 31 41.9 314 55.7Nash-Rocky Mount 1,379 44.7 6 83.3 14 71.4 721 35.8 83 38.6 38 31.6 517 57.8Orange 507 52.7 1 * 3 * 96 36.5 39 35.9 20 55.0 348 59.2Person 384 43.2 1 * 1 * 143 29.4 19 36.8 11 45.5 209 53.6Randolph 1,553 42.2 6 50.0 19 31.6 68 27.9 232 26.7 47 44.7 1,181 46.1Rockingham 1,081 47.1 2 * 4 * 248 37.1 76 38.2 38 60.5 713 50.5Vance 536 38.8 1 * 0 * 354 36.4 45 44.4 9 33.3 127 44.1Wake 9,810 62.4 25 60.0 539 80.5 2,524 45.3 1,054 39.0 409 60.4 5,259 73.7Warren 180 50.0 12 83.3 0 * 122 44.3 8 50.0 8 37.5 30 63.3Wilson 859 43.7 2 * 10 50.0 395 30.4 91 33.0 17 58.8 344 61.0Bethel Hill** 52 55.8 1 * 2 * 1 * 1 * 1 * 46 58.7Carter Community** 19 42.1 0 * 0 * 19 42.1 0 * 0 * 0 *Casa Esperanza** 15 53.3 0 * 1 * 1 * 3 * 1 * 9 66.7Central Park School** 42 47.6 1 * 0 * 5 40.0 2 * 3 * 31 51.6Chatham Charter** 36 38.9 0 * 0 * 15 40.0 0 * 2 * 19 42.1Clover Garden** 36 52.8 0 * 0 * 2 * 0 * 2 * 32 53.1Crosscreek Charter School** 20 20.0 0 * 0 * 3 * 0 * 2 * 15 20.0East Wake Academy** 66 42.4 1 * 1 * 7 42.9 2 * 1 * 54 40.7Franklin Academy** 94 76.6 1 * 0 * 4 * 0 * 0 * 89 77.5Greensboro Academy** 78 85.9 0 * 1 * 0 * 0 * 0 * 77 85.7Guilford Prep Academy** 18 44.4 1 * 0 * 14 50.0 0 * 1 * 2 *Haliwa-Saponi Tribal** 16 56.3 14 64.3 0 * 2 * 0 * 0 * 0 *Healthy Start** 36 38.9 0 * 0 * 34 38.2 0 * 2 * 0 *Hope Elementary** 13 15.4 0 * 0 * 13 15.4 0 * 0 * 0 *Magellan** 68 94.1 0 * 3 * 3 * 2 * 0 * 60 >=95%Maureen Joy** 23 17.4 0 * 0 * 20 15.0 2 * 1 * 0 *Omuteko Gwamaziima** 12 16.7 0 * 0 * 11 18.2 0 * 1 * 0 *Orange Charter** 22 50.0 0 * 0 * 5 20.0 2 * 1 * 14 57.1Phoenix Academy** 48 66.7 1 * 2 * 6 50.0 1 * 1 * 37 67.6PreEminent** 71 45.1 0 * 0 * 67 43.3 3 * 0 * 1 *Quest Academy** 15 86.7 0 * 1 * 0 * 0 * 0 * 14 85.7Research Triangle** 73 31.5 0 * 1 * 56 25.0 0 * 0 * 16 50.0River Mill Academy** 44 54.5 0 * 0 * 4 * 0 * 2 * 38 57.9Rocky Mount Prep Sch** 60 31.7 0 * 1 * 40 30.0 2 * 2 * 15 33.3S.B. Howard** 71 32.4 0 * 0 * 37 40.5 31 19.4 1 * 2 *SPARC Academy** 18 16.7 0 * 0 * 17 17.6 0 * 0 * 1 *Sterling Montessori** 58 77.6 0 * 13 76.9 7 57.1 0 * 5 * 33 78.8Torchlight Academy** 27 37.0 0 * 0 * 24 37.5 2 * 1 * 0 *Vance Charter** 37 45.9 0 * 1 * 0 * 0 * 1 * 35 45.7Woods Charter** 16 68.8 0 * 0 * 0 * 0 * 1 * 15 73.3

Notes: *Performance data are not reported when number tested is fewer than five. Performance data that are less than or equal to 5.0 percent, or greater than or equal to 95.0 percent, are not displayed. The ethnic categories may not sum to total number tested because ethnic category may not have been coded on some student answer sheets. **Denotes a charter school. For reporting purposes the charter school name has been abbreviated; the complete name can be found in the Appendix. Alternate assessment data by LEA school are available at http://report.ncsu.edu/ncpublicschools. Data received from LEAs and charter schools after August 21, 2007 are not included in this table. Prepared by the NCDPI Division of Accountability Services/Test Development Section.

White

North Carolina General Writing Assessment, 2006-07

Total American Indian Asian Black Hispanic Multi-Racial


Table 20k. North Carolina Testing Program

Grade 4, by LEA and Ethnicity,Central Region

85

Number Tested Percent At or

Above Level III Number Tested Percent At or







Above Level IIIState 104,687 52.7 51,827 59.7 52,860 45.8 56,608 45.4 48,079 61.2 53,578 45.9 2,744 37.5 768 28.5Central Region 33,774 54.0 16,599 60.9 17,175 47.3 14,162 43.4 19,612 61.6 13,653 43.9 503 30.6 54 31.5Alamance-Burlington 1,641 50.8 820 56.5 821 45.2 830 41.8 811 60.0 830 41.8 0 * 6 66.7Asheboro City 183 46.4 95 53.7 88 38.6 183 46.4 0 * 183 46.4 0 * 0 *Caswell 222 53.2 97 58.8 125 48.8 221 53.4 1 * 221 53.4 0 * 0 *Chapel Hill-Carrboro City 799 74.7 383 78.3 416 71.4 45 31.1 754 77.3 0 * 45 31.1 0 *Chatham 542 46.3 266 58.3 276 34.8 141 24.1 401 54.1 141 24.1 0 * 3 *Durham 2,298 48.0 1,129 54.6 1,169 41.7 1,989 45.8 309 62.5 1,989 45.8 0 * 0 *Franklin 616 50.0 311 59.2 305 40.7 614 50.2 2 * 614 50.2 0 * 1 *Granville 676 45.7 302 54.0 374 39.0 575 45.9 101 44.6 481 46.2 94 44.7 1 *Guilford 5,101 54.1 2,522 61.4 2,579 47.0 1,886 36.9 3,215 64.2 1,886 36.9 0 * 0 *Harnett 1,360 53.5 692 59.2 668 47.6 1,359 53.5 1 * 1,359 53.5 0 * 7 71.4Johnston 2,163 54.3 1,035 60.9 1,128 48.3 1,017 47.8 1,146 60.1 1,016 47.8 0 * 10 10.0Lee 680 46.3 331 55.6 349 37.5 550 42.2 130 63.8 550 42.2 0 * 10 30.0Nash-Rocky Mount 1,379 44.7 656 51.4 723 38.6 1,287 44.1 92 53.3 1,287 44.1 0 * 3 *Orange 507 52.7 259 57.9 248 47.2 63 30.2 444 55.9 0 * 63 30.2 0 *Person 384 43.2 194 49.5 190 36.8 196 30.1 188 56.9 196 30.1 0 * 0 *Randolph 1,553 42.2 785 50.3 768 34.0 299 22.1 1,254 47.0 152 30.9 142 12.7 5 20.0Rockingham 1,081 47.1 525 55.2 556 39.4 837 44.4 244 56.1 837 44.4 0 * 8 25.0Vance 536 38.8 255 42.7 281 35.2 533 38.8 3 * 533 38.8 0 * 0 *Wake 9,810 62.4 4,834 69.7 4,976 55.4 275 44.4 9,535 63.0 212 43.4 63 47.6 0 *Warren 180 50.0 95 50.5 85 49.4 179 50.3 1 * 179 50.3 0 * 0 *Wilson 859 43.7 417 50.6 442 37.1 754 42.4 105 52.4 754 42.4 0 * 0 *Bethel Hill** 52 55.8 26 50.0 26 61.5 0 * 52 55.8 0 * 0 * 0 *Carter Community** 19 42.1 11 63.6 8 12.5 18 44.4 1 * 18 44.4 0 * 0 *Casa Esperanza** 15 53.3 6 66.7 9 44.4 0 * 15 53.3 0 * 0 * 0 *Central Park School** 42 47.6 17 70.6 25 32.0 0 * 42 47.6 0 * 0 * 0 *Chatham Charter** 36 38.9 22 50.0 14 21.4 36 38.9 0 * 36 38.9 0 * 0 *Clover Garden** 36 52.8 17 58.8 19 47.4 7 42.9 29 55.2 0 * 7 42.9 0 *Crosscreek Charter School** 20 20.0 10 20.0 10 20.0 20 20.0 0 * 20 20.0 0 * 0 *East Wake Academy** 66 42.4 29 41.4 37 43.2 2 * 64 43.8 0 * 2 * 0 *Franklin Academy** 94 76.6 54 85.2 40 65.0 0 * 94 76.6 0 * 0 * 0 *Greensboro Academy** 78 85.9 32 90.6 46 82.6 0 * 78 85.9 0 * 0 * 0 *Guilford Prep Academy** 18 44.4 6 50.0 12 41.7 17 47.1 1 * 0 * 17 47.1 0 *Haliwa-Saponi Tribal** 16 56.3 9 66.7 7 42.9 0 * 16 56.3 0 * 0 * 0 *Healthy Start** 36 38.9 23 47.8 13 23.1 36 38.9 0 * 36 38.9 0 * 0 *Hope Elementary** 13 15.4 8 12.5 5 20.0 5 * 8 25.0 0 * 5 * 0 *Magellan** 68 94.1 36 94.4 32 93.8 0 * 68 94.1 0 * 0 * 0 *Maureen Joy** 23 17.4 8 12.5 15 20.0 23 17.4 0 * 23 17.4 0 * 0 *Omuteko Gwamaziima** 12 16.7 6 33.3 6 * 11 18.2 1 * 11 18.2 0 * 0 *Orange Charter** 22 50.0 8 62.5 14 42.9 0 * 22 50.0 0 * 0 * 0 *Phoenix Academy** 48 66.7 24 75.0 24 58.3 0 * 48 66.7 0 * 0 * 0 *PreEminent** 71 45.1 43 48.8 28 39.3 0 * 71 45.1 0 * 0 * 0 *Quest Academy** 15 86.7 8 75.0 7 * 0 * 15 86.7 0 * 0 * 0 *Research Triangle** 73 31.5 36 22.2 37 40.5 0 * 73 31.5 0 * 0 * 0 *River Mill Academy** 44 54.5 23 60.9 21 47.6 0 * 44 54.5 0 * 0 * 0 *Rocky Mount Prep Sch** 60 31.7 29 37.9 31 25.8 38 26.3 22 40.9 0 * 38 26.3 0 *S.B. Howard** 71 32.4 37 37.8 34 26.5 71 32.4 0 * 71 32.4 0 * 0 *SPARC Academy** 18 16.7 3 * 15 6.7 18 16.7 0 * 18 16.7 0 * 0 *Sterling Montessori** 58 77.6 29 82.8 29 72.4 0 * 58 77.6 0 * 0 * 0 *Torchlight Academy** 27 37.0 16 43.8 11 27.3 27 37.0 0 * 0 * 27 37.0 0 *Vance Charter** 37 45.9 14 42.9 23 47.8 0 * 37 45.9 0 * 0 * 0 *Woods Charter** 16 68.8 6 66.7 10 70.0 0 * 16 68.8 0 * 0 * 0 *



Central Region

Total Female Male Not Served by Title I Schoolwide Title I Program Targeted Assistance MigrantServed by Title I

North Carolina General Writing Assessment, 2006-07


Table 20l. North Carolina Testing Program


86

87

2006-07


State-Level Summary Statistics

Grade 7

Report of Student Performance in Writing Grades 4, 7, and 10, 2006-07

89


Results of the North Carolina Writing Assessment at Grade 7 Observations

The prompt for the 2007 Grade 7 North Carolina General Writing Assessment asked students to write an "argumentative" evaluation response to the following prompt: Your local newspaper is sponsoring a contest titled “Making a Difference.” Students have been encouraged to write an essay on how they can “make a difference” by improving their school or local community. The winning essay will be published in the education section of the newspaper. Write an essay for the newspaper editor in which you proposed a solution to make your school or community a better place. Contracted readers scored 106,471 public school responses for grade 7 from the 2006-07 North Carolina General Writing Assessment. The scores show that 50.8 percent of the seventh graders wrote well enough to score at or above Level III. This represents an increase of 9.9 percentage points from the 40.9 percent who achieved this level in the 2002-03 pilot assessment administration, and a 4.6 percent increase over 2005-06 results. Less than five percent of the seventh graders in the 2006-07 North Carolina General Writing Assessment received the highest scores in Level IV and 6.2 percent received the lowest scores in Level I. In 2006-07, less than one percent (0.2) of the papers had problems which made them non-scorable. Non-scorable papers receive Achievement Level I rankings and are included in the state results as Level I scores. The average weighted content score for seventh graders participating in the North Carolina General Writing Assessment in 2006-07 was 8.2 on a scale of four to twenty. The average conventions score was 0.8 on a scale of zero to four. The average Total Writing Score was 11.1 of a possible 20. The following observations were noted during the scoring process:

• Many students seemed to understand and respond well to this prompt. While the prompt did require students to supply a problem and a solution, students did manage to handle these demands fairly well, though, they often took a strategy of focusing most of their response on either the problem or the solution.

• Often responses attempted to address the subject of the prompt too

broadly. Usually these responses failed to effectively elaborate on the community or school problem that would be the basis for a solution and/or failed to effectively elaborate on a solution to that problem, relying on general, undeveloped support or list-like support.

• Many responses took the form of the five-paragraph essay, in which

three problems (and, possibly, three solutions) were addressed. This often resulted in a general, undeveloped description/explanation of the


90

Observations (continued)

problems and hindered the student’s ability to develop a complete and unified piece of writing. Some students, however, whether they used a five-paragraph format or wrote on both the community and school, achieved an upper-level score point because they were able to more completely elaborate on the ideas they raised in their responses.

• The type of conventions issues in responses showed some overall

improvement. The most common sentence formation errors were run-ons and comma-splices, though fragments, even if less common, were evidenced in many responses.

• The most common usage error was probably the failure to use a word

according to standard meaning, such as there for their or to for too. Also common were agreement errors, subject-verb agreement errors, pronoun agreement errors and comma usage errors (both missing and unnecessary commas).

• For mechanics, spelling errors were common and these errors were

clearly the most persistent of all conventions errors.

Performance of Subgroups at Grade 7

Gender Approximately 59.9 percent of the female students scored at or above Level III compared to 42.0 percent for male students. Ethnicity About 65.4 percent of Asian students scored at or above Level III compared to 60.5 percent of the White students, 53.6 percent of Multi-Racial students, 35.9 percent of Black students, 35.7 percent of American Indian students, and 35.3 percent of Hispanic students. There were 106,471 seventh-grade public school student responses scored by two independent readers. The inter-rater reliability rates (agreement rates) of the readers are shown below in Table 21. The 70.0 percent criterion rate for perfect agreement based upon industry standards was exceeded and the resolutions required were few.


Seventh Grade Reader Agreement Statistics

Total Public School Papers

Perfect Agreement

Percent

Adjacent Agreement

Percent

Resolution Required Percent



91

Performance of Subgroups at Grade 7 (continued)

The following pages, and Appendix C, present data for the Grade 7 North Carolina General Writing Assessment. Figure 6 shows that the percent of students scoring at or above Achievement Level III on the North Carolina General Writing Assessment increased between the pilot year and the current year by 9.9 percent (4.6% increase between 2002-03 and 2003-04, 1.2 percent increase between 2003-04 and 2004-05, and a 0.5 decrease between 2004-05 and 2005-06). Table 28a, a table of Achievement Levels by subgroup, demonstrates that females outperformed males in Grade 7 as in Grade 4. Also, Asian, White, and Multi-Racial students performed at a higher level than the American Indian, Black, and Hispanic subgroups as in Grade 4. Table 30a, the frequency distribution, shows that less than five percent of few seventh graders reached Achievement Level IV, 50.6 percent of the students received a III, 42.9 received a II, and 6.2 percent received Achievement Level I.


92

The North Carolina Writing Assessment (NCEXTEND2) - Grade 7

Results of the North Carolina Writing Assessment (NCEXTEND2) at Grade 7 Observations

The prompt for the 2007 Grade 7 North Carolina Writing Assessment (NCEXTEND2) asked students to write an "argumentative" evaluation response to the following prompt: Your local newspaper is sponsoring a contest titled “Making a Difference.” Students have been encouraged to write an essay on how they can “make a difference” by improving their school or local community. The winning essay will be published in the education section of the newspaper. Write an essay for the newspaper editor in which you proposed a solution to make your school or community a better place. Contracted readers scored 2,433 public school responses for grade 7 after the 2006-07 North Carolina Writing Assessment (NCEXTEND2). The scores show that 7.5 percent of the seventh graders scored at or above Level III. This represents a 2.8 percent increase over the 2005-06 results. Less than five percent of the seventh graders in the 2006-07 North Carolina Writing Assessment (NCEXTEND2) received the highest scores in Level IV and 58.0 percent received the lowest scores in Level I. In 2006-07, 5.3 percent of the papers had problems which made them non-scorable. Non-scorable papers receive Achievement Level I rankings and are included in the state results as Level I scores. The average weighted content score for seventh graders participating in the North Carolina Writing Assessment (NCEXTEND2) 2006-07 was 5.8 on a scale of four to twenty. The average conventions score was 1.4 on a scale of zero to four. The average Total Writing Score was 7.5 The following additional observations were noted during the scoring process:

• There was a larger number of higher scores on this assessment than last year’s assessment. More responses showed the ability to develop at least the minimal focus, organization and support required to achieve a 2 score point.

• Less successful responses failed to clearly address the subject. Some

clearly failed to even address the issue of “Making a Difference” and described or talked about newspapers, the community, or schools in general terms, with no reference to any improvement or solution.

• While some improvement in conventions overall was noted over last

year’s assessment, conventions errors across all areas were common in the majority of responses.

• Responses exhibited various levels of control over sentence formation.

Not only were run-ons, fragments and comma-splices common, but so


93


were many instances of periods being placed in apparent random fashion. Sometimes identifying an error as a sentence error or some other kind of error was difficult as many responses had missing words or verbs.

• Although a variety of usage errors were encountered in varying

degrees, incorrect verb forms seemed to be a particularly common problem.

• Mechanics errors proved to be the most common problem area.

Spelling errors sometimes caused difficulty in scoring due to the need to determine the extent to which such errors impeded the reader’s ability to understand the ideas being conveyed.

Gender Approximately 7.8 percent of the female students scored at or above Level III compared to 7.3 percent for male students. Ethnicity About 10.1 percent of the American Indian students scored at or above Level III compared to 10.0 percent of the White students, 7.6 percent of the Hispanic students, 6.8 percent of the Multi-Racial students, 5.3 percent of the Asian students, and less than or equal to 5.0 percent of the Black students. There were 2,433 NCEXTEND2 Writing Assessment seventh-grade public school student responses scored by two independent readers. The inter-rater reliability rates (agreement rates) of the readers are shown below in Table 22. The 70.0 percent criterion rate for perfect agreement based upon industry standards was exceeded and the resolutions required were few.

Table 22. North Carolina Writing Assessment (NCEXTEND2)

Seventh Grade Reader Agreement Statistics

Total Public School Papers

Perfect Agreement

Percent

Adjacent Agreement

Percent

Resolution Required Percent


The following pages, and Appendix C, present data for the Grade 7 North Carolina Writing Assessment (NCEXTEND2). Table 28c, a table of Achievement Levels by subgroup, demonstrates that females outperformed males in Grade 7 unlike Grade 4 NCEXTEND2. Also, American Indian, White, and Hispanic students performed at a higher level than the Multi-Racial, Asian, and Black subgroups. Table 30c, the frequency distribution, shows that very few seventh graders reached Achievement Level IV (less than five percent of students), while 6.8 percent of the students received a III, 34.6 percent received a II, and 58.0 percent received Achievement Level I.


94


Notes: 1The writing standard, scale, and scoring model changed efective with the 2002-03 school year.

The data from 2002-03 are reported from the pilot test administration.

operationalized in 2005-06. NCEXTEND1, a newly developed writing assessment for students with severe cognitive disabilities, replaces NCAAP in 2006-07. Data received from LEAs and charter schools after August 21, 2007 are not included in this figure. Prepared by the NCDPI Division of Accountability Services/Test Development Section.

94

Figure 6. North Carolina Testing ProgramNorth Carolina General Writing Assessment, 2002-03 to 2006-07,

Percent of Students Scoring At or Above Level III Grade 7

The vertical line indicates that the NCAAAI was discontinued and replaced by NCCLAS, and NCCLAS and NCEXTEND2 were

50.8

72.7

33.6

7.5

46.246.7

45.5

40.9

13.0

6.5

11.7

58.0

49.5

62.7

27.0

4.7

83.9

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07

Perc

ent o

f Stu

dent

s

1

GENERALASSESSMENT

NCAAAI

NCAAP

NCCLAS

NCEXTEND2

NCEXTEND1



Figure 7. North Carolina Testing ProgramNorth Carolina General Writing Assessment, 2006-07,

Percent of Students At or Above Level III,Grade 7, by Gender and Ethnicity

27.7%

58.0%

61.7%

70.2%

74.0%

27.1%

26.6%

42.9%

44.8%

45.6%

45.2%

50.8%

51.2%

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

State


Black Male

Hispanic Male

Hispanic Female

Black Female


Multi-Racial Male

White Male

Asian Male

Multi-Racial Female

White Female

Asian Female

Percent of Students

*N=1,056

*N=29,280

*N=1,505

*N=1,210

*N=30,499

*N=1,495

*N=15,538

*N=735

*N=106,471

*N=4,337

*N=4,363

*N=15,678

*N=774

Stat

e Pe

rcen

t

95


Notes: *N counts equal the number of students who participated in the NCCLAS Writing Assessment operationalized in 2005-06. **Performance data are not reported when number tested is fewer than five. Performance data that are less than or equal to 5.0 percent, or greater than or equal to 95.0 percent, are not displayed. When summed, gender/ethnicity N counts may not match the state N counts because a gender/ethnicity category may not have been coded on some student answer sheets. Data received from LEAs and charter schools after August 21, 2007 are not included in this figure. Prepared by the NCDPI Division of Accountability Services/Test Development Section.

Percent of Students



22.1%

22.8%

77.6%

83.3%

64.3%

33.3%

24.0%

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

State



Multi-Racial Female

Asian Female

Hispanic Female

Hispanic Male

Asian Male

Black Female

White Female

Black Male

White Male

Multi-Racial Male

Percent of Students

*N=136

*N=25

*N=0

*N=3

*N=149

*N=7

*N=28

*N=0

71.4%

33.6%

17.4%

*N=6

*N=432

*N=6

*N=49

Stat

e Pe

rcen

t*N=23

**

**

**

96



Percent of Students



7.7%

10.3%

10.4%

7.7%

7.6%

6.8%

6.7%

<=5.0%

<=5.0%

9.9%

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

State

Asian Female

Black Male

Black Female

Multi-Racial Female

Multi-Racial Male

Hispanic Male

Asian Male

Hispanic Female

White Male



White Female

Percent of Students

*N=44

*N=13

*N=6

*N=347

*N=132

*N=70

*N=708

*N=708

5.5%

10.0%

7.5%

*N=309

*N=2,433

*N=52

*N=29

*N=15

Stat

e Pe

rcen

t

97


Notes: *N counts equal the number of students who participated in the NCEXTEND1 Writing Assessment operationalized in 2006-07 **Performance data are not reported when number tested is fewer than five. Performance data that are less than or equal to 5.0 percent, or greater than or equal to 95.0 percent, are not displayed. When summed, gender/ethnicity N counts may not match the state N counts because a gender/ethnicity category may not have been coded on some student answer sheets. Data received from LEAs and charter schools after August 21, 2007 are not included in this figure. Prepared by the NCDPI Division of Accountability Services/Test Development Section.

Percent of Students



83.3%

>=95.0%

87.0%

84.1%

60.0%

83.5%

80.0%

71.4%

83.9%

83.3%

84.6%

85.2%

90.6%

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

State

Asian Male

Multi-Racial Female

Asian Female


Multi-Racial Male

Black Female

White Male

Hispanic Female

Black Male

White Female

Hispanic Male


Percent of Students

*N=5

*N=32

*N=7

*N=12

*N=138

*N=10

*N=239

*N=6

*N=8

*N=85

*N=216

*N=795

Stat

e Pe

rcen

t

*N=26

**

98




All Students 111,657 106,471 100.0 11.1 50.8 3,660 3.3 27.2 1,526 1.4 110,131 98.6Female 54,307 52,451 49.3 11.5 59.9 1,221 2.2 28.1 635 1.2 53,672 98.8Male 57,338 54,020 50.7 10.6 42.0 2,428 4.2 26.7 890 1.6 56,448 98.4American Indian 1,646 1,509 1.4 10.3 35.7 113 6.9 20.4 24 1.5 1,622 98.5Asian 2,418 2,266 2.1 11.8 65.4 82 3.4 25.6 70 2.9 2,348 97.1Black 33,153 31,216 29.3 10.4 35.9 1,369 4.1 22.9 568 1.7 32,585 98.3Hispanic 9,566 8,700 8.2 10.2 35.3 527 5.5 24.5 339 3.5 9,227 96.5Multi-Racial/Other 3,128 3,000 2.8 11.2 53.6 87 2.8 31.0 41 1.3 3,087 98.7White 61,733 59,779 56.1 11.5 60.5 1,471 2.4 32.6 483 0.8 61,250 99.2Free and Reduced Lunch 49,086 45,850 43.1 10.4 36.1 2,482 5.1 24.8 754 1.5 48,332 98.5No Free and Reduced Lunch 62,571 60,621 56.9 11.6 61.9 1,178 1.9 32.1 772 1.2 61,799 98.8Title I 23,306 22,410 21.0 10.5 40.3 895 3.8 23.0 1 0.0 23,305 100.0Not Title I 88,351 84,061 79.0 11.2 53.6 2,765 3.1 28.5 1,525 1.7 86,826 98.3Schoolwide Title I 21,860 21,008 19.7 10.5 40.5 851 3.9 23.5 1 0.0 21,859 100.0Targeted Assistance 915 893 0.8 10.8 41.4 22 2.4 13.6 0 0.0 915 100.0Migrant 800 756 0.7 9.5 27.8 44 5.5 9.1 0 0.0 800 100.0Not migrant 110,857 105,715 99.3 11.1 51.0 3,616 3.3 27.4 1,526 1.4 109,331 98.6Limited English Proficient (LEP) 5,567 4,725 4.4 9.3 18.9 503 9.0 21.9 339 6.1 5,228 93.9Not Limited English Proficient 106,090 101,746 95.6 11.1 52.3 3,157 3.0 28.0 1,187 1.1 104,903 98.9Students with Disabilities 16,256 12,718 11.9 9.2 18.8 3,312 20.4 27.7 226 1.4 16,030 98.6Students without Disabilities 95,401 93,753 88.1 11.3 55.1 348 0.4 21.6 1,300 1.4 94,101 98.6Students with IEPs 13,798 10,260 9.6 9.0 15.0 3,312 24.0 27.7 226 1.6 13,572 98.4Students without IEPs 97,859 96,211 90.4 11.3 54.6 348 0.4 21.6 1,300 1.3 96,559 98.7Not Exceptional 78,318 76,706 72.0 11.0 47.8 348 0.4 21.6 1,264 1.6 77,054 98.4Academically Gifted 16,740 16,738 15.7 12.8 87.7 2 0.0 * 0 0.0 16,740 100.0Behaviorally-Emotionally Disabled 1,111 966 0.9 8.4 11.7 96 8.6 14.6 49 4.4 1,062 95.6Hearing Impaired 157 122 0.1 9.5 23.0 34 21.7 8.8 1 0.6 156 99.4Educable Mentally Disabled 1,997 665 0.6 7.0 <=5% 1,304 65.3 13.6 28 1.4 1,969 98.6Deaf-Blind 5 4 0.0 * * 1 20.0 * 0 0.0 5 100.0Visually Impaired 50 42 0.0 11.3 59.5 6 12.0 33.3 2 4.0 48 96.0Other Health Impaired 2,917 2,478 2.3 9.2 18.2 393 13.5 20.1 46 1.6 2,871 98.4Orthopedically Impaired 64 45 0.0 9.4 22.2 15 23.4 13.3 4 6.3 60 93.8Traumatic Brain Injured 33 15 0.0 8.9 13.3 15 45.5 33.3 3 9.1 30 90.9Severely/Profoundly Mentally Disabled 47 0 0.0 * * 46 97.9 65.2 1 2.1 46 97.9Multihandicapped 151 9 0.0 7.7 11.1 135 89.4 61.5 7 4.6 144 95.4Speech-Language Impaired 313 293 0.3 9.9 28.0 15 4.8 20.0 5 1.6 308 98.4Specific Learning Disabled 6,163 5,396 5.1 9.1 13.7 697 11.3 20.2 70 1.1 6,093 98.9Trainable Mentally Disabled 284 6 0.0 5.6 * 276 97.2 82.2 2 0.7 282 99.3Autistic 506 219 0.2 9.5 32.0 279 55.1 54.8 8 1.6 498 98.4Section 504 2,458 2,458 2.3 10.3 34.7 0 0.0 * 0 0.0 2,458 100.0

Notes: 1"Membership" is the total number of students on the 2006-07 Disag_Students data file who were present on the first day of March, 2007. 2 "Number Tested" is the number of students who participated in the North Carolina General Writing Assessment. *Performance data are not reported when number tested is fewer than five. Performance data that are less than or equal to 5.0 percent, or greater than or equal to 95.0 percent, are not displayed. Data received from LEAs and charter schools after August 21, 2007 are not included in this table. Prepared by the NCDPI Division of Accountability Services/Test Development Section.

Number Alternate Writing

Assessments

Mean General Writing

Score

Percent Proficient General Writing

Percent Proficient Alternate Writing

Percent Alternate Writing

Assessments

Grade 7

Category

Table 23. North Carolina Testing ProgramNorth Carolina Writing Assessments, 2006-07

Statewide Number of Students Participating in the General Assessment, Taking Alternate Assessments, and Number Not Tested,

Not Tested

Number Absent or

Other

Percent Absent or

Other

Number Tested2

(General Writing)

Percent Tested

(General Writing)

99



1995-96 87,072 4,253 31,004 43,652 8,163

4.9 35.6 50.1 9.4

1996-97 88,422 3,325 6,574 44,040 4,4833.8 41.4 49.8 5.1

1997-98 91,332 5,272 28,950 47,330 9,7805.8 31.7 51.8 10.7

1998-99 90,921 2,084 24,888 56,188 7,761 2.3 27.4 61.8 8.5

1999-00 93,567 1,543 24,710 61,869 5,4451.6 26.4 66.1 5.8

2000-01 98,178 2,383 23,884 64,810 7,1012.4 24.3 66.0 7.2

2001-02 101,425 1,949 35,697 60,898 2,8991.9 35.2 60.1 2.9

2002-031 103,074 12,935 47,964 42,151 24

12.5 46.5 40.9 <0.1

2003-04 105,231 6,866 50,434 47,905 266.5 47.9 45.5 <0.1

2004-05 106,957 6,407 50,610 49,762 *6.0 47.3 46.5 <=5%

2005-06 104,388 9,576 46,578 48,111 *9.2 44.6 46.1 <=5%

2006-07 106,471 6,651 45,728 53,901 *6.2 42.9 50.6 <=5%

less than or equal to 5.0 percent, or greater than or equal to 95.0 percent, are not displayed. *Performance data are not reported when number tested is fewer than five. Performance data that are Notes: 1The writing standard, scale, and scoring model changed effective with the 2002-03 school year.

Prepared by the NCDPI Division of Accountability Services/Test Development Section. Data received from LEAs and charter schools after August 21, 2007 are not included in this table.

Achievement Levels

Table 24. North Carolina Testing ProgramNorth Carolina General Writing Assessment, 1995-96 to 2006-07,


100



2005-06 389 185 99 95 *47.6 25.4 24.4 <=5.0

2006-07 432 187 100 134 *43.3 23.1 31.0 <=5.0


2005-06 1,860 1,237 536 * *66.5 28.8 <=5.0 <=5.0

2006-07 2,433 1,410 841 166 *58.0 34.6 6.8 <=5.0


2006-07 795 108 * 160 50713.6 <=5.0 20.1 63.8



Grade 7

Achievement Levels


Table 25. North Carolina Testing ProgramNorth Carolina Writing Assessment (NCCLAS), 2005-06 to 2006-07,


Notes: *Performance data are not reported when number tested is fewer than five. Performance data that


Achievement Levels

Achievement Levels


Distribution of Achievement Levels Across Years,North Carolina Writing Assessment (NCEXTEND2 ), 2005-06 to 2006-07,

101



Level III Level III Level I Level I Level II Level II Level III Level III Level IV Level IVAll Students 106,471 100.0 54,092 50.8 6,651 6.2 45,728 42.9 53,901 50.6 * <=5%Female 52,451 49.3 31,421 59.9 * <=5% 19,275 36.7 31,290 59.7 * <=5%Male 54,020 50.7 22,671 42.0 4,896 9.1 26,453 49.0 22,611 41.9 * <=5%American Indian 1,509 1.4 538 35.7 146 9.7 825 54.7 538 35.7 * <=5%Asian 2,266 2.1 1,483 65.4 * <=5% 701 30.9 1,468 64.8 * <=5%Black 31,216 29.3 11,215 35.9 2,907 9.3 17,094 54.8 11,203 35.9 * <=5%Hispanic 8,700 8.2 3,072 35.3 1,075 12.4 4,553 52.3 3,067 35.3 * <=5%Multi-Racial/Other 3,000 2.8 1,609 53.6 * <=5% 1,244 41.5 1,600 53.3 * <=5%White 59,779 56.1 36,174 60.5 * <=5% 21,311 35.6 36,024 60.3 * <=5%Free and Reduced Lunch 45,850 43.1 16,539 36.1 4,492 9.8 24,819 54.1 16,524 36.0 * <=5%No Free and Reduced Lunch 60,621 56.9 37,553 61.9 * <=5% 20,909 34.5 37,377 61.7 * <=5%Title I 22,410 21.0 9,042 40.3 2,103 9.4 11,265 50.3 9,029 40.3 * <=5%Not Title I 84,061 79.0 45,050 53.6 4,548 5.4 34,463 41.0 44,872 53.4 * <=5%Schoolwide Title I 21,008 19.7 8,517 40.5 1,932 9.2 10,559 50.3 8,505 40.5 * <=5%Targeted Assistance 893 0.8 370 41.4 54 6.0 469 52.5 369 41.3 * <=5%Migrant 756 0.7 210 27.8 163 21.6 383 50.7 210 27.8 * <=5%Not migrant 105,715 99.3 53,882 51.0 6,488 6.1 45,345 42.9 53,691 50.8 * <=5%Limited English Proficient (LEP) 4,725 4.4 891 18.9 966 20.4 2,868 60.7 890 18.8 * <=5%Not Limited English Proficient 101,746 95.6 53,201 52.3 5,685 5.6 42,860 42.1 53,011 52.1 * <=5%Students with Disabilities 12,718 11.9 2,391 18.8 2,812 22.1 7,515 59.1 2,385 18.8 * <=5%Students without Disabilities 93,753 88.1 51,701 55.1 * <=5% 38,213 40.8 51,516 54.9 * <=5%Students with IEPs 10,260 9.6 1,539 15.0 2,582 25.2 6,139 59.8 1,537 15.0 * <=5%Students without IEPs 96,211 90.4 52,553 54.6 * <=5% 39,589 41.1 52,364 54.4 * <=5%Not Exceptional 76,706 72.0 36,683 47.8 * <=5% 36,235 47.2 36,637 47.8 * <=5%Behaviorally-Emotionally Disabled 966 0.9 113 11.7 335 34.7 518 53.6 113 11.7 * <=5%Hearing Impaired 122 0.1 28 23.0 29 23.8 65 53.3 28 23.0 * <=5%Educable Mentally Disabled 665 0.6 * <=5% 366 55.0 282 42.4 * <=5% * <=5%Deaf-Blind 4 0.0 * * * * * * * * * *Visually Impaired 42 0.0 25 59.5 * <=5% 15 35.7 25 59.5 * <=5%Other Health Impaired 2,478 2.3 451 18.2 571 23.0 1,456 58.8 451 18.2 * <=5%45 0.0 10 22.2 7 15.6 28 62.2 10 22.2 5%

The total for "All Students with Disabilities" includes Section 504. Some categories may not add up to the total due to missing coding. Data received from LEAs and charter schools after August 21, 2007 are not included in this table.

Notes: 1"Number Tested" is the number of students who participated in the North Carolina General Writing Assessment. 2"Percent" is calculated based on the number tested in the "All Students" category.


102



Number Tested1

(General)Percent2

(General)

*Performance data are not reported when membership is fewer than five. Performance data that are less than or equal to 5.0 percent, or greater than or equal to 95.0 percent, are not displayed.

Category



Level III Level III Level I Level I Level II Level II Level III Level III Level IV Level IVAll Students with Disabilities (continued)Orthopedically Impaired 45 0.0 10 22.2 7 15.6 28 62.2 10 22.2 * <=5%Traumatic Brain Injured 15 0.0 2 13.3 4 26.7 9 60.0 2 13.3 * *Severely/Profoundly Mentally Disabled . . * * * * * * * * * *Multihandicapped 9 0.0 1 11.1 5 55.6 3 33.3 1 11.1 * *Speech-Language Impaired 293 0.3 82 28.0 46 15.7 165 56.3 82 28.0 * <=5%Specific Learning Disabled 5,396 5.1 737 13.7 1,156 21.4 3,503 64.9 735 13.6 * <=5% Learning Disabled-Reading 4,249 4.0 516 12.1 990 23.3 2,743 64.6 516 12.1 * <=5% Learning Disabled-Mathematics 2,061 1.9 250 12.1 544 26.4 1,267 61.5 250 12.1 * <=5% Learning Disabled-Written Expression 3,605 3.4 472 13.1 856 23.7 2,277 63.2 470 13.0 * <=5% Learning Disabled-Other 155 0.1 29 18.7 28 18.1 98 63.2 29 18.7 * <=5%Trainable Mentally Disabled 6 0.0 * * 5 83.3 1 16.7 * * * *Autistic 219 0.2 70 32.0 55 25.1 94 42.9 70 32.0 * <=5%Section 504 2,458 2.3 852 34.7 230 9.4 1,376 56.0 848 34.5 * <=5%Academically/Intellectually Gifted 16,738 15.7 14,673 87.7 * <=5% 2,002 12.0 14,539 86.9 * <=5% AIG Reading 13,208 12.4 11,856 89.8 * <=5% 1,312 9.9 11,729 88.8 * <=5% AIG Mathematics 13,963 13.1 12,284 88.0 * <=5% 1,637 11.7 12,170 87.2 * <=5%AccommodationsBraille Edition 5 0.0 4 80.0 * * 1 20.0 4 80.0 * *Large Print 45 0.0 20 44.4 6 13.3 19 42.2 19 42.2 * <=5%Assistive Technology 77 0.1 22 28.6 13 16.9 42 54.5 21 27.3 * <=5%Braille Writer 4 0.0 * * * * * * * * * *Cramner Abacus 1 0.0 * * * * * * * * * *Dictation to Scribe 322 0.3 * <=5% 86 26.7 227 70.5 * <=5% * <=5%Interpreter Signs Test 16 0.0 1 6.3 9 56.3 6 37.5 1 6.3 * *Magnification Devices 9 0.0 3 33.3 1 11.1 5 55.6 3 33.3 * *Student Marks in Test Book 1,675 1.6 257 15.3 409 24.4 1,009 60.2 257 15.3 * <=5%Test Administrator Reads Test Aloud 6,104 5.7 566 9.3 1,894 31.0 3,644 59.7 566 9.3 * <=5%Use Of Typewriter or Word Processor 259 0.2 126 48.6 30 11.6 103 39.8 125 48.3 * <=5%Hospital/Home Testing 14 0.0 4 28.6 5 35.7 5 35.7 4 28.6 * *Multiple Test Sessions 2,204 2.1 309 14.0 626 28.4 1,269 57.6 309 14.0 * <=5%Scheduled Extended Time 12,323 11.6 2,066 16.8 2,912 23.6 7,345 59.6 2,062 16.7 * <=5%Testing in a Separate Room 9,553 9.0 1,320 13.8 2,503 26.2 5,730 60.0 1,318 13.8 * <=5%English/Native Lang. Dictionary/Electronic Translato 1,115 1.0 132 11.8 349 31.3 634 56.9 132 11.8 * <=5%One Item per Page 19 0.0 4 21.1 5 26.3 10 52.6 4 21.1 * *Read Test Aloud to Self 171 0.2 12 7.0 52 30.4 107 62.6 12 7.0 * <=5%


Grade 7 (continued)


103



Number Tested1

(General)Percent2

(General)

Category





Level III Level III Level I Level I Level II Level II Level III Level III Level IV Level IVAll Students 432 100.0 145 33.6 187 43.3 100 23.1 134 31.0 * <=5%Female 196 45.4 57 29.1 87 44.4 52 26.5 55 28.1 * <=5%Male 236 54.6 88 37.3 100 42.4 48 20.3 79 33.5 * <=5%American Indian 0 . * * * * * * * * * *Asian 48 11.1 10 20.8 22 45.8 16 33.3 9 18.8 * <=5%Black 13 3.0 7 53.8 6 46.2 * * 7 53.8 * *Hispanic 285 66.0 64 22.5 147 51.6 74 26.0 59 20.7 * <=5%Multi-Racial/Other 9 2.1 8 88.9 * * 1 11.1 7 77.8 1 11.1White 77 17.8 56 72.7 12 15.6 9 11.7 52 67.5 4 5.2Free and Reduced Lunch 318 73.6 105 33.0 144 45.3 69 21.7 100 31.4 * <=5%No Free and Reduced Lunch 114 26.4 40 35.1 43 37.7 31 27.2 34 29.8 6 5.3Title I 1 0.2 * * * * * * * * * *Not Title I 431 99.8 145 33.6 186 43.2 100 23.2 134 31.1 * <=5%Schoolwide Title I 1 0.2 * * * * * * * * * *Targeted Assistance 0 0.0 * * * * * * * * * *Migrant 1 0.2 * * * * * * * * * *Not migrant 431 99.8 145 33.6 186 43.2 100 23.2 134 31.1 * <=5%Limited English Proficient (LEP) 340 78.7 81 23.8 167 49.1 92 27.1 72 21.2 * <=5%Not Limited English Proficient 92 21.3 64 69.6 20 21.7 8 8.7 62 67.4 * <=5%Students with Disabilities 89 20.6 70 78.7 13 14.6 6 6.7 68 76.4 * <=5%Students without Disabilities 343 79.4 75 21.9 174 50.7 94 27.4 66 19.2 * <=5%Students with IEPs 89 20.6 70 78.7 13 14.6 6 6.7 68 76.4 * <=5%Students without IEPs 343 79.4 75 21.9 174 50.7 94 27.4 66 19.2 * <=5%Not Exceptional 343 79.4 75 21.9 174 50.7 94 27.4 66 19.2 * <=5%Behaviorally-Emotionally Disabled 5 1.2 * * * * * * 4 80.0 1 20.0Hearing Impaired 2 0.5 * * * * * * * * * *Educable Mentally Disabled 6 1.4 4 66.7 1 16.7 1 16.7 4 66.7 * *Deaf-Blind 0 0.0 * * * * * * * * * *Visually Impaired 0 0.0 * * * * * * * * * *Other Health Impaired 13 3.0 8 61.5 1 7.7 4 30.8 7 53.8 1 7.7Orthopedically Impaired 0 0.0 * * * * * * * * * *Traumatic Brain Injured 1 0.2 * * * * * * * * * *Severely/Profoundly Mentally Disabled 0 0.0 * * * * * * * * * *Multihandicapped 0 0.0 * * * * * * * * * *Speech-Language Impaired 2 0.5 * * * * * * * * * *Specific Learning Disabled 56 13.0 49 87.5 6 10.7 * <=5% 49 87.5 * <=5%Trainable Mentally Disabled 0 0.0 * * * * * * * * * *Autistic 4 0.9 * * * * * * * * * *Section 504 0 0.0 * * * * * * * * * *


104




(NCCLAS)Percent2

(NCCLAS)

Notes: 1"Number Tested" is the number of students who participated in the North Carolina Writing Assessment (NCCLAS). 2"Percent" is calculated based on the number tested in the "All Students" category. *Performance data are not reported when membership is fewer than five. Performance data that are less than or equal to 5.0 percent, or greater than or equal to 95.0 percent, are not displayed.




Level III Level III Level I Level I Level II Level II Level III Level III Level IV Level IVAll Students 2,433 100.0 182 7.5 1,410 58.0 841 34.6 166 6.8 * <=5%Female 758 31.2 59 7.8 418 55.1 281 37.1 55 7.3 * <=5%Male 1,675 68.8 123 7.3 992 59.2 560 33.4 111 6.6 * <=5%American Indian 99 4.1 10 10.1 50 50.5 39 39.4 8 8.1 * <=5%Asian 19 0.8 1 5.3 12 63.2 6 31.6 1 5.3 * *Black 1,055 43.4 * <=5% 644 61.0 360 34.1 * <=5% * <=5%Hispanic 184 7.6 14 7.6 123 66.8 47 25.5 14 7.6 * <=5%Multi-Racial/Other 59 2.4 4 6.8 35 59.3 20 33.9 3 5.1 * <=5%White 1,017 41.8 102 10.0 546 53.7 369 36.3 94 9.2 * <=5%Free and Reduced Lunch 1,708 70.2 114 6.7 1,010 59.1 584 34.2 105 6.1 * <=5%No Free and Reduced Lunch 725 29.8 68 9.4 400 55.2 257 35.4 61 8.4 * <=5%Title I 706 29.0 51 7.2 404 57.2 251 35.6 43 6.1 * <=5%Not Title I 1,727 71.0 131 7.6 1,006 58.3 590 34.2 123 7.1 * <=5%Schoolwide Title I 667 27.4 48 7.2 382 57.3 237 35.5 41 6.1 * <=5%Targeted Assistance 20 0.8 2 10.0 11 55.0 7 35.0 * <=5% * <=5%Migrant 39 1.6 * <=5% 21 53.8 17 43.6 * <=5% * <=5%Not migrant 2,394 98.4 181 7.6 1,389 58.0 824 34.4 165 6.9 * <=5%Limited English Proficient (LEP) 141 5.8 9 6.4 96 68.1 36 25.5 9 6.4 * <=5%Not Limited English Proficient 2,292 94.2 173 7.5 1,314 57.3 805 35.1 157 6.8 * <=5%Students with Disabilities 2,428 99.8 182 7.5 1,406 57.9 840 34.6 166 6.8 * <=5%Students without Disabilities 5 0.2 * * 4 80.0 1 20.0 * * * *Students with IEPs 2,428 99.8 182 7.5 1,406 57.9 840 34.6 166 6.8 * <=5%Students without IEPs 5 0.2 * * 4 80.0 1 20.0 * * * *Not Exceptional 5 0.2 * * 4 80.0 1 20.0 * * * *Behaviorally-Emotionally Disabled 89 3.7 8 9.0 48 53.9 33 37.1 6 6.7 * <=5%Hearing Impaired 31 1.3 * <=5% 23 74.2 7 22.6 * <=5% * <=5%Educable Mentally Disabled 1,140 46.9 * <=5% 791 69.4 319 28.0 * <=5% * <=5%Deaf-Blind 1 0.0 * * * * * * * * * *Visually Impaired 5 0.2 1 20.0 3 60.0 1 20.0 1 20.0 * *Other Health Impaired 349 14.3 44 12.6 149 42.7 156 44.7 42 12.0 * <=5%45 0.0 10 22.2 7 15.6 28 62.2 10 22.2 5%




(NCEXTEND2 )

105

Table 28c. North Carolina Testing ProgramNorh Carolina Writing Assessment (NCEXTEND2 ), 2006-07,


Notes: 1"Number Tested" is the number of students who participated in the North Carolina Writing Assessment (NCEXTEND2 ). 2"Percent" is calculated based on the number tested in the "All Students" category. *Performance data are not reported when membership is fewer than five. Performance data that are less than or equal to 5.0 percent, or greater than or equal to 95.0 percent, are not displayed.




Level III Level III Level I Level I Level II Level II Level III Level III Level IV Level IVAll Students with Disabilities (continued)Orthopedically Impaired 12 0.5 1 8.3 7 58.3 4 33.3 * * 1 8.3Traumatic Brain Injured 10 0.4 1 10.0 6 60.0 3 30.0 1 10.0 * *Severely/Profoundly Mentally Disabled 0 0.0 * * * * * * * * * *Multihandicapped 21 0.9 * <=5% * >=95% * <=5% * <=5% * <=5%Speech-Language Impaired 13 0.5 3 23.1 3 23.1 7 53.8 3 23.1 * *Specific Learning Disabled 638 26.2 90 14.1 265 41.5 283 44.4 81 12.7 * <=5% Learning Disabled-Reading 623 25.6 63 10.1 282 45.3 278 44.6 58 9.3 * <=5% Learning Disabled-Mathematics 389 16.0 34 8.7 193 49.6 162 41.6 32 8.2 * <=5% Learning Disabled-Written Expression 589 24.2 76 12.9 263 44.7 250 42.4 68 11.5 * <=5% Learning Disabled-Other 14 0.6 1 7.1 5 35.7 8 57.1 1 7.1 * *Trainable Mentally Disabled 17 0.7 * * * * * * * * * *Autistic 102 4.2 * <=5% 73 71.6 26 25.5 * <=5% * <=5%Section 504 0 0.0 * * * * * * * * * *Academically/Intellectually Gifted 2 0.1 * * * * * * * * * * AIG Reading 0 0.0 * * * * * * * * * * AIG Mathematics 2 0.1 * * * * * * * * * *AccommodationsBraille Edition 2 0.1 * * * * * * * * * *Large Print 11 0.5 1 9.1 7 63.6 3 27.3 1 9.1 * *Assistive Technology 21 0.9 3 14.3 10 47.6 8 38.1 * <=5% 2 9.5Braille Writer 0 0.0 * * * * * * * * * *Cramner Abacus 0 0.0 * * * * * * * * * *Dictation to Scribe 246 10.1 * <=5% 131 53.3 103 41.9 * <=5% * <=5%Interpreter Signs Test 11 0.5 * * * * * * * * * *Magnification Devices 5 0.2 1 20.0 3 60.0 1 20.0 1 20.0 * *Student Marks in Test Book 606 24.9 36 5.9 352 58.1 218 36.0 33 5.4 * <=5%Test Administrator Reads Test Aloud 1,971 81.0 127 6.4 1,189 60.3 655 33.2 120 6.1 * <=5%Use Of Typewriter or Word Processor 27 1.1 5 18.5 11 40.7 11 40.7 4 14.8 * <=5%Hospital/Home Testing 2 0.1 * * * * * * * * * *Multiple Test Sessions 652 26.8 51 7.8 362 55.5 239 36.7 45 6.9 * <=5%Scheduled Extended Time 2,178 89.5 158 7.3 1,263 58.0 757 34.8 145 6.7 * <=5%Testing in a Separate Room 2,166 89.0 155 7.2 1,254 57.9 757 34.9 142 6.6 * <=5%English/Native Lang. Dictionary/Electronic Translato 13 0.5 * * 10 76.9 3 23.1 * * * *One Item per Page 4 0.2 * * * * * * * * * *Read Test Aloud to Self 31 1.3 * <=5% 17 54.8 13 41.9 * <=5% * <=5%


Notes: 1"Number Tested" is the number of students who participated in the North Carolina Writing Assessment (NCEXTEND2 ). 2"Percent" is calculated based on the number tested in the "All Students" category. *Performance data are not reported when membership is fewer than five. Performance data that are less than or equal to 5.0 percent, or greater than or equal to 95.0 percent, are not displayed.


106





(NCEXTEND2 )



Level III Level III Level I Level I Level II Level II Level III Level III Level IV Level IVAll Students 795 100.0 667 83.9 108 13.6 * <=5% 160 20.1 507 63.8Female 267 33.6 227 85.0 34 12.7 * <=5% 64 24.0 163 61.0Male 517 65.0 438 84.7 65 12.6 * <=5% 94 18.2 344 66.5American Indian 14 1.8 13 92.9 * * 1 7.1 1 7.1 12 85.7Asian 15 1.9 10 66.7 4 26.7 1 6.7 3 20.0 7 46.7Black 301 37.9 255 84.7 38 12.6 * <=5% 54 17.9 201 66.8Hispanic 58 7.3 51 87.9 6 10.3 * <=5% 13 22.4 38 65.5Multi-Racial/Other 19 2.4 15 78.9 3 15.8 1 5.3 4 21.1 11 57.9White 377 47.4 321 85.1 48 12.7 * <=5% 83 22.0 238 63.1Free and Reduced Lunch 456 57.4 397 87.1 49 10.7 * <=5% 95 20.8 302 66.2No Free and Reduced Lunch 339 42.6 270 79.6 59 17.4 * <=5% 65 19.2 205 60.5Title I 188 23.6 155 82.4 27 14.4 * <=5% 36 19.1 119 63.3Not Title I 607 76.4 512 84.3 81 13.3 * <=5% 124 20.4 388 63.9Schoolwide Title I 183 23.0 152 83.1 25 13.7 * <=5% 35 19.1 117 63.9Targeted Assistance 2 0.3 * * * * * * * * * *Migrant 4 0.5 * * * * * * * * * *Not migrant 791 99.5 664 83.9 107 13.5 * <=5% 160 20.2 504 63.7Limited English Proficient (LEP) 22 2.8 20 90.9 2 9.1 * <=5% 6 27.3 14 63.6Not Limited English Proficient 773 97.2 647 83.7 106 13.7 * <=5% 154 19.9 493 63.8Students with Disabilities 795 100.0 667 83.9 108 13.6 * <=5% 160 20.1 507 63.8Students without Disabilities 0 0.0 * * * * * * * * * *Students with IEPs 795 100.0 667 83.9 108 13.6 * <=5% 160 20.1 507 63.8Students without IEPs 0 0.0 * * * * * * * * * *Not Exceptional 0 0.0 * * * * * * * * * *Behaviorally-Emotionally Disabled 2 0.3 * * * * * * * * * *Hearing Impaired 1 0.1 * * * * * * * * * *Educable Mentally Disabled 158 19.9 143 90.5 11 7.0 * <=5% 36 22.8 107 67.7Deaf-Blind 0 0.0 * * * * * * * * * *Visually Impaired 1 0.1 * * * * * * * * * *Other Health Impaired 31 3.9 27 87.1 3 9.7 * <=5% 6 19.4 21 67.7Orthopedically Impaired 3 0.4 * * * * * * * * * *Traumatic Brain Injured 4 0.5 * * * * * * * * * *Severely/Profoundly Mentally Disabled 46 5.8 30 65.2 14 30.4 * <=5% 6 13.0 24 52.2Multihandicapped 114 14.3 83 72.8 28 24.6 * <=5% 25 21.9 58 50.9Speech-Language Impaired 0 0.0 * * * * * * * * * *Specific Learning Disabled 3 0.4 * * * * * * * * * *Trainable Mentally Disabled 259 32.6 227 87.6 26 10.0 * <=5% 53 20.5 174 67.2Autistic 173 21.8 148 85.5 21 12.1 * <=5% 34 19.7 114 65.9Section 504 0 0.0 * * * * * * * * * *


Number Tested1


(NCEXTEND1 )

2"Percent" is calculated based on the number tested in the "All Students" category. *Performance data are not reported when membership is fewer than five. Performance data that are less than or equal to 5.0 percent, or greater than or equal to 95.0 percent, are not displayed.


Notes: 1"Number Tested" is the number of students who participated in the North Carolina Writing Assessment (NCEXTEND1) .

107

Table 28d. North Carolina Testing ProgramNorth Carolina Writing Assessment (NCEXTEND1), 2006-07,


Category



All Students 106,471 100.0 11.1 8.2 2.9 218 0.2Female 52,451 49.3 11.5 8.4 3.1 52 0.0Male 54,020 50.7 10.6 8.0 2.6 166 0.2American Indian 1,509 1.4 10.3 7.8 2.5 4 0.0Asian 2,266 2.1 11.8 8.5 3.2 6 0.0Black 31,216 29.3 10.4 7.8 2.5 62 0.1Hispanic 8,700 8.2 10.2 7.7 2.4 54 0.1Multi-Racial/Other 3,000 2.8 11.2 8.2 3.0 9 0.0White 59,779 56.1 11.5 8.4 3.1 83 0.1Free and Reduced Lunch 45,850 43.1 10.4 7.8 2.5 133 0.1No Free and Reduced Lunch 60,621 56.9 11.6 8.4 3.1 85 0.1Title I 22,410 21.0 10.5 7.9 2.6 58 0.1Not Title I 84,061 79.0 11.2 8.2 2.9 160 0.2Schoolwide Title I 21,008 19.7 10.5 7.9 2.6 52 0.0Targeted Assistance 893 0.8 10.8 8.1 2.7 0 0.0Migrant 756 0.7 9.5 7.3 2.2 6 0.0Not migrant 105,715 99.3 11.1 8.2 2.9 212 0.2Limited English Proficient (LEP) 4,725 4.4 9.3 7.3 1.9 49 0.0Not Limited English Proficient 101,746 95.6 11.1 8.2 2.9 169 0.2Students with Disabilities 12,718 11.9 9.2 7.3 1.9 93 0.1Students without Disabilities 93,753 88.1 11.3 8.3 3.0 125 0.1Students with IEPs 10,260 9.6 9.0 7.2 1.7 88 0.1Students without IEPs 96,211 90.4 11.3 8.3 3.0 130 0.1Not Exceptional 76,706 72.0 11.0 8.1 2.8 119 0.1Behaviorally-Emotionally Disabled 966 0.9 8.4 6.7 1.6 17 0.0Hearing Impaired 122 0.1 9.5 7.3 2.0 2 0.0Educable Mentally Disabled 665 0.6 7.0 5.9 1.0 16 0.0Deaf-Blind 4 0.0 10.8 8.0 2.8 0 0.0Visually Impaired 42 0.0 11.3 8.2 3.0 0 0.0Other Health Impaired 2,478 2.3 9.2 7.2 1.9 22 0.0Orthopedically Impaired 45 0.0 9.4 7.7 1.8 0 0.0


Notes: 1"Number Tested" is the number of students who participated in the North Carolina General Writing Assessment.

Number Tested1

(General)

Category



Percent2

(General)

108





All Students with Disabilities (continued)Traumatic Brain Injured 15 0.0 8.9 7.2 1.7 0 0.0Severely/Profoundly Mentally Disabled 0 0.0 * * * * *Multihandicapped 9 0.0 7.7 6.7 1.0 0 0.0Speech-Language Impaired 293 0.3 9.9 7.6 2.2 3 0.0Specific Learning Disabled 5,396 5.1 9.1 7.3 1.7 19 0.0 Learning Disabled-Reading 4,249 4.0 8.9 7.3 1.6 17 0.0 Learning Disabled-Mathematics 2,061 1.9 8.8 7.1 1.6 10 0.0 Learning Disabled-Written Expression 3,605 3.4 8.9 7.3 1.6 16 0.0 Learning Disabled-Other 155 0.1 9.4 7.4 2.0 0 0.0Trainable Mentally Disabled 6 0.0 5.6 4.3 0.3 1 0.0Autistic 219 0.2 9.5 7.0 2.2 8 0.0Section 504 2,458 2.3 10.3 7.9 2.5 5 0.0Academically/Intellectually Gifted 16,738 15.7 12.8 9.1 3.7 7 0.0 AIG Reading 13,208 12.4 12.9 9.2 3.7 5 0.0 AIG Mathematics 13,963 13.1 12.8 9.1 3.7 4 0.0AccommodationsBraille Edition 5 0.0 13.2 9.6 3.6 0 0.0Large Print 45 0.0 10.6 7.9 2.5 1 0.0Assistive Technology 77 0.1 10.0 7.7 2.1 1 0.0Braille Writer 4 0.0 11.5 8.5 3.0 0 0.0Cramner Abacus 1 0.0 10.0 8.0 2.0 0 0.0Dictation to Scribe 322 0.3 7.5 7.5 0.0 1 0.0Interpreter Signs Test 16 0.0 7.7 5.8 1.4 1 0.0Magnification Devices 9 0.0 10.1 7.3 2.8 0 0.0Student Marks in Test Book 1,675 1.6 9.0 7.1 1.7 18 0.0Test Administrator Reads Test Aloud 6,104 5.7 8.5 6.9 1.5 65 0.1Use Of Typewriter or Word Processor 259 0.2 11.0 8.2 2.5 6 0.0Hospital/Home Testing 14 0.0 8.3 6.9 1.4 0 0.0Multiple Test Sessions 2,204 2.1 8.7 7.0 1.6 22 0.0Scheduled Extended Time 12,323 11.6 9.1 7.2 1.8 104 0.1Testing in a Separate Room 9,553 9.0 8.9 7.1 1.7 96 0.1English/Native Lang. Dictionary/Electronic Translator 1,115 1.0 8.6 6.8 1.6 23 0.0One Item per Page 19 0.0 9.3 7.3 1.6 1 0.0Read Test Aloud to Self 171 0.2 8.6 6.9 1.5 3 0.0


Category


Percent2

(General)

North Carolina General Writing Assessment, 2006-07,

Number Tested1

(General)


109


Table 29a. North Carolina Testing Program



All Students 432 100.0 7.8Female 196 45.4 7.6Male 236 54.6 8.0American Indian 0 0.0 0.0Asian 48 11.1 7.4Black 13 3.0 8.0Hispanic 285 66.0 7.1Multi-Racial/Other 9 2.1 11.8White 77 17.8 10.3Free and Reduced Lunch 318 73.6 7.7No Free and Reduced Lunch 114 26.4 8.2Title I 1 0.2 4.0Not Title I 431 99.8 7.8Schoolwide Title I 1 0.2 4.0Targeted Assistance 0 0.0 0.0Migrant 1 0.2 4.0Not migrant 431 99.8 7.8Limited English Proficient (LEP) 340 78.7 7.3Not Limited English Proficient 92 21.3 9.8Students with Disabilities 89 20.6 10.4Students without Disabilities 343 79.4 7.1Students with IEPs 89 20.6 10.4Students without IEPs 343 79.4 7.1Not Exceptional 343 79.4 7.1Behaviorally-Emotionally Disabled 5 1.2 12.2Hearing Impaired 2 0.5 7.5Educable Mentally Disabled 6 1.4 10.0Deaf-Blind 0 0.0 0.0Visually Impaired 0 0.0 0.0Other Health Impaired 13 3.0 10.1Orthopedically Impaired 0 0.0 0.0Traumatic Brain Injured 1 0.2 11.0Severely/Profoundly Mentally Disabled 0 0.0 0.0Multihandicapped 0 0.0 0.0Speech-Language Impaired 2 0.5 5.0Specific Learning Disabled 56 13.0 10.8Trainable Mentally Disabled 0 0.0 0.0Autistic 4 0.9 8.0Section 504 0 0.0 *


Number Tested1

(NCCLAS)Percent2

(NCCLAS)

Notes: 1"Number Tested" is the number of students who participated in the North Carolina Writing Assessment (NCCLAS).



Category



110



All Students 2,433 100.0 7.5 5.8 1.4 130 5.3Female 758 31.2 7.8 5.7 1.6 48 2.0Male 1,675 68.8 7.4 5.8 1.3 82 3.4American Indian 99 4.1 8.2 6.2 1.6 5 0.2Asian 19 0.8 6.9 4.7 1.1 3 0.1Black 1,055 43.4 7.2 5.5 1.4 49 2.0Hispanic 184 7.6 7.0 5.4 1.0 14 0.6Multi-Racial/Other 59 2.4 7.4 5.7 1.3 4 0.2White 1,017 41.8 7.9 6.1 1.4 55 2.3Free and Reduced Lunch 1,708 70.2 7.4 5.7 1.3 83 3.4No Free and Reduced Lunch 725 29.8 7.9 5.9 1.5 47 1.9Title I 706 29.0 7.5 5.8 1.4 36 1.5Not Title I 1,727 71.0 7.5 5.8 1.4 94 3.9Schoolwide Title I 667 27.4 7.5 5.8 1.4 35 1.4Targeted Assistance 20 0.8 8.0 6.2 1.8 0 0.0Migrant 39 1.6 7.6 5.7 1.7 1 0.0Not migrant 2,394 98.4 7.5 5.8 1.4 129 5.3Limited English Proficient (LEP) 141 5.8 6.7 5.3 0.9 12 0.5Not Limited English Proficient 2,292 94.2 7.6 5.8 1.4 118 4.8Students with Disabilities 2,428 99.8 7.5 5.8 1.4 130 5.3Students without Disabilities 5 0.2 6.0 4.8 1.2 0 0.0Students with IEPs 2,428 99.8 7.5 5.8 1.4 130 5.3Students without IEPs 5 0.2 6.0 4.8 1.2 0 0.0Not Exceptional 5 0.2 6.0 4.8 1.2 0 0.0Behaviorally-Emotionally Disabled 89 3.7 7.9 5.8 1.4 7 0.3Hearing Impaired 31 1.3 6.6 4.6 0.8 6 0.2Educable Mentally Disabled 1,140 46.9 6.5 5.1 1.1 56 2.3Deaf-Blind 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1 0.0Visually Impaired 5 0.2 8.5 4.8 2.0 1 0.0Other Health Impaired 349 14.3 8.7 6.7 1.8 7 0.3Orthopedically Impaired 12 0.5 7.1 6.0 1.1 0 0.0

*Performance data are not reported when number tested is fewer than five. The total for "All Students with Disabilities" includes Section 504. Some categories may not add up to the total due to missing coding. Data received from LEAs and charter schools after August 21, 2007 are not included in this table. Prepared by the NCDPI Division of Accountability Services/Test Development Section.

Number Tested1


(NCEXTEND2 )

Category

111






All Students with Disabilities (continued)Traumatic Brain Injured 10 0.4 7.4 5.6 1.1 1 0.0Severely/Profoundly Mentally Disabled 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0Multihandicapped 21 0.9 4.7 3.9 0.3 2 0.1Speech-Language Impaired 13 0.5 9.7 7.4 2.3 0 0.0Specific Learning Disabled 638 26.2 8.8 6.9 1.7 12 0.5 Learning Disabled-Reading 623 25.6 8.3 6.5 1.6 19 0.8 Learning Disabled-Mathematics 389 16.0 8.0 6.2 1.4 15 0.6 Learning Disabled-Written Expression 589 24.2 8.5 6.7 1.6 18 0.7 Learning Disabled-Other 14 0.6 9.4 7.1 2.2 0 0.0Trainable Mentally Disabled 17 0.7 4.0 1.9 0.0 9 0.4Autistic 102 4.2 6.9 4.0 1.0 28 1.2Section 504 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0Academically/Intellectually Gifted 2 0.1 6.5 5.0 1.5 0 0.0 AIG Reading 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 AIG Mathematics 2 0.1 6.5 5.0 1.5 0 0.0AccommodationsBraille Edition 2 0.1 6.0 2.0 1.0 1 0.0Large Print 11 0.5 7.3 4.5 1.5 2 0.1Assistive Technology 21 0.9 9.0 6.8 1.8 1 0.0Braille Writer 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0Cramner Abacus 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0Dictation to Scribe 246 10.1 7.1 6.9 0.0 9 0.4Interpreter Signs Test 11 0.5 4.8 3.6 0.3 2 0.1Magnification Devices 5 0.2 8.0 4.8 1.6 1 0.0Student Marks in Test Book 606 24.9 7.4 5.5 1.3 44 1.8Test Administrator Reads Test Aloud 1,971 81.0 7.3 5.6 1.3 106 4.4Use Of Typewriter or Word Processor 27 1.1 9.0 6.8 1.8 1 0.0Hospital/Home Testing 2 0.1 14.0 5.0 2.0 1 0.0Multiple Test Sessions 652 26.8 7.7 5.8 1.4 43 1.8Scheduled Extended Time 2,178 89.5 7.5 5.8 1.4 111 4.6Testing in a Separate Room 2,166 89.0 7.5 5.7 1.4 118 4.8English/Native Lang. Dictionary/Electronic Translator 13 0.5 6.4 3.7 0.8 4 0.2One Item per Page 4 0.2 6.5 5.5 1.0 0 0.0Read Test Aloud to Self 31 1.3 7.8 5.6 1.4 3 0.1




112

Table 29c. North Carolina Testing ProgramNorth Carolinal Writing Assessment (NCEXTEND2 ), 2006-07,




(NCEXTEND2 )

Notes: 1"Number Tested" is the number of students who participated in the North Carolina Writing Assessment (NCEXTEND2 ).



All Students 795 100.0 13.4Female 267 33.6 13.4Male 517 65.0 13.6American Indian 14 1.8 15.1Asian 15 1.9 11.6Black 301 37.9 13.6Hispanic 58 7.3 13.8Multi-Racial/Other 19 2.4 12.9White 377 47.4 13.5Free and Reduced Lunch 456 57.4 13.8No Free and Reduced Lunch 339 42.6 13.0Title I 188 23.6 13.3Not Title I 607 76.4 13.5Schoolwide Title I 183 23.0 13.4Targeted Assistance 2 0.3 9.0Migrant 4 0.5 13.0Not migrant 791 99.5 13.4Limited English Proficient (LEP) 22 2.8 13.9Not Limited English Proficient 773 97.2 13.4Students with Disabilities 795 100.0 13.4Students without Disabilities 0 0.0 0.0Students with IEPs 795 100.0 13.4Students without IEPs 0 0.0 0.0Not Exceptional 0 0.0 0.0Behaviorally-Emotionally Disabled 2 0.3 10.0Hearing Impaired 1 0.1 16.0Educable Mentally Disabled 158 19.9 14.2Deaf-Blind 0 0.0 0.0Visually Impaired 1 0.1 16.0Other Health Impaired 31 3.9 13.9Orthopedically Impaired 3 0.4 8.0Traumatic Brain Injured 4 0.5 13.0Severely/Profoundly Mentally Disabled 46 5.8 11.5Multihandicapped 114 14.3 12.0Speech-Language Impaired 0 0.0 0.0Specific Learning Disabled 3 0.4 12.0Trainable Mentally Disabled 259 32.6 13.8Autistic 173 21.8 13.6Section 504 0 0.0 0.0

NCEXTEND1 is an assessment for students with severe cognitive disabilities operationalized in 2006-07.


Number Tested1


(NCEXTEND1 )



Category

Notes: 1"Number Tested" is the number of students who participated in the North Carolina Writing Assessment ( NCEXTEND1 ).



113



LOW SCORE 4


90 14MEAN 11.1 75 12


VARIANCE 5.1


20 51 106,471 0.0 100.019 1 106,420 0.0 100.018 134 106,419 0.1 100.017 5 106,285 0.0 99.8

16 3,769 106,280 3.5 99.815 461 102,511 0.4 96.314 9,647 102,050 9.1 95.813 2,945 92,403 2.8 86.812 37,079 89,458 34.8 84.0

11 4,569 52,379 4.3 49.210 33,770 47,810 31.7 44.99 3,663 14,040 3.4 13.28 3,725 10,377 3.5 9.7

7 1,667 6,652 1.6 6.26 1,717 4,985 1.6 4.75 695 3,268 0.7 3.14 2,355 2,573 2.2 2.4

NS 218 218 0.2 0.2






I

II

III

IV

114


HIGH SCORE 16

432 LOW SCORE 4TOTAL

MEAN 7.8 PERCENTILES SCORE90 12

STANDARD 75 11DEVIATION 3.2 50 (median) 8

25 4VARIANCE 10.4 10 4


16 4 432 0.9 100.015 1 428 0.2 99.114 6 427 1.4 98.8

13 5 421 1.2 97.512 79 416 18.3 96.311 32 337 7.4 78.010 18 305 4.2 70.6

9 13 287 3.0 66.48 67 274 15.5 63.47 20 207 4.6 47.9

6 51 187 11.8 43.35 24 136 5.6 31.54 112 112 25.9 25.9

Notes: The range used for the NCCLAS Writing Assessment is different from the range used for the North Carolina Writing Assessment. Data received from LEAs and charter schools after August 21, 2007 are not included in this table. Prepared by the NCDPI Division of Accountability Services/Test Development Section.





I

II

III

IV

115



LOW SCORE 4


90 12MEAN 7.5 75 10


VARIANCE 13.5


20 7 2,433 0.3 100.019 0 2,426 0.0 99.718 9 2,426 0.4 99.7

17 3 2,417 0.1 99.316 83 2,414 3.4 99.215 10 2,331 0.4 95.814 70 2,321 2.9 95.4

12 253 2,251 10.4 92.511 68 1,998 2.8 82.110 260 1,930 10.7 79.39 70 1,670 2.9 68.68 190 1,600 7.8 65.8

7 75 1,410 3.1 58.06 260 1,335 10.7 54.95 130 1,075 5.3 44.24 815 945 33.5 38.8

NS 130 130 5.3 5.3

Notes: The range used for the NCEXTEND2 Writing Assessment is different from the range used for the North Carolina Writing Assessment. Data received from LEAs and charter schools after August 21, 2007 are not included in this table. Prepared by the NCDPI Division of Accountability Services/Test Development Section.





I

II

III

IV

116


HIGH SCORE 16795

LOW SCORE 4MEAN 13.4 TOTAL

PERCENTILES SCORESTANDARD 90 16DEVIATION 4.2 75 16

50 (median) 16VARIANCE 17.3 25 12

10 4


16 507 795 63.8 100.015 0 288 0.0 36.2

14 18 288 2.3 36.213 0 270 0.0 34.012 142 270 17.9 34.011 0 128 0.0 16.1

10 8 128 1.0 16.19 0 120 0.0 15.18 12 120 1.5 15.17 0 108 0.0 13.6

6 0 108 0.0 13.65 0 108 0.0 13.64 108 108 13.6 13.6

Notes: The range used for the NCEXTEND1 Writing Assessment is different from the range used for the North Carolina Writing Assessment. Data received from LEAs and charter schools after August 21, 2007 are not included in this table. Prepared by the NCDPI Division of Accountability Services/Test Development Section.





IV

III

II

I

117

119

2006-07


Grade 7

Copies of Grade 7

Sample Student Responses

The North Carolina Writing Assessment Scoring Model is comprised of a content component with a 1-4 score range and a conventions component with a 0-2 score range. To report a total writing score for each student, the score is computed by combining the content and conventions scores using the following model: Total Writing Assessment Score = sum of the (content component scores from two independent readers multiplied by 2) + the sum of the (conventions component scores from two independent readers multiplied by 1). The following pages provide copies of sample student responses from the North Carolina Writing Assessment at grade 7. The total content score, total conventions score, total writing score, Achievement Level, and annotated explanations of the scores are provided for each response.

121


122


Rubric Content Score: 1 Rubric Convention Score: 0 Total Content Score: 4 Total Writing Score: 4 Total Conventions Score: 0 Achievement Level: I Content Annotation: The sparse response exhibits an unclear topic/subject and fails to maintain focus. The development consists of random ideas with little or no detail (…help by picking up garbage. After word help anybody That needs help). Conventions Annotation: The response exhibits a lack of control of conventions. There are a couple of sentence fragments (Like no fighting or spend 50 days in Jail…). There are several usage and mechanics errors also (Me and my friends…After word…).

123

124


125


Rubric Content Score: 2 Rubric Convention Score: 0 Total Content Score: 8 Total Writing Score: 8 Total Conventions Score: 0 Achievement Level: II Content Annotation: Though the topic is generally clear (help our school) and there is basic organization, the response lapses in its development due to general, undeveloped details presented in a list-like fashion (help our school...finachuly. We are in need of monny with low Bojats and lots of kids their are of problems. Do what you can Donate monny, Buy from school fund raisers, and Don’t complain if the taxes Go up Because we need the monny.). Sentence fluency and use of vocabulary is minimal (A nother way to help our school is in the teachers and suBs. We need more Better subs). Conventions Annotation: The response exhibits a lack of control of grammatical conventions. In sentence formation, there are several run-ons (We need more Better suBs for instance a Basket Ball coach is my sub rite now). There are usage errors in comparison or agreement (more Better...and slow computer). The lack of control in mechanics is evident in the frequent random capitalizations and misspellings of common words (wee...monny...rite...coald...un sarate...Git any thing Done).

126

127


128


Rubric Content Score: 2 Rubric Convention Score: 2 Total Content Score: 8 Total Writing Score: 12 Total Conventions Score: 4 Achievement Level: III Content Annotation: The topic/subject is generally clear (problem with litter...pick up...clean up) in this organized response that includes a good conclusion. However, there are lapses in progression of support due to general, repetitive details (At my school people just throw trash down everywhere. If we put out more trash cans in the hallways, students would find it more convenient...Another thing...make strict rules about littering...put together people who are willing to pick up a little bit of trash...be litter free for the week. We could also put more trash cans...some people won’t want to help make the school and community a better place, but they Live here and will have to live in it...I want to make a difference...even if I have to do it alone, I will.) The response demonstrates some reasonable use of sentence fluency and vocabulary, but the response is sometimes lacking in vocabulary that is precise and purposeful (pick up a little bit of trash...put more trash cans...where people like to hang out.). Conventions Annotation: The response exhibits reasonable use of conventions. The few errors are minor mechanics issues like missing punctuation or an unnecessary capitalization.

129

130


131


Rubric Content Score: 3 Rubric Convention Score: 2 Total Content Score: 12 Total Writing Score: 16 Total Conventions Score: 4 Achievement Level: III

Content Annotation: In this response the topic/subject is clear (...building homes for the homeless people) and focus is maintained, with only a minor lapse in the fact that development is more related to the problem than the solution. Despite a little repetition, there is a logical progression of ideas/events and the response is reasonably complete. This is due to some specific details in ideas/events (...the homeless people in our community would be extremely grateful to have their own home...it would make them feel better about themselves...For example, last week, I was at a stoplight, in my car and a homeless person came up to my car and asked me for some money or food. He didn’t even look at me when he asked me, so I could tell that he was really embarrased. Then I gave him some money and a bottle of water...). The precision and purpose of the vocabulary exhibited and the sentence fluency demonstrated in the response are reasonable and at times skillful (He was grinning from ear to ear...Just remember, Mr. or Mrs. Editor of the newspaper, to build a homeless person a house is like giving them some water except that it has an immensly bigger impact.). Conventions Annotation: There is reasonable control of conventions in this response. The sentence formation is generally correct. Errors include a few usage and mechanics (...if I was for were...definately...immensly...to many for too).

132

133


134

Grade 7-North Carolina General Writing Assessment - Sample Student Response #5 Rubric Content Score: 4 Rubric Convention Score: 2 Total Content Score: 16 Total Writing Score: 20 Total Conventions Score: 4 Achievement Level: IV Content Annotation: There is a clear topic/subject (...The amount of time students spend waiting in the lunch line) and focus is maintained in this organized response. There is a logical progression of ideas with specific, developed details, and also an awareness of the purpose and audience of the writing task. These aspects help make the response unified and complete (Two of the main causes of this problem are too many students entering the caferteria at the same time and not enough lunch staff...about one hundred-twenty students enter ...in five minuts...only three caferteria staff on duty...hire three additional lunch staff. Two should work at the dollar bar...one should assist in the regular lunch line...wait time...should decrease by fifty percent...). The response demonstrates skillful use of sentence fluency and vocabulary (Every day students are waiting in lunch lines three-fourths of there lunch time, leaving them only about five minuts to devour their entire meal...Implementing this solution involves several easy steps.). Conventions Annotation: There is reasonable control of conventions in this response. There are a few errors in usage and mechanics (there lunch time...minuts...caferteria...chang...scedule).

135

2006-07


Grade 7 – NCEXTEND2

Copies of Grade 7


The North Carolina Writing Assessment Scoring Model is comprised of a content component with a 1-4 score range and a conventions component with a 0-2 score range. To report a total writing scale score for each student, the score is computed by combining the content and conventions scores using the following model: Total Writing Assessment Score = sum of the (content component scores from two independent readers multiplied by 2) + the sum of the (conventions component scores from two independent readers multiplied by 1). The following pages provide copies of sample student responses from the North Carolina Writing Assessment (NCEXTEND2) at grade 7. The total content score, total conventions score, total writing score, Achievement Level, and annotated explanations of the scores are provided for each response.

137

138


139


Rubric Content Score: 1 Rubric Convention Score: 0 Total Content Score: 4 Total Writing Score: 4 Total Conventions Score: 0 Achievement Level: I Content Annotation: While the topic is clearly on the subject of the prompt, (It can make your school a better place), there is a lack of specific focus and little connection is made between ideas. The ideas are presented in a random fashion. (….Also It can make your school a better place by have nit stufe. Also your can have a better place by not put gum under the stient and put stop fighting …). As a result, the relatedness of the support is confusing, and there is no clear progression of ideas. The response lacks vocabulary that is precise and purposeful and does not demonstrate sentence fluency. Conventions Annotation: The response exhibits a lack of control of conventions. The response contains sentence formation errors and numerous usage and spelling errors (Also It can make your school a better place by have nit stufe. Also your can have a better place by not put gum under the stient and put stop fighting….Also It make your school a better Place by not eat food in class and It can make your school a better place no write on the best). The errors impede the reader’s understanding of the ideas trying to be conveyed.

140

141


142


Rubric Content Score: 2 Rubric Convention Score: 1 Total Content Score: 8 Total Writing Score: 10 Total Conventions Score: 2 Achievement Level: II Content Annotation:

The focus of the response is vague (This is how you can improve our school….), and there is little organizational structure, though transitions give some sense of logical progression (Oh don’t forget….in plus....). Support remains list-like, and generally undeveloped, though some attempted elaboration is evident (More PTA so the parents now what there child is doing in school and what your not doing in school what you got to make up on if you are playing or not). The response does not exhibit the use of vocabulary that is precise and purposeful and demonstrates little sentence fluency. Conventions Annotation: The response exhibits a minimal control of conventions. There are sentence formation errors, usage errors and misspellings (Oh don’t forget the young pepol that like to play an entruments for band clases we need more entruments).

143

144


145


Rubric Content Score: 2 Rubric Convention Score: 2 Total Content Score: 8 Total Writing Score: 12 Total Conventions Score: 4 Achievement Level: II Content Annotation: The topic is generally clear (…If we had a park…), but the organizational structure establishes little relationship between ideas, and there are major lapses in logical progression. While specific details and elaboration is present (…Some of the things we can do is have a fun day, that is when they have a fare and every one can come out have fun. You can also make money there to by selling food, drink, toys and tickets for rids on the big toys), how support relates to the topic is not always clear nor is it always clear how ideas are related to each other (We can also have a day to raize money for sick people and have some side walks forevery one to walk on. It is also saffer then walk in by the street you can get het by a car.) The response exhibits reasonable use of vocabulary that is precise and purposeful and demonstrates some sentence fluency. Conventions Annotation: The response exhibits reasonable control of conventions. Sentence formation errors and spelling errors are present.

146

147


148


Rubric Content Score: 3 Rubric Convention Score: 2 Total Content Score: 12 Total Writing Score: 16 Total Conventions Score: 4 Achievement Level: III Content Annotation: The subject/topic is generally clear (In my school we have problems like more people dropping out of school and standing out on coners, and why can’t we all just get along and work together) and focus is maintained. Support is related to the topic (It’s not a game you need to be in school so you can make it out in this world because if you don’t learn nothing how are you going to get a job and what if you get marred and have kids how are you going to provid for them…). The response exhibits some reasonable use of vocabulary that is precise and purposeful and demonstrates some sentence fluency. Conventions Annonation: The response exhibits reasonable control of conventions appropriate for the writing task.

149

150


151


Rubric Content Score: 4 Rubric Convention Score: 2 Total Content Score: 16 Total Writing Score: 20 Total Conventions Score: 4 Achievement Level: IV

Content Annotation: The topic/subject is clear (…we should make a difference at our school by improving our school ) and focus is maintained. An organizational structure establishes relationships between and among ideas and events. The support and elaboration are related to and supportive of the topic/subject and consist of some specific details (…consider of inproving our school by purchesing new stuff. We need laptop’s because our computers are slow and we could take them home every night. New book’s because their riped apart and old ….New shelves for the Libary because their almost broke). The response exhibits reasonable use of vocabulary that is precise and purposeful and demonstrates reasonable use of sentence fluency. Conventions Annotation: The response exhibits reasonable control of conventions appropriate for the writing task.

153

2006-07


Grade 7


Tables 33a through 33l provide the number of students participating and the percent of students at or above Achievement Level III for each of the LEAs by region (former six Technical Assistance Centers configurations). Performance by ethnicity, gender, Title I, and migrant students is also provided for each LEA.


State Percent† 2007 LEA Performance * Metrolina**, Magellan** ... 92 Quest Academy** ... 86 Greensboro Academy** ... 84 Lake Norman** 83 Phoenix Academy** ... 79 Millennium**, Thomas Jefferson** ... 77 Forsyth Academies**, Success Institute** 76 Lincoln Charter**, Union Academy** 75 Exploris** 74 American Ren. Middle**, Woods Charter**

2001 State 73 2000 State 72 Chapel Hill-Carrboro City, Dare, Gaston College Prep**

71 Franklin Academy**, Queen's Grant**1999 State 70

69 Sterling Montessori** 68 Charter Day School**, Elkin City, Mount Airy City 67 Carolina International** 66 Henderson, River Mill Academy** 65 Pamlico, Wake, Watauga 64 Ashe, Transylvania1998,2002 State 63 Bethany Community**, Camden, Clover Garden**

62 Polk, Washington Montessori** 61 Carteret 60 Evergreen Community**, Mooresville City, Mountain Community**, Summit Charter**

1996 State 59 58 Cherokee County 57 ArtSpace Charter**, Chatham, Clay, Harnett, Haywood, Moore 56 Catawba, Graham, McDowell, New Hanover, Orange, Tyrrell, Union

1997 State 55 Hickory City, Piedmont Community** 54 Asheboro City, Asheville City, Buncombe, Cleveland, Davidson, Davie, Newton-Conover City, Roxboro Community**, Yancey 53 Charlotte/Mecklenburg, Jackson, Johnston, Pender, Tiller School**, Wilkes 52 Cabarrus, Caldwell, Cumberland, East Wake Academy**, Orange Charter**, Whiteville City, Winston-Salem/Forsyth

2007 State 51 Alamance-Burlington, Burke, Currituck, Iredell-Statesville, Rowan-Salisbury, Stanly 50 Brevard Academy**, Chatham Charter**, Edenton/Chowan, The Learning Center** 49 Randolph, Scotland 48 C.G. Woodson**, Elizabeth City/Pasquotank, Gaston, Lincoln, Onslow, Person, Rocky Mount Prep Sch**, Surry, Wayne

2005 State 47 Haliwa-Saponi Tribal**2004,2006 State 46 Alleghany, Brunswick, Craven, Crosscreek Charter School**, Guilford, Lee, Mitchell, Roanoke Rapids City,

Rockingham, Two Rivers Community School** 45 Cape Fear Center**, Downtown Middle**, Vance Charter**, Warren 44 Alexander, Avery, Lenoir, Wilson, Yadkin 43 Bladen, Caswell, Kestrel Heights**, Pitt, Research Triangle**, Stokes, Vance 42 Durham, Rutherford

2003 State 41 Duplin, Gates, Granville, Madison 40 Beaufort, Bridges**, Perquimans, Richmond, Sampson 39 Arapahoe Charter**, Hoke, Hyde, Nash-Rocky Mount, Swain 38 Anson, Clinton City, Franklin, Halifax, Kannapolis City, Omuteko Gwamaziima** 37 Montgomery 36 F Delany New School**, Lexington City 35 Carter Community**, Jones 34 Martin 33 Northampton, STARS** 32 Bertie, Macon, Robeson 31 SPARC Academy** 30 Columbus, Edgecombe, Maureen Joy**, Thomasville City 29 Hertford, Kinston Charter Academy**, Quality Education**, Washington, Weldon City ... 27 PreEminent** ... 25 S.B. Howard**, Sugar Creek** 24 Academy of Moore County** 23 Greene 22 Guilford Prep Academy**, Healthy Start** ... 17 Mountain Discovery**, Provisions Academy** ... 13 Crossnore Academy** ... 8 CIS Academy** * Alpha Academy**, Grandfather Academy**, Kennedy Charter** Notes: †Percents are rounded to the nearest whole percent. *Performance data are not reported when number tested is fewer than five. Performance data that are less than or equal to 5.0 percent, or greater than or equal to 95.0 percent, are not displayed. **Denotes a charter school. For reporting purposes the charter school name has been abbreviated; the complete charter school name can be found in the Appendix. Beginning in 2003, data are reported using the revised standard and are generated using the new scoring model. Data for 2003 are from the pilot test administration. Data received from LEAs and charter schools after August 21, 2007 are not included in this table. Prepared by the NCDPI Division of Accountability Services/Test Development Section.

Table 31. North Carolina Testing ProgramNorth Carolina General Writing Assessment, 2006-07,

Percent of Students Scoring At or Above Level III, by LEA,Grade 7

155


State Mean Score† 2007 LEA Performance 14.3 Metrolina** ... 14.0 Magellan** ... 13.1 Greensboro Academy** 12.9 Quest Academy** ... 12.5 Gaston College Prep**, Thomas Jefferson** 12.3 Ashe, Dare, Exploris**, Forsyth Academies**, Lake Norman**, Lincoln Charter**, Millennium**, Pamlico, Phoenix Academy** 12.1 Chapel Hill-Carrboro City, Charter Day School**, Franklin Academy**, Watauga 12.0 Mount Airy City 11.9 American Ren. Middle**, Clover Garden**, Elkin City, Evergreen Community**, Henderson, Queen's Grant**, Union Academy**, Washington Montessori**, Woods Charter** 11.7 Clay, Mooresville City, Roxboro Community**, Sterling Montessori**, Success Institute**, Summit Charter**, Transylvania, Wake 11.5 ArtSpace Charter**, Camden, Carolina International**, Carteret, Catawba, Chatham, Cherokee County, Haywood, McDowell, Moore, Mountain Community**, Orange, Polk, Wilkes 11.3 Asheville City, Bethany Community**, Buncombe, Burke, Cabarrus, Caldwell, Cleveland, Davidson, Davie, Edenton/Chowan, Graham, Harnett, Jackson, Johnston, New Hanover, Newton-Conover City, Pender, River Mill Academy**, The Learning Center**, Two Rivers Community School**, Winston-Salem/Forsyth, Yancey

2007 State 11.1 Alleghany, Charlotte/Mecklenburg, Currituck, East Wake Academy**, Iredell-Statesville, Stanly, Union, Vance Charter**

2004 State 11.0 Alamance-Burlington, Cumberland, Downtown Middle**, Gaston, Hickory City, Lincoln, Orange Charter**, Surry2003,2005 State 10.9 Alexander, Asheboro City, Brevard Academy**, Brunswick, C.G. Woodson**, Cape Fear Center**, Caswell, Chatham Charter**, Elizabeth City/Pasquotank, Granville, Guilford, Lee, Mitchell, Onslow, Piedmont Community**, Randolph, Research Triangle**, Rockingham, Rocky Mount Prep Sch**, Rowan-Salisbury, SPARC Academy**, Scotland, Swain, Tiller School**, Tyrrell, Wayne, Whiteville City, Wilson, Yadkin

2006 State 10.7 Anson, Avery, Beaufort, Clinton City, Craven, Duplin, Durham, Franklin, Gates, Haliwa-Saponi Tribal**, Kannapolis City, Kestrel Heights**, Kinston Charter Academy**, Lenoir, Madison, Maureen Joy**, Perquimans, Person, Pitt, Quality Education**, Roanoke Rapids City, STARS**, Vance 10.5 Bladen, Crosscreek Charter School**, Hoke, Hyde, Montgomery, Northampton, Richmond, Rutherford, Stokes, Warren 10.3 Arapahoe Charter**, Carter Community**, Columbus, F Delany New School**, Guilford Prep Academy**, Jones, Lexington City, Macon, Martin, Mountain Discovery**, Nash-Rocky Mount, Robeson, Sampson, Washington 10.1 Bertie, Healthy Start**, Omuteko Gwamaziima**, Thomasville City 10.0 Hertford, Sugar Creek** 9.9 Academy of Moore County**, Halifax, Weldon City 9.7 PreEminent** 9.5 Crossnore Academy**, Edgecombe, Greene 9.3 Bridges**, S.B. Howard** 9.1 Kennedy Charter** 9.0 CIS Academy** 8.9 Alpha Academy** ... 8.0 Provisions Academy** 7.9 Grandfather Academy**

Notes: † Scale scores are rounded up to the nearest two-tenths of a point. *Performance data are not reported when number tested is fewer than five. **Denotes a charter school. For reporting purposes the charter school name has been abbreviated; the complete charter school name can be found in th Appendix. Beginning in 2003, data are reported using the revised standard and are generated usig the new scoring model Data for 2003 are from the pilot test administration. Data received from LEAs and charter schools after August 21, 2007 are not included in this table. Prepared by the NCDPI Division of Accountability Services/Test Development Section

Table 32. North Carolina Testing Program North Carolina General Writing Assessment, 2006-07,

Average Total Writing Score, by LEA,Grade 7

156

Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


State 106,471 50.8 1,509 35.7 2,266 65.4 31,216 35.9 8,700 35.3 3,000 53.6 59,779 60.5Western Region 7,213 53.8 99 40.4 60 68.3 421 32.3 357 40.3 208 49.5 6,068 56.3Asheville City 217 53.9 2 * 0 * 89 30.3 10 30.0 12 41.7 104 78.8Buncombe 1,947 54.0 7 42.9 16 56.3 102 37.3 103 35.0 78 48.7 1,641 56.5Cherokee County 281 58.0 1 * 3 * 3 * 2 * 6 66.7 266 57.1Clay 88 56.8 0 * 0 * 1 * 1 * 1 * 85 57.6Graham 84 56.0 10 30.0 0 * 0 * 0 * 0 * 74 59.5Haywood 567 57.3 7 85.7 3 * 7 42.9 19 31.6 8 50.0 523 57.9Henderson 833 66.4 1 * 10 70.0 34 41.2 88 48.9 24 58.3 676 70.3Jackson 257 53.3 28 50.0 2 * 2 * 8 12.5 3 * 214 55.1Macon 343 32.4 4 * 3 * 4 * 17 29.4 7 28.6 308 32.8Madison 175 40.6 0 * 1 * 0 * 4 * 1 * 169 41.4McDowell 468 56.2 0 * 10 60.0 15 6.7 27 44.4 7 57.1 409 58.7Mitchell 164 46.3 1 * 0 * 1 * 6 50.0 2 * 154 46.1Polk 186 62.4 0 * 1 * 13 30.8 14 57.1 9 44.4 149 66.4Rutherford 747 42.3 0 * 3 * 127 29.1 28 25.0 29 44.8 560 45.9Swain 154 39.0 37 32.4 1 * 1 * 2 * 1 * 112 39.3Transylvania 246 64.2 0 * 5 80.0 9 44.4 3 * 11 45.5 218 65.1Yancey 231 53.7 0 * 0 * 4 * 17 41.2 2 * 208 55.3ArtSpace Charter** 21 57.1 0 * 0 * 0 * 2 * 0 * 19 52.6Brevard Academy** 18 50.0 0 * 1 * 1 * 0 * 1 * 15 46.7Evergreen Community** 40 60.0 1 * 0 * 1 * 3 * 3 * 32 62.5F Delany New School** 14 35.7 0 * 0 * 2 * 1 * 0 * 11 36.4Mountain Community** 15 60.0 0 * 0 * 1 * 2 * 0 * 12 58.3Mountain Discovery** 6 16.7 0 * 1 * 1 * 0 * 1 * 3 *Summit Charter** 10 60.0 0 * 0 * 0 * 0 * 0 * 10 60.0The Learning Center** 6 50.0 0 * 0 * 0 * 0 * 0 * 6 50.0Thomas Jefferson** 95 78.9 0 * 0 * 3 * 0 * 2 * 90 80.0


Grade 7, by LEA and EthnicityWestern Region

Total



American Indian White


Asian Black Hispanic Multi-Racial

157

Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


State 106,471 50.8 52,451 59.9 54,020 42.0 22,410 40.3 84,061 53.6 21,008 40.5 893 41.4 756 27.8Western Region 7,213 53.8 3,564 63.9 3,649 44.0 1,549 47.7 5,664 55.5 1,469 48.8 76 25.0 12 41.7Asheville City 217 53.9 105 58.1 112 50.0 0 * 217 53.9 0 * 0 * 0 *Buncombe 1,947 54.0 948 63.7 999 44.7 1 * 1,946 54.0 0 * 0 * 1 *Cherokee County 281 58.0 144 71.5 137 43.8 82 70.7 199 52.8 82 70.7 0 * 0 *Clay 88 56.8 43 60.5 45 53.3 0 * 88 56.8 0 * 0 * 0 *Graham 84 56.0 40 70.0 44 43.2 0 * 84 56.0 0 * 0 * 0 *Haywood 567 57.3 286 69.6 281 44.8 320 53.4 247 62.3 272 60.3 48 14.6 0 *Henderson 833 66.4 408 74.5 425 58.6 3 * 830 66.3 0 * 0 * 3 *Jackson 257 53.3 128 64.1 129 42.6 253 54.2 4 * 253 54.2 0 * 0 *Macon 343 32.4 173 43.9 170 20.6 309 31.1 34 44.1 309 31.1 0 * 0 *Madison 175 40.6 88 56.8 87 24.1 0 * 175 40.6 0 * 0 * 0 *McDowell 468 56.2 237 65.0 231 47.2 0 * 468 56.2 0 * 0 * 0 *Mitchell 164 46.3 74 51.4 90 42.2 163 46.6 1 * 163 46.6 0 * 0 *Polk 186 62.4 86 65.1 100 60.0 0 * 186 62.4 0 * 0 * 0 *Rutherford 747 42.3 366 55.7 381 29.4 0 * 747 42.3 0 * 0 * 0 *Swain 154 39.0 72 47.2 82 31.7 153 38.6 1 * 153 38.6 0 * 0 *Transylvania 246 64.2 128 75.0 118 52.5 0 * 246 64.2 0 * 0 * 0 *Yancey 231 53.7 120 63.3 111 43.2 231 53.7 0 * 231 53.7 0 * 8 25.0ArtSpace Charter** 21 57.1 10 70.0 11 45.5 0 * 21 57.1 0 * 0 * 0 *Brevard Academy** 18 50.0 8 62.5 10 40.0 18 50.0 0 * 0 * 18 50.0 0 *Evergreen Community** 40 60.0 17 88.2 23 39.1 0 * 40 60.0 0 * 0 * 0 *F Delany New School** 14 35.7 6 33.3 8 37.5 3 * 11 45.5 0 * 3 * 0 *Mountain Community** 15 60.0 7 * 8 25.0 0 * 15 60.0 0 * 0 * 0 *Mountain Discovery** 6 16.7 5 20.0 1 * 2 * 4 * 0 * 2 * 0 *Summit Charter** 10 60.0 5 40.0 5 80.0 0 * 10 60.0 0 * 0 * 0 *The Learning Center** 6 50.0 1 * 5 40.0 6 50.0 0 * 6 50.0 0 * 0 *Thomas Jefferson** 95 78.9 59 79.7 36 77.8 5 60.0 90 80.0 0 * 5 60.0 0 *


Male Not Served by Title ISchoolwide Title I

Program Targeted Assistance

Grade 7, by LEA, Gender, Title I, and Migrant Students,Western Region

Total



Female MigrantServed by Title I

158

Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


State 106,471 50.8 1,509 35.7 2,266 65.4 31,216 35.9 8,700 35.3 3,000 53.6 59,779 60.5Northwest Region 16,203 51.9 31 51.6 431 50.6 2,462 35.1 1,307 35.3 420 48.3 11,552 57.5Alexander 440 43.9 0 * 17 23.5 22 36.4 23 30.4 2 * 376 46.3Alleghany 105 45.7 0 * 0 * 0 * 13 30.8 1 * 91 48.4Ashe 225 63.6 0 * 1 * 1 * 9 33.3 5 60.0 209 65.1Avery 171 43.9 0 * 0 * 0 * 4 * 4 * 163 44.2Burke 1,115 51.2 2 * 111 42.3 76 25.0 45 51.1 32 40.6 849 55.2Caldwell 998 52.2 2 * 12 50.0 68 22.1 49 40.8 25 48.0 842 55.5Catawba 1,244 55.5 4 * 98 44.9 78 41.0 94 47.9 34 41.2 936 59.2Davidson 1,502 54.4 4 * 14 64.3 46 41.3 50 40.0 23 47.8 1,365 55.3Davie 511 54.2 0 * 5 * 38 23.7 38 39.5 13 23.1 417 58.8Elkin City 100 68.0 0 * 0 * 6 50.0 14 35.7 3 * 77 75.3Hickory City 349 55.0 0 * 21 42.9 104 41.3 34 38.2 15 53.3 175 68.0Iredell-Statesville 1,643 50.8 5 60.0 42 57.1 276 30.4 124 33.1 35 42.9 1,161 57.5Lexington City 248 36.3 0 * 19 52.6 110 33.6 45 31.1 11 36.4 63 39.7Mooresville City 404 60.4 0 * 6 * 74 41.9 15 40.0 8 75.0 301 64.8Mount Airy City 103 68.0 0 * 1 * 7 42.9 4 * 2 * 89 69.7Newton-Conover City 222 53.6 0 * 10 50.0 45 31.1 28 42.9 9 66.7 130 63.1Stokes 604 42.7 2 * 0 * 31 22.6 16 31.3 11 27.3 544 44.5Surry 630 47.6 1 * 2 * 18 38.9 75 42.7 12 41.7 522 48.9Thomasville City 210 29.5 2 * 3 * 103 31.1 42 19.0 6 33.3 54 33.3Watauga 344 65.4 0 * 2 * 4 * 6 * 7 42.9 325 67.4Wilkes 744 53.4 1 * 7 85.7 33 48.5 41 39.0 13 46.2 649 54.2Winston-Salem/Forsyth 3,466 52.0 8 75.0 58 62.1 1,139 34.4 438 31.1 132 57.6 1,691 68.3Yadkin 479 44.1 0 * 0 * 10 30.0 72 26.4 8 50.0 389 47.6American Ren. Middle** 54 74.1 0 * 1 * 6 50.0 1 * 2 * 44 75.0Bridges** 10 40.0 0 * 0 * 0 * 0 * 0 * 10 40.0C.G. Woodson** 25 48.0 0 * 0 * 17 52.9 8 37.5 0 * 0 *Crossnore Academy** 8 12.5 0 * 0 * 0 * 0 * 1 * 7 14.3Downtown Middle** 105 44.8 0 * 0 * 80 41.3 5 * 3 * 17 76.5Forsyth Academies** 73 76.7 0 * 1 * 37 70.3 12 75.0 0 * 23 87.0Grandfather Academy** 7 * 0 * 0 * 0 * 0 * 2 * 5 *Millennium** 19 78.9 0 * 0 * 2 * 0 * 0 * 17 76.5Quality Education** 21 28.6 0 * 0 * 19 31.6 2 * 0 * 0 *Success Institute** 13 76.9 0 * 0 * 12 83.3 0 * 1 * 0 *Two Rivers Community School** 11 45.5 0 * 0 * 0 * 0 * 0 * 11 45.5 Notes: *Performance data are not reported when number tested is fewer than five. Performance data that are less than or equal to 5.0 percent, or greater than or equal to 95.0 percent, are not displayed. The ethnic categories may not sum to total number tested because ethnic category may not have been coded on some student answer sheets. **Denotes a charter school. For reporting purposes the charter school name has been abbreviated; the complete name can be found in the Appendix. Alternate assessment data by LEA school are available at http://report.ncsu.edu/ncpublicschools. Data received from LEAs and charter schools after August 21, 2007 are not included in this table. Prepared by the NCDPI Division of Accountability Services/Test Development Section.

Northwest Region



Grade 7, by LEA and Ethnicity


159

Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


State 106,471 50.8 52,451 59.9 54,020 42.0 22,410 40.3 84,061 53.6 21,008 40.5 893 41.4 756 27.8Northwest Region 16,203 51.9 8,066 61.1 8,137 42.7 2,882 44.2 13,321 53.5 2,800 44.8 76 22.4 6 33.3Alexander 440 43.9 214 51.9 226 36.3 26 7.7 414 46.1 0 * 26 7.7 0 *Alleghany 105 45.7 51 51.0 54 40.7 105 45.7 0 * 105 45.7 0 * 0 *Ashe 225 63.6 118 72.9 107 53.3 0 * 225 63.6 0 * 0 * 0 *Avery 171 43.9 84 54.8 87 33.3 171 43.9 0 * 171 43.9 0 * 0 *Burke 1,115 51.2 545 62.2 570 40.7 0 * 1,115 51.2 0 * 0 * 0 *Caldwell 998 52.2 486 62.3 512 42.6 992 52.3 6 33.3 992 52.3 0 * 0 *Catawba 1,244 55.5 625 63.7 619 47.2 0 * 1,244 55.5 0 * 0 * 0 *Davidson 1,502 54.4 763 62.4 739 46.1 0 * 1,502 54.4 0 * 0 * 0 *Davie 511 54.2 269 66.2 242 40.9 0 * 511 54.2 0 * 0 * 0 *Elkin City 100 68.0 46 78.3 54 59.3 0 * 100 68.0 0 * 0 * 0 *Hickory City 349 55.0 185 57.8 164 51.8 349 55.0 0 * 349 55.0 0 * 0 *Iredell-Statesville 1,643 50.8 797 62.1 846 40.2 0 * 1,643 50.8 0 * 0 * 0 *Lexington City 248 36.3 131 44.3 117 27.4 248 36.3 0 * 248 36.3 0 * 0 *Mooresville City 404 60.4 204 66.7 200 54.0 0 * 404 60.4 0 * 0 * 0 *Mount Airy City 103 68.0 55 83.6 48 50.0 0 * 103 68.0 0 * 0 * 0 *Newton-Conover City 222 53.6 121 59.5 101 46.5 0 * 222 53.6 0 * 0 * 0 *Stokes 604 42.7 284 54.2 320 32.5 0 * 604 42.7 0 * 0 * 0 *Surry 630 47.6 307 60.6 323 35.3 5 20.0 625 47.8 0 * 0 * 5 20.0Thomasville City 210 29.5 117 39.3 93 17.2 0 * 210 29.5 0 * 0 * 0 *Watauga 344 65.4 168 79.2 176 52.3 64 70.3 280 64.3 64 70.3 0 * 0 *Wilkes 744 53.4 360 67.2 384 40.4 1 * 743 53.3 0 * 0 * 1 *Winston-Salem/Forsyth 3,466 52.0 1,737 59.1 1,729 44.8 436 26.4 3,030 55.6 436 26.4 0 * 0 *Yadkin 479 44.1 232 51.3 247 37.2 386 39.6 93 62.4 386 39.6 0 * 0 *American Ren. Middle** 54 74.1 27 85.2 27 63.0 4 * 50 80.0 0 * 4 * 0 *Bridges** 10 40.0 3 * 7 42.9 0 * 10 40.0 0 * 0 * 0 *C.G. Woodson** 25 48.0 11 63.6 14 35.7 25 48.0 0 * 0 * 25 48.0 0 *Crossnore Academy** 8 12.5 5 20.0 3 * 8 12.5 0 * 8 12.5 0 * 0 *Downtown Middle** 105 44.8 47 53.2 58 37.9 21 14.3 84 52.4 0 * 21 14.3 0 *Forsyth Academies** 73 76.7 41 85.4 32 65.6 0 * 73 76.7 0 * 0 * 0 *Grandfather Academy** 7 * 1 * 6 * 7 * 0 * 7 * 0 * 0 *Millennium** 19 78.9 7 * 12 66.7 0 * 19 78.9 0 * 0 * 0 *Quality Education** 21 28.6 12 25.0 9 33.3 21 28.6 0 * 21 28.6 0 * 0 *Success Institute** 13 76.9 7 71.4 6 83.3 13 76.9 0 * 13 76.9 0 * 0 *Two Rivers Community School** 11 45.5 6 50.0 5 40.0 0 * 11 45.5 0 * 0 * 0 * Notes: *Performance data are not reported when number tested is fewer than five. Performance data that are less than or equal to 5.0 percent, or greater than or equal to 95.0 percent, are not displayed. The gender, Title I, and Migrant categories may not sum to total number tested because these categories may not have been coded on some student answer sheets. **Denotes a charter school. For reporting purposes the charter school name has been abbreviated; the complete name can be found in the Appendix. Alternate assessment data by LEA school are available at http://report.ncsu.edu/ncpublicschools. Data received from LEAs and charter schools after August 21, 2007 are not included in this table. Prepared by the NCDPI Division of Accountability Services/Test Development Section.


Northwest Region


Table 33d. North Carolina Testing ProgramNorth Carolina General Writing Assessment, 2006-07,

Grade 7, by LEA, Gender, Title I, and Migrant Students,

160

Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


State 106,471 50.8 1,509 35.7 2,266 65.4 31,216 35.9 8,700 35.3 3,000 53.6 59,779 60.5Southwest Region 25,146 51.5 251 41.0 598 65.9 7,811 36.9 2,226 35.3 583 50.8 13,677 62.0Anson 339 37.8 1 * 13 53.8 205 27.8 7 28.6 4 * 109 55.0Cabarrus 1,951 52.4 4 * 30 73.3 327 37.3 167 31.1 64 54.7 1,359 58.2Charlotte/Mecklenburg 9,366 52.9 34 52.9 380 65.5 4,240 40.2 1,164 37.8 236 51.3 3,312 73.2Cleveland 1,300 54.2 3 * 5 80.0 370 37.0 37 37.8 18 66.7 867 61.8Gaston 2,387 47.6 7 28.6 44 75.0 503 32.8 137 35.8 21 47.6 1,675 52.4Hoke 535 38.9 65 33.8 3 * 269 33.8 49 32.7 11 27.3 138 53.6Kannapolis City 365 38.4 2 * 5 40.0 106 31.1 57 29.8 16 50.0 179 43.6Lincoln 949 47.9 2 * 6 50.0 61 32.8 75 33.3 29 48.3 776 50.6Montgomery 317 36.6 1 * 5 40.0 85 21.2 71 26.8 5 40.0 150 49.3Moore 953 57.4 4 * 13 53.8 180 40.6 66 25.8 23 56.5 667 65.2Richmond 718 40.0 41 26.8 9 55.6 268 28.0 31 22.6 13 61.5 356 50.8Rowan-Salisbury 1,598 50.7 4 * 16 43.8 333 33.9 99 38.4 48 47.9 1,098 57.1Scotland 510 49.2 70 54.3 5 60.0 247 37.7 5 60.0 9 33.3 174 63.8Stanly 753 51.3 2 * 20 40.0 112 28.6 38 28.9 15 40.0 566 58.0Union 2,511 56.0 8 12.5 23 87.0 404 30.0 208 32.7 57 52.6 1,811 64.3Academy of Moore County** 29 24.1 0 * 0 * 12 16.7 1 * 1 * 15 33.3Carolina International** 42 66.7 0 * 4 * 5 80.0 0 * 5 60.0 28 64.3Kennedy Charter** 8 * 0 * 0 * 7 * 1 * 0 * 0 *Lake Norman** 156 84.0 0 * 6 * 1 * 4 * 0 * 145 82.8Lincoln Charter** 66 75.8 0 * 0 * 1 * 2 * 2 * 61 77.0Metrolina** 18 * 0 * 9 * 0 * 1 * 1 * 7 *Piedmont Community** 58 55.2 1 * 2 * 9 33.3 2 * 1 * 43 60.5Queen's Grant** 76 71.1 1 * 0 * 5 40.0 0 * 0 * 70 74.3STARS** 9 33.3 1 * 0 * 2 * 0 * 1 * 5 40.0Sugar Creek** 57 24.6 0 * 0 * 54 25.9 1 * 2 * 0 *Union Academy** 75 76.0 0 * 0 * 5 60.0 3 * 1 * 66 78.8 Notes: *Performance data are not reported when number tested is fewer than five. Performance data that are less than or equal to 5.0 percent, or greater than or equal to 95.0 percent, are not displayed. The ethnic categories may not sum to total number tested because ethnic category may not have been coded on some student answer sheets. **Denotes a charter school. For reporting purposes the charter school name has been abbreviated; the complete name can be found in the Appendix. Alternate assessment data by LEA school are available at http://report.ncsu.edu/ncpublicschools. Data received from LEAs and charter schools after August 21, 2007 are not included in this table. Prepared by the NCDPI Division of Accountability Services/Test Development Section.


Table 33e. North Carolina Testing ProgramNorth Carolina General Writing Assessment, 2006-07,



Southwest Region


161

Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


State 106,471 50.8 52,451 59.9 54,020 42.0 22,410 40.3 84,061 53.6 21,008 40.5 893 41.4 756 27.8Southwest Region 25,146 51.5 12,457 59.7 12,689 43.4 3,121 35.7 22,025 53.7 3,035 34.8 76 71.1 10 30.0Anson 339 37.8 168 44.6 171 31.0 0 * 339 37.8 0 * 0 * 0 *Cabarrus 1,951 52.4 908 61.2 1,043 44.8 1 * 1,950 52.5 1 * 0 * 0 *Charlotte/Mecklenburg 9,366 52.9 4,638 60.9 4,728 45.1 1,678 31.9 7,688 57.5 1,677 32.0 0 * 1 *Cleveland 1,300 54.2 650 64.5 650 43.8 0 * 1,300 54.2 0 * 0 * 0 *Gaston 2,387 47.6 1,134 57.6 1,253 38.5 141 31.2 2,246 48.6 141 31.2 0 * 0 *Hoke 535 38.9 279 42.7 256 34.8 237 32.1 298 44.3 232 32.3 0 * 5 20.0Kannapolis City 365 38.4 172 47.1 193 30.6 0 * 365 38.4 0 * 0 * 0.0 *Lincoln 949 47.9 464 57.3 485 39.0 476 45.6 473 50.3 476 45.6 0 * 0 *Montgomery 317 36.6 146 41.1 171 32.7 1 * 316 36.7 0 * 0 * 1 *Moore 953 57.4 462 65.8 491 49.5 108 33.3 845 60.5 108 33.3 0 * 0 *Richmond 718 40.0 369 45.8 349 33.8 126 33.3 592 41.4 126 33.3 0 * 0 *Rowan-Salisbury 1,598 50.7 799 59.4 799 41.9 3 * 1,595 50.7 0 * 0 * 3 *Scotland 510 49.2 244 57.0 266 42.1 157 42.7 353 52.1 157 42.7 0 * 0 *Stanly 753 51.3 399 57.6 354 44.1 45 53.3 708 51.1 45 53.3 0 * 0 *Union 2,511 56.0 1,317 64.5 1,194 46.6 0 * 2,511 56.0 0 * 0 * 0 *Academy of Moore County** 29 24.1 17 23.5 12 25.0 0 * 29 24.1 0 * 0 * 0 *Carolina International** 42 66.7 25 84.0 17 41.2 0 * 42 66.7 0 * 0 * 0 *Kennedy Charter** 8 * 4 * 4 * 7 * 1 * 7 * 0 * 0 *Lake Norman** 156 84.0 89 86.5 67 80.6 0 * 156 84.0 0 * 0 * 0 *Lincoln Charter** 66 75.8 32 81.3 34 70.6 0 * 66 75.8 0 * 0 * 0 *Metrolina** 18 * 7 * 11 * 0 * 18 * 0 * 0 * 0 *Piedmont Community** 58 55.2 32 68.8 26 38.5 0 * 58 55.2 0 * 0 * 0 *Queen's Grant** 76 71.1 39 76.9 37 64.9 76 71.1 0 * 0 * 76 71.1 0 *STARS** 9 33.3 4 * 5 * 9 33.3 0 * 9 33.3 0 * 0 *Sugar Creek** 57 24.6 26 26.9 31 22.6 56 23.2 1 * 56 23.2 0 * 0 *Union Academy** 75 76.0 33 81.8 42 71.4 0 * 75 76.0 0 * 0 * 0 * Notes: *Performance data are not reported when number tested is fewer than five. Performance data that are less than or equal to 5.0 percent, or greater than or equal to 95.0 percent, are not displayed. The gender, Title I, and Migrant categories may not sum to total number tested because these categories may not have been coded on some student answer sheets. **Denotes a charter school. For reporting purposes the charter school name has been abbreviated; the complete name can be found in the Appendix. Alternate assessment data by LEA school are available at http://report.ncsu.edu/ncpublicschools. Data received from LEAs and charter schools after August 21, 2007 are not included in this table. Prepared by the NCDPI Division of Accountability Services/Test Development Section.



Southwest Region

Total Female


Table 33f. North Carolina Testing ProgramNorth Carolina General Writing Assessment, 2006-07,


MigrantServed by Title I

162

Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


State 106,471 50.8 1,509 35.7 2,266 65.4 31,216 35.9 8,700 35.3 3,000 53.6 59,779 60.5Northeast Region 6,422 42.5 32 50.0 34 70.6 3,283 31.2 254 37.0 109 43.1 2,710 56.2Beaufort 497 40.4 0 * 0 * 196 26.5 39 30.8 11 45.5 251 52.6Bertie 249 32.1 0 * 1 * 222 29.3 3 * 1 * 22 50.0Camden 136 62.5 0 * 1 * 20 60.0 0 * 3 * 112 62.5Currituck 331 50.8 0 * 2 * 27 44.4 7 42.9 9 44.4 286 51.4Dare 343 72.3 0 * 4 * 12 66.7 20 55.0 6 33.3 301 74.4Edenton/Chowan 184 50.0 0 * 1 * 87 37.9 1 * 4 * 91 61.5Edgecombe 554 29.6 1 * 1 * 333 23.1 30 36.7 9 11.1 180 41.7Elizabeth City/Pasquotank 393 48.3 2 * 2 * 182 40.7 9 33.3 12 66.7 186 55.4Gates 152 41.4 1 * 2 * 63 31.7 1 * 1 * 84 48.8Halifax 364 38.2 19 42.1 1 * 322 37.6 3 * 2 * 17 47.1Hertford 241 29.0 3 * 1 * 199 28.1 3 * 4 * 31 29.0Hyde 49 38.8 0 * 0 * 15 20.0 4 * 0 * 30 46.7Martin 320 34.4 1 * 3 * 171 21.6 10 20.0 4 * 131 51.1Northampton 236 33.1 1 * 0 * 191 28.8 2 * 1 * 41 51.2Perquimans 136 40.4 0 * 0 * 41 31.7 2 * 2 * 91 44.0Pitt 1,656 42.9 2 * 12 66.7 885 30.4 103 36.9 37 40.5 617 61.6Roanoke Rapids City 212 45.8 1 * 2 * 50 30.0 3 * 1 * 155 50.3Tyrrell 48 56.3 0 * 0 * 19 42.1 3 * 1 * 25 68.0Washington 167 28.7 0 * 1 * 120 25.8 7 28.6 1 * 38 36.8Weldon City 65 29.2 0 * 0 * 60 28.3 3 * 0 * 2 *Gaston College Prep** 76 72.4 1 * 0 * 65 69.2 0 * 0 * 10 90.0Washington Montessori** 13 61.5 0 * 0 * 3 * 1 * 0 * 9 66.7



Table 33g. North Carolina Testing ProgramNorth Carolina General Writing Assessment, 2006-07,



Northeast Region


163

Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


State 106,471 50.8 52,451 59.9 54,020 42.0 22,410 40.3 84,061 53.6 21,008 40.5 893 41.4 756 27.8Northeast Region 6,422 42.5 3,183 51.8 3,239 33.3 2,604 34.6 3,818 47.8 2,028 34.3 124 50.8 537 29.8Beaufort 497 40.4 245 49.8 252 31.3 149 42.3 348 39.7 149 42.3 0 * 0 *Bertie 249 32.1 126 35.7 123 28.5 242 32.2 7 28.6 242 32.2 0 * 0 *Camden 136 62.5 62 80.6 74 47.3 0 * 136 62.5 0 * 0 * 0 *Currituck 331 50.8 158 60.1 173 42.2 0 * 331 50.8 0 * 0 * 0 *Dare 343 72.3 165 84.2 178 61.2 0 * 343 72.3 0 * 0 * 0 *Edenton/Chowan 184 50.0 87 62.1 97 39.2 183 49.7 1 * 183 49.7 0 * 0 *Edgecombe 554 29.6 297 37.0 257 21.0 535 29.7 19 26.3 83 19.3 0 * 535 29.7Elizabeth City/Pasquotank 393 48.3 194 63.4 199 33.7 0 * 393 48.3 0 * 0 * 0 *Gates 152 41.4 75 46.7 77 36.4 0 * 152 41.4 0 * 0 * 0 *Halifax 364 38.2 179 46.9 185 29.7 363 38.0 1 * 363 38.0 0 * 1 *Hertford 241 29.0 121 40.5 120 17.5 240 28.8 1 * 240 28.8 0 * 0 *Hyde 49 38.8 25 44.0 24 33.3 42 33.3 7 71.4 42 33.3 0 * 0 *Martin 320 34.4 158 48.1 162 21.0 219 30.1 101 43.6 219 30.1 0 * 0 *Northampton 236 33.1 104 46.2 132 22.7 235 33.2 1 * 235 33.2 0 * 1 *Perquimans 136 40.4 59 50.8 77 32.5 0 * 136 40.4 0 * 0 * 0 *Pitt 1,656 42.9 828 50.7 828 35.1 113 20.4 1,543 44.6 65 23.1 48 16.7 0 *Roanoke Rapids City 212 45.8 106 57.5 106 34.0 20 65.0 192 43.8 20 65.0 0 * 0 *Tyrrell 48 56.3 22 63.6 26 50.0 0 * 48 56.3 0 * 0 * 0 *Washington 167 28.7 83 36.1 84 21.4 122 28.7 45 28.9 122 28.7 0 * 0 *Weldon City 65 29.2 36 41.7 29 13.8 65 29.2 0 * 65 29.2 0 * 0 *Gaston College Prep** 76 72.4 43 76.7 33 66.7 76 72.4 0 * 0 * 76 72.4 0 *Washington Montessori** 13 61.5 10 60.0 3 * 0 * 13 61.5 0 * 0 * 0 *


Not Served by Title ISchoolwide Title I


Northeast Region

Total Female MigrantServed by Title IMale


Table 33h. North Carolina Testing ProgramNorth Carolina General Writing Assessment, 2006-07,


164

Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


State 106,471 50.8 1,509 35.7 2,266 65.4 31,216 35.9 8,700 35.3 3,000 53.6 59,779 60.5Southeast Region 17,677 46.7 942 31.1 168 64.9 6,058 35.9 1,293 35.2 597 53.4 8,618 56.8Bladen 436 43.3 6 16.7 0 * 217 37.8 25 40.0 3 * 185 51.9Brunswick 887 46.2 4 * 2 * 178 29.8 51 39.2 32 43.8 620 51.5Carteret 649 61.0 2 * 7 57.1 49 44.9 17 5.9 14 50.0 560 64.3Clinton City 211 37.9 10 60.0 5 20.0 88 21.6 29 44.8 6 33.3 73 53.4Columbus 518 30.3 41 26.8 0 * 195 21.5 21 9.5 5 20.0 255 39.2Craven 1,045 45.8 2 * 15 60.0 373 31.4 48 22.9 28 67.9 579 55.8Cumberland 3,857 51.8 81 37.0 64 73.4 1,864 43.6 258 53.5 157 56.7 1,433 61.4Duplin 638 41.2 2 * 2 * 215 32.1 139 28.1 11 36.4 269 55.4Greene 240 22.9 0 * 1 * 105 17.1 48 20.8 3 * 83 30.1Jones 80 35.0 0 * 0 * 43 32.6 1 * 1 * 35 40.0Lenoir 727 44.4 0 * 6 50.0 347 36.9 44 34.1 19 31.6 311 55.0New Hanover 1,767 56.4 6 * 26 88.5 466 33.5 79 38.0 57 59.6 1,133 66.0Onslow 1,705 48.2 19 63.2 16 37.5 356 36.2 114 50.9 149 52.3 1,051 51.2Pamlico 102 64.7 0 * 0 * 30 43.3 2 * 2 * 68 73.5Pender 610 53.0 1 * 2 * 137 36.5 37 29.7 16 43.8 417 60.7Robeson 1,731 31.5 729 29.5 7 71.4 516 26.0 116 24.1 29 51.7 334 44.3Sampson 622 39.9 1 * 0 * 171 30.4 129 22.5 14 28.6 307 53.1Wayne 1,490 47.7 2 * 12 41.7 588 37.8 126 29.4 46 71.7 716 57.5Whiteville City 165 52.1 1 * 1 * 75 41.3 3 * 4 * 81 64.2Alpha Academy** 5 * 0 * 0 * 5 * 0 * 0 * 0 *Arapahoe Charter** 44 38.6 0 * 2 * 1 * 3 * 0 * 38 44.7CIS Academy** 37 8.1 33 9.1 0 * 4 * 0 * 0 * 0 *Cape Fear Center** 31 45.2 0 * 0 * 8 25.0 0 * 0 * 23 52.2Charter Day School** 37 67.6 2 * 0 * 1 * 1 * 1 * 32 65.6Kinston Charter Academy** 28 28.6 0 * 0 * 26 30.8 1 * 0 * 1 *Tiller School** 15 53.3 0 * 0 * 0 * 1 * 0 * 14 57.1

Notes: *Performance data are not reported when number tested is fewer than five. Performance data that are less than or equal to 5.0 percent, or greater than or equal to 95.0 percent, are not displayed. The ethnic categories may not sum to total number tested because ethnic category may not have been coded on some student answer sheets.

**Denotes a charter school. For reporting purposes the charter school name has been abbreviated; the complete name can be found in the Appendix. Alternate assessment data by LEA school are available at http://report.ncsu.edu/ncpublicschools. Data received from LEAs and charter schools after August 21, 2007 are not included in this table. Prepared by the NCDPI Division of Accountability Services/Test Development Section

Southeast Region


Table 33i. North Carolina Testing ProgramNorth Carolina General Writing Assessment, 2006-07,



165

Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


State 106,471 50.8 52,451 59.9 54,020 42.0 22,410 40.3 84,061 53.6 21,008 40.5 893 41.4 756 27.8Southeast Region 17,677 46.7 8,698 56.5 8,979 37.2 9,947 42.7 7,730 51.7 9,480 42.9 466 40.3 148 23.0Bladen 436 43.3 220 56.8 216 29.6 218 36.7 218 50.0 218 36.7 0 * 89 32.6Brunswick 887 46.2 456 57.9 431 33.9 0 * 887 46.2 0 * 0 * 0 *Carteret 649 61.0 323 71.5 326 50.6 49 59.2 600 61.2 49 59.2 0 * 0 *Clinton City 211 37.9 106 47.2 105 28.6 209 37.8 2 * 209 37.8 0 * 0 *Columbus 518 30.3 271 40.2 247 19.4 515 30.3 3 * 449 29.0 66 39.4 7 *Craven 1,045 45.8 505 56.8 540 35.6 0 * 1,045 45.8 0 * 0 * 0 *Cumberland 3,857 51.8 1,868 61.0 1,989 43.0 2,953 48.4 904 62.6 2,953 48.4 0 * 0 *Duplin 638 41.2 316 50.6 322 32.0 534 40.4 104 45.2 534 40.4 0 * 0 *Greene 240 22.9 100 30.0 140 17.9 0 * 240 22.9 0 * 0 * 0 *Jones 80 35.0 40 45.0 40 25.0 80 35.0 0 * 80 35.0 0 * 0 *Lenoir 727 44.4 348 55.5 379 34.3 718 44.8 9 11.1 718 44.8 0 * 1 *New Hanover 1,767 56.4 854 65.8 913 47.6 1,269 54.5 498 61.4 1,172 55.4 97 43.3 1 *Onslow 1,705 48.2 865 60.1 840 35.8 0 * 1,705 48.2 0 * 0 * 0 *Pamlico 102 64.7 53 69.8 49 59.2 0 * 102 64.7 0 * 0 * 0 *Pender 610 53.0 277 64.3 333 43.5 364 43.4 246 67.1 364 43.4 0 * 5 *Robeson 1,731 31.5 864 38.3 867 24.7 1,724 31.6 7 14.3 1,724 31.6 0 * 36 5.6Sampson 622 39.9 299 49.8 323 30.7 621 39.9 1 * 621 39.9 0 * 4 *Wayne 1,490 47.7 753 57.6 737 37.6 423 35.2 1,067 52.7 163 33.1 260.0 36.5 2 *Whiteville City 165 52.1 89 57.3 76 46.1 162 52.5 3 * 161 52.8 0 * 3 *Alpha Academy** 5 * 2 * 3 * 5 * 0 * 0 * 5 * 0 *Arapahoe Charter** 44 38.6 24 45.8 20 30.0 1 * 43 39.5 0 * 1 * 0 *CIS Academy** 37 8.1 18 5.6 19 10.5 37 8.1 0 * 37 8.1 0 * 0 *Cape Fear Center** 31 45.2 9 66.7 22 36.4 0 * 31 45.2 0 * 0 * 0 *Charter Day School** 37 67.6 21 81.0 16 50.0 37 67.6 0 * 0 * 37 67.6 0 *Kinston Charter Academy** 28 28.6 13 38.5 15 20.0 28 28.6 0 * 28 28.6 0 * 0 *Tiller School** 15 53.3 4 * 11 45.5 0 * 15 53.3 0 * 0 * 0 *



Southeast Region


Table 33j. North Carolina Testing ProgramNorth Carolina General Writing Assessment, 2006-07,


166

Number Tested


IIINumber Tested


IIINumber Tested


IIINumber Tested


IIINumber Tested


IIINumber Tested


IIINumber Tested


IIIState 106,471 50.8 1,509 35.7 2,266 65.4 31,216 35.9 8,700 35.3 3,000 53.6 59,779 60.5Central Region 33,810 52.9 154 45.5 975 71.5 11,181 37.0 3,263 34.7 1,083 59.2 17,154 65.4Alamance-Burlington 1,714 50.8 3 * 22 68.2 399 39.8 265 32.8 34 58.8 991 59.3Asheboro City 153 53.6 3 * 1 * 23 30.4 61 41.0 5 60.0 60 78.3Caswell 260 42.7 0 * 1 * 96 28.1 14 57.1 9 55.6 140 50.7Chapel Hill-Carrboro City 834 71.6 0 * 98 80.6 114 36.8 67 41.8 35 77.1 520 81.0Chatham 580 56.7 2 * 4 * 84 36.9 125 39.2 24 62.5 341 67.4Durham 2,254 42.1 4 * 46 63.0 1,321 33.1 280 26.8 76 67.1 527 67.6Franklin 629 38.0 1 * 6 66.7 251 29.1 48 16.7 9 33.3 314 48.1Granville 717 40.6 4 * 7 42.9 266 30.8 54 27.8 20 50.0 366 49.2Guilford 5,187 46.3 26 34.6 229 56.3 2,283 32.5 375 29.9 190 49.5 2,084 63.1Harnett 1,304 56.6 12 50.0 4 * 378 47.6 119 48.7 63 55.6 728 62.5Johnston 2,193 52.5 11 45.5 11 63.6 446 36.3 271 31.4 66 54.5 1,388 61.7Lee 661 46.0 3 * 6 83.3 159 33.3 150 33.3 23 56.5 320 56.6Nash-Rocky Mount 1,320 38.6 6 16.7 14 71.4 702 30.3 77 33.8 16 50.0 505 49.9Orange 557 56.2 1 * 3 * 131 34.4 36 25.0 13 69.2 373 66.0Person 395 47.8 3 * 1 * 146 34.9 18 50.0 6 50.0 221 56.6Randolph 1,595 49.2 6 50.0 12 41.7 90 44.4 171 31.6 42 38.1 1,274 52.3Rockingham 1,096 45.9 1 * 4 * 250 30.8 70 32.9 40 40.0 731 52.5Vance 549 42.8 0 * 3 * 360 38.1 48 37.5 6 33.3 132 58.3Wake 9,409 64.7 31 61.3 470 79.1 2,648 46.1 878 39.9 360 67.5 5,022 77.3Warren 215 44.7 13 46.2 0 * 140 36.4 7 42.9 5 80.0 50 64.0Wilson 962 44.1 2 * 13 61.5 474 31.6 77 28.6 11 54.5 385 61.6Bethany Community** 32 62.5 0 * 0 * 1 * 0 * 1 * 30 63.3Carter Community** 23 34.8 0 * 0 * 23 34.8 0 * 0 * 0 *Chatham Charter** 20 50.0 0 * 0 * 4 * 0 * 2 * 14 50.0Clover Garden** 40 62.5 0 * 0 * 3 * 0 * 0 * 37 59.5Crosscreek Charter School** 13 46.2 0 * 0 * 3 * 1 * 0 * 9 55.6East Wake Academy** 71 52.1 1 * 1 * 10 50.0 2 * 0 * 57 52.6Exploris** 60 75.0 1 * 3 * 8 50.0 2 * 2 * 44 77.3Franklin Academy** 96 70.8 1 * 0 * 6 83.3 1 * 2 * 86 69.8Greensboro Academy** 81 86.4 0 * 3 * 2 * 0 * 1 * 75 86.7Guilford Prep Academy** 23 21.7 0 * 0 * 20 25.0 0 * 1 * 2 *Haliwa-Saponi Tribal** 17 47.1 15 46.7 0 * 2 * 0 * 0 * 0 *Healthy Start** 49 22.4 0 * 0 * 47 19.1 0 * 1 * 1 *Kestrel Heights** 74 43.2 1 * 1 * 31 32.3 7 42.9 6 83.3 28 46.4Magellan** 67 >=95% 0 * 3 * 4 * 2 * 0 * 58 >=95%Maureen Joy** 30 30.0 1 * 0 * 25 28.0 2 * 1 * 1 *Omuteko Gwamaziima** 8 37.5 0 * 0 * 8 37.5 0 * 0 * 0 *Orange Charter** 23 52.2 0 * 0 * 1 * 0 * 0 * 22 54.5Phoenix Academy** 23 82.6 0 * 3 * 4 * 0 * 1 * 15 80.0PreEminent** 37 27.0 0 * 0 * 35 25.7 2 * 0 * 0 *Provisions Academy** 6 16.7 0 * 0 * 5 * 0 * 0 * 1 *Quest Academy** 13 92.3 0 * 1 * 0 * 0 * 1 * 11 *Research Triangle** 63 42.9 1 * 1 * 51 39.2 2 * 2 * 6 83.3River Mill Academy** 44 65.9 0 * 0 * 4 * 0 * 0 * 40 70.0Rocky Mount Prep Sch** 83 48.2 1 * 2 * 52 44.2 3 * 3 * 22 54.5Roxboro Community** 71 53.5 0 * 0 * 17 29.4 0 * 1 * 53 60.4S.B. Howard** 56 25.0 0 * 0 * 32 28.1 23 21.7 0 * 1 *SPARC Academy** 16 31.3 0 * 0 * 14 28.6 2 * 0 * 0 *Sterling Montessori** 26 69.2 0 * 2 * 4 * 3 * 2 * 15 53.3Vance Charter** 42 45.2 0 * 0 * 4 * 0 * 0 * 38 44.7Woods Charter** 19 73.7 0 * 0 * 0 * 0 * 3 * 16 68.8


Central RegionTotal American Indian Asian Black Hispanic Multi-Racial White





167

Number TestedPercent At or

Above Level III Number TestedPercent At or







Above Level III

State 106,471 50.8 52,451 59.9 54,020 42.0 22,410 40.3 84,061 53.6 21,008 40.5 893 41.4 756 27.8Central Region 33,810 52.9 16,483 61.9 17,327 44.3 2,307 33.1 31,503 54.3 2,196 33.3 75 38.7 43 14.0Alamance-Burlington 1,714 50.8 833 59.9 881 42.2 239 32.2 1,475 53.8 239 32.2 0 * 0 *Asheboro City 153 53.6 75 64.0 78 43.6 0 * 153 53.6 0 * 0 * 0 *Caswell 260 42.7 141 55.3 119 27.7 260 42.7 0 * 260 42.7 0 * 0 *Chapel Hill-Carrboro City 834 71.6 392 78.1 442 65.8 0 * 834 71.6 0 * 0 * 0 *Chatham 580 56.7 287 67.6 293 46.1 149 47.7 431 59.9 148 48.0 0 * 8 25.0Durham 2,254 42.1 1,112 51.6 1,142 32.9 0 * 2,254 42.1 0 * 0 * 0 *Franklin 629 38.0 302 44.7 327 31.8 1 * 628 38.1 0 * 0 * 1 *Granville 717 40.6 337 53.1 380 29.5 1 * 716 40.6 0 * 0 * 1 *Guilford 5,187 46.3 2,486 55.0 2,701 38.3 1,197 30.5 3,990 51.1 1,197 30.5 0 * 0 *Harnett 1,304 56.6 643 66.1 661 47.4 3 * 1,301 56.6 0 * 0 * 3 *Johnston 2,193 52.5 1,118 62.3 1,075 42.2 7 14.3 2,186 52.6 0 * 0 * 7 14.3Lee 661 46.0 318 54.1 343 38.5 7 * 654 46.5 0 * 0 * 7 *Nash-Rocky Mount 1,320 38.6 634 49.1 686 29.0 9 22.2 1,311 38.7 0 * 0 * 9 22.2Orange 557 56.2 295 64.4 262 46.9 0 * 557 56.2 0 * 0 * 0 *Person 395 47.8 183 60.1 212 37.3 0 * 395 47.8 0 * 0 * 0 *Randolph 1,595 49.2 767 60.2 828 38.9 4 * 1,591 49.3 0 * 0 * 4 *Rockingham 1,096 45.9 536 57.8 560 34.5 3 * 1,093 46.0 0 * 0 * 3 *Vance 549 42.8 255 53.3 294 33.7 0 * 549 42.8 0 * 0 * 0 *Wake 9,409 64.7 4,592 72.5 4,817 57.3 3 * 9,406 64.7 3 * 0 * 0 *Warren 215 44.7 104 54.8 111 35.1 0 * 215 44.7 0 * 0 * 0 *Wilson 962 44.1 472 51.7 490 36.7 127 31.5 835 46.0 127 31.5 0 * 0 *Bethany Community** 32 62.5 15 73.3 17 52.9 0 * 32 62.5 0 * 0 * 0 *Carter Community** 23 34.8 9 33.3 14 35.7 23 34.8 0 * 23 34.8 0 * 0 *Chatham Charter** 20 50.0 8 62.5 12 41.7 20 50.0 0 * 20 50.0 0 * 0 *Clover Garden** 40 62.5 23 60.9 17 64.7 0 * 40 62.5 0 * 0 * 0 *Crosscreek Charter School** 13 46.2 5 40.0 8 50.0 13 46.2 0 * 13 46.2 0 * 0 *East Wake Academy** 71 52.1 37 64.9 34 38.2 3 * 68 51.5 0 * 3 * 0 *Exploris** 60 75.0 34 82.4 26 65.4 0 * 60 75.0 0 * 0 * 0 *Franklin Academy** 96 70.8 49 83.7 47 57.4 0 * 96 70.8 0 * 0 * 0 *Greensboro Academy** 81 86.4 47 >=95% 34 73.5 0 * 81 86.4 0 * 0 * 0 *Guilford Prep Academy** 23 21.7 8 12.5 15 26.7 23 21.7 0 * 0 * 23 21.7 0 *Haliwa-Saponi Tribal** 17 47.1 7 71.4 10 30.0 0 * 17 47.1 0 * 0 * 0 *Healthy Start** 49 22.4 28 21.4 21 23.8 49 22.4 0 * 49 22.4 0 * 0 *Kestrel Heights** 74 43.2 26 53.8 48 37.5 0 * 74 43.2 0 * 0 * 0 *Magellan** 67 >=95% 30 >=95% 37 94.6 0 * 67 >=95% 0 * 0 * 0 *Maureen Joy** 30 30.0 11 18.2 19 36.8 30 30.0 0 * 30 30.0 0 * 0 *Omuteko Gwamaziima** 8 37.5 5 60.0 3 * 8 37.5 0 * 8 37.5 0 * 0 *Orange Charter** 23 52.2 8 87.5 15 33.3 0 * 23 52.2 0 * 0 * 0 *Phoenix Academy** 23 82.6 9 * 14 71.4 2 * 21 90.5 2 * 0 * 0 *PreEminent** 37 27.0 19 42.1 18 11.1 0 * 37 27.0 0 * 0 * 0 *Provisions Academy** 6 16.7 1 * 5 * 6 16.7 0 * 6 16.7 0 * 0 *Quest Academy** 13 92.3 5 * 8 87.5 0 * 13 92.3 0 * 0 * 0 *Research Triangle** 63 42.9 35 51.4 28 32.1 0 * 63 42.9 0 * 0 * 0 *River Mill Academy** 44 65.9 28 75.0 16 50.0 0 * 44 65.9 0 * 0 * 0 *Rocky Mount Prep Sch** 83 48.2 39 59.0 44 38.6 49 44.9 34 52.9 0 * 49 44.9 0 *Roxboro Community** 71 53.5 39 66.7 32 37.5 0 * 71 53.5 0 * 0 * 0 *S.B. Howard** 56 25.0 29 34.5 27 14.8 55 25.5 1 * 55 25.5 0 * 0 *SPARC Academy** 16 31.3 9 33.3 7 28.6 16 31.3 0 * 16 31.3 0 * 0 *Sterling Montessori** 26 69.2 12 75.0 14 64.3 0 * 26 69.2 0 * 0 * 0 *Vance Charter** 42 45.2 21 47.6 21 42.9 0 * 42 45.2 0 * 0 * 0 *Woods Charter** 19 73.7 5 * 14 64.3 0 * 19 73.7 0 * 0 * 0 * Notes: *Performance data are not reported when number tested is fewer than five. Performance data that are less than or equal to 5.0 percent, or greater than or equal to 95.0 percent, are not displayed. The gender, Title I, and Migrant categories may not sum to total number tested because these categories may not have been coded on some student answer sheets. **Denotes a charter school. For reporting purposes the charter school name has been abbreviated; the complete name can be found in the Appendix. Alternate assessment data by LEA school are available at http://report.ncsu.edu/ncpublicschools. Data received from LEAs and charter schools after August 21, 2007 are not included in this table. Prepared by the NCDPI Division of Accountability Services/Test Development Section.

Schoolwide Title I Program Targeted Assistance Migrant


Total Female Male Not Served by Title IServed by Title I



Grade 7, by LEA, Gender, Title I, and Migrant Students,Central Region

168

169

2006-07


State-Level Summary Statistics

Grade 10


171


Results of the North Carolina General Writing Assessment at Grade 10

The prompt for the 2007 Grade 10 North Carolina General Writing Assessment asked students to write an “informational” definition response to the following prompt:

Write an article for a school newspaper about the meaning of human rights (rights that should be given to all people simply because they are human). You may use the following information, your own experiences, observations, and/or readings. Right: That which is just, legal, morally good, or appropriate.

Source: Webster’s II New College Dictionary Article 1 All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood. Article 2 Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status. Article 3 Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person.

Source: Universal Declaration of Human Rights: The First Three Articles

This must be a world of democracy and respect for human rights, a world freed from the horrors of poverty, hunger, deprivation and ignorance, relieved of the threat and the scourge of civil wars and external aggression and unburdened of the great tragedy of millions forced to become refugees.

Source: Nelson Mandela, Nobel Peace Prize Address Contracted readers scored 97,796 public school responses for grade 10 from the 2006-07 North Carolina General Writing Assessment. The scores show that 51.4 percent of the tenth graders wrote well enough to score at or above Level III. A small percentage of the tenth graders (less than five percent) in the 2006-07 North Carolina General Writing Assessment received the highest scores in Level IV and 16.0 percent received the lowest scores in Level I. In 2006-07, less than 0.4 percent of the papers had problems which made them non-scorable. Non-scorable papers receive Achievement Level I ratings and are included in the state results as Level I scores. The average weighted content score for tenth graders participating in the North Carolina General Writing Assessment in 2006-07 was 7.6 in a range of four to twenty. The average conventions score was 2.9 on a scale of zero to four. The average Total Writing Score was 10.6 The following observations were noted during the scoring process:


172

Observations

• Most students understood the prompt well enough and were able to

sufficiently focus their discussion on defining the meaning of human rights. • Papers consisting of undeveloped details presented in a random, list-like

fashion were common. These papers established little relationship between ideas and events and usually consisted of a series of unrelated ideas about what human rights meant. Often it was difficult to determine the actual topic, but the details tended to support an implicit focus. Each idea or event was unconnected to the next event, and the support tended to be a list-like series of general and undeveloped support and elaboration. The responses also generally exhibited minimal use of precise and purposeful vocabulary and sentence fluency.

• Often student responses consisted of a series of loosely-connected ideas with

a great deal of descriptive, but sometimes confusing detail. These papers had more voice and attempted to use metaphors to further their ideas of the meaning of human rights. At first glance they may have seemed like upper- level papers due to the impressive amount of descriptive detail and precise and purposeful language. These papers established a vague topic and remained somewhat focused on that topic. However, these papers showed weaknesses in relatedness to and support of the topic and contained major lapses in progression, often changing focus to ideas that were tangential to the topic. Many provided a great deal of descriptive or specific details, but elaboration was somewhat confusing.

• Many responses relied too heavily on the long quotes to develop their

responses, which left little room for original writing. These papers established a vague topic based on ideas presented in the prompt, and then exhibited major lapses in focus on their topic when students relied heavily on unrelated ideas for development using the quotes. These papers often lacked an organizational plan, and the papers seemed to go nowhere. As the organizational structure of these papers established little connection between ideas, major lapses in logical progression and major weaknesses in elaboration supporting the topic frequently kept the papers as being only minimally complete. Elaboration generally consisted of an attempt to define the quotes or had few specific details that went beyond the prompt.

• The most common sentence formation errors by far were fragments, although

comma splices were also common. Run-ons were less of a problem. • Usage errors were prevalent with (there/their/they’re, your/you’re,

were/we’re, is/was, has/have, don’t/doesn’t) and with incorrect use of verbs (respect/respected, belong/ belonged, talk/talked). Additionally, pronoun agreement was problematic (everyone/them, no one/they, person/they).

• The most mechanics errors were constituted by missing commas needed to set

off independent clauses and misspellings (wold/world, adres/address,


173


rember/remember, alot/a lot, belive/believe). Quotation punctuation was often handled corrrectly by the students.

Performance of Subgroups at Grade 10

Gender Approximately 58.5 percent of the female students scored at or above Level III compared to 44.1 percent for male students. Ethnicity About 59.4 percent of White students scored at or above Level III compared to 58.6 percent of the Asian students, 57.6 percent of Multi-Racial students, 37.5 percent of Black students, 34.8 percent of Hispanic students, and 33.9 percent of American Indian students. There were 97,796 tenth grade public school student responses scored by two independent readers. The inter-rater reliability rates (agreement rates) of the readers are shown in Table 34. The 70.0 percent criterion rate for perfect agreement based upon industry standards was exceeded and the resolutions required were few.


Tenth Grade Reader Agreement Statistics

Total Public Perfect

Agreement Adjacent

Agreement Resolution



The following pages, and Appendix D, present data for the Grade 10 North Carolina General Writing Assessments. Figure 11 indicates that an increase of 11.5 percent of students scoring at or above Achievement Level III on the North Carolina General Writing Assessment occurred between the pilot year and the current year, an increase of 12.6 percent from 2002-03 to 2003-04, a decrease of 4.7 percent between 2003-04 and 2004-05, and an increase of 5.5 percent from 2004-05 to 2005-06. Table 41a, a table of Achievement Levels by subgroup, demonstrates that females outperformed males as in Grades 4 and 7. Also, White, Asian, and Multi-Racial students performed at a higher level than the Hispanic, American Indian, and Black subgroups as in Grades 4 and 7. Table 43a, the frequency distribution, shows that less than five percent of tenth graders reached Achievement Level IV, 50.6 percent of the students received a III, 32.7 percent received a II, and 16.0 percent received Achievement Level I.


174

The North Carolina Writing Assessment (NCEXTEND2 OCS) - Grade 10

Results of The North Carolina Writing Assessment (NCEXTEND2 OCS) at Grade 10 Observations

The prompt for the 2007 Grade 10 North Carolina Writing Assessment (NCEXTEND2 OCS) asked students to write an expressive journal entry about how to prepare for a job interview.

You are going on a job interview. Write a journal entry about how you would prepare for a job interview. Contracted readers scored 2,143 public school responses for grade 10 from the 2006-07 North Carolina Writing Assessment (NCEXTEND2 OCS). The scores show that 28.8 percent of the tenth graders wrote well enough to score at or above Level III. A small percentage of the tenth graders in the 2006-07 North Carolina Writing Assessment (NCEXTEND2 OCS) received the highest scores in Level IV and 33.4 percent received the lowest scores in Level I. In 2006-07, 3.6 percent of the papers had problems which made them non-scorable. Non-scorable papers receive Achievement Level I ratings and are included in the state results as Level I scores. The average weighted content score for tenth graders taking the North Carolina Writing Assessment (NCEXTEND2 OCS) in 2006-07 was 6.8 in a range of four to sixteen. The average conventions score was 1.8 in a range of zero to two. The average Total Writing Assessment Score was 8.9 of a possible 20. The following observations were noted during the scoring process:

• Most students understood the prompt well enough and were able to

sufficiently focus their discussion on preparing for a job interview. • Papers consisting of undeveloped details presented in a random, list-like

fashion were common. These papers established little relationship between ideas and events and usually consisted of a series of unrelated ideas about job interviews. Often it was difficult to determine the actual topic, because some responses would waver between how the student would prepare for a job interview and what the student would do once they got the job. Each idea or event was unconnected to the next event, and the support tended to be a list-like series of general and undeveloped support and elaboration.

• Many student responses consisted of a series of ideas with a great deal of

descriptive, but sometimes confusing detail. Most of the upper level papers included an impressive amount of descriptive detail. These papers established a topic and remained somewhat focused on that topic. However, these papers displayed minor lapses in progression, often mentioning ideas that were tangential to the topic. Many provided a great deal of descriptive or specific details, but elaboration was sometimes confusing.

• Often the amount and variety of conventions errors in the response made the


175

Observations (continued) Performance of Subgroups at Grade 10

writing confusing for the reader. • The most common sentence formation errors by far were fragments,

although comma splices were also common. Run-ons were less of a problem. • The most common sentence formation errors were run-ons, including

complete lack of punctuation. • The most common mechanics errors were spelling errors in the form of

phonetic misspellings and dropped letters (Becaus, Propable[probably], Pletty [plenty], sleeppie, slepping [sleeping] ).

Gender Approximately 34.7 percent of the female students scored at or above Level III compared to 25.5 percent for male students. Ethnicity About 31.8 percent of White students scored at or above Level III compared to 30.0 percent of Multi-Racial students, 28.0 percent of Black students, 22.5 percent of Hispanic students, and 11.4 percent of American Indian students, and 11.1 percent of the Asian students. There were 2,143 tenth grade public school student responses scored by two independent readers. The inter-rater reliability rates (agreement rates) of the readers are shown in Table 35. The 70.0 percent criterion rate for perfect agreement based upon industry standards was exceeded and the resolutions required were few.

The following pages, and Appendix D, present data for the Grade 10 North Carolina Writing Assessment (NCEXTEND2 OCS). Table 41c, a table of Achievement Levels by subgroup, demonstrates that females outperformed males. Table 43c, the frequency distribution, shows that less than five percent of tenth graders reached Achievement Level IV, while 26.7 percent of the students received a III, 40.5 percent received a II, and 33.4 percent received Achievement Level I.

Table 35. North Carolina Writing Assessment (NCEXTEND2 OCS)

Tenth Grade Reader Agreement Statistics

Total Public Perfect

Agreement Adjacent

Agreement Resolution



Report of Students Performance in Writing, Grades 4, 7, and 10, 2006-07

Notes: 1The writing standard, scale, and scoring model changed effective with the 2002-03 school year. The data from 2002-03 are reported from the pilot test administration. The vertical line indicates the NCAAAI was discontinued and replaced by NCCLAS in 2005-06. The NCAAP was discontinued and NCEXTEND2 OCS and NCEXTEND1 writing assessments were operationalized in 2006-07. Data received from LEAs and charter schools after August 21, 2007 are not included in this figure. Prepared by the NCDPI Division of Accountablility Services/Test Development Section.

176

Figure 11. North Carolina Testing ProgramNorth Carolina Writing Assessments, 2002-03 to 2006-07,

Percent of Students Scoring At or Above Level IIIGrade 10

51.4

67.162.8

28.8

83.8

53.3

52.539.91 47.8

11.17.9 9.8

50.0

57.853.1

29.8

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07

Perc

ent o

f Stu

dent

s

NCAAP

NCAAAI

GENERALASSESSMENT

NCCLAS

NCEXTEND2 OCS

NCEXTEND1



Figure 12. North Carolina Testing ProgramNorth Carolina General Writing Assessment, 2006-07,

Percent of Students At or Above Level III,Grade 10, by Gender and Ethnicity

51.4%

26.2%

29.3%

30.5%

40.5%

40.7%

43.9%

64.3%

64.4%

67.5%

49.7%

52.9%

51.5%

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

State


Hispanic Male

Black Male

Hispanic Female


Black Female

Multi-Racial Male

White Male

Asian Male

Asian Female

Multi-Racial Female

White Female

Percent of Students

*N=97,796

*N=29,180

*N=1,111

*N=1,071

*N=1,086

*N=29,660

*N=959

*N=14,495

*N=644

*N=2,869

*N=13,123

*N=3,036

*N=562 Stat

e Pe

rcen

t

177


Notes: *N counts equal the number of students who participated in the North Carolina Writing Assessment (NCCLAS). **Performance data are not reported when number tested is fewer than five. Performance data that are less than or equal to 5.0 percent, or greater than or equal to 95.0 percent, are not displayed. When summed, gender/ethnicity N counts may not match the state N counts because a gender/ethnicity category may not have been coded on some student answer sheets. Data received from LEAs and charter schools after August 21, 2007 are not included in this figure. Prepared by the NCDPI Division of Accountability Services/Test Development Section.

Percent of Students



80.0%

80.6%

**

87.5%

**

**

**

62.8%

60.3%

64.3%

66.7%

47.8

>95.0%

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

State



Multi-Racial Female

Multi-Racial Male

Hispanic Male

Hispanic Female

Asian Male

Asian Female

Black Female

White Male

Black Male

White Female

Percent of Students

*N=8

*N=8

*N=31

*N=10

*N=6

*N=14

*N=68

*N=67

*N=1

*N=0

*N=0

*N=0

Stat

e Pe

rcen

t

*N=215

178


Notes: *N counts equal the number of students who participated in the North Carolina Writing Assessment (NCEXTEND2 OCS). **Performance data are not reported when number tested is fewer than five. Performance data that are less than or equal to 5.0 percent, or greater than or equal to 95.0 percent, are not displayed. When summed, gender/ethnicity N counts may not match the state N counts because a gender/ethnicity category may not have been coded on some student answer sheets. Data received from LEAs and charter schools after August 21, 2007 are not included in this figure. Prepared by the NCDPI Division of Accountability Services/Test Development Section.

Percent of Students

Figure 14. North Carolina Testing ProgramNorth Carolina Writing Assessment (NCEXTEND2 OCS), 2006-07,


28.8%

42.9%

24.4%

29.1%

<=5.0%

8.3%

15.2%

16.7%

36.4%

33.6%

26.1%

37.1%

30.2%

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

State


Asian Male

Hispanic Male

Asian Female

Black Male

Multi-Racial Male

White Male

Hispanic Female

Black Female


White Female

Multi-Racial Female

Percent of Students

*N=7

*N=291

*N=11

*N=422

*N=43

*N=581

*N=23

*N=668

*N=6

*N=46

*N=12

*N=33

Stat

e Pe

rcen

t

*N=2,143

179


Notes: *N counts equal the number of students who participated in the North Carolina Writing Assessment (NCEXTEND1 ). **Performance data are not reported when number tested is fewer than five. Performance data that are less than or equal to 5.0 percent, or greater than or equal to 95.0 percent, are not displayed. When summed, gender/ethnicity N counts may not match the state N counts because a gender/ethnicity category may not have been coded on some student answer sheets. Data received from LEAs and charter schools after August 21, 2007 are not included in this figure. Prepared by the NCDPI Division of Accountability Services/Test Development Section.

Percent of Students

180



83.8%

90.9%

**

82.4%

**

**

**

**

87.5%

85.9%

77.5%

87.5%

82.7%

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

State

Multi-Racial Female


Asian Female

Asian Male


Black Female

Hispanic Male

White Male

Black Male

Hispanic Female

White Female

Multi-Racial Male

Percent of Students

*N=11

*N=112

*N=8

*N=191

*N=208

*N=17

*N=102

*N=4

*N=4

*N=4

*N=3

*N=3

Stat

e Pe

rcen

t

*N=681

Report of Student Performance in Writing, Grades 4,7, and 10, 2006-07



All Students 103,660 97,796 100.0 10.6 51.4 3,039 2.9 43.6 2,825 2.7 100,835 97.3Female 51,644 49,370 50.5 11.0 58.5 1,105 2.1 47.6 1,169 2.3 50,475 97.7Male 52,000 48,426 49.5 10.1 44.1 1,919 3.7 41.1 1,655 3.2 50,345 96.8American Indian 1,309 1,206 1.2 9.3 33.9 51 3.9 23.5 52 4.0 1,257 96.0Asian 2,264 2,157 2.2 11.3 58.6 46 2.0 50.0 61 2.7 2,203 97.3Black 30,236 27,618 28.2 9.8 37.5 1,401 4.6 40.2 1,217 4.0 29,019 96.0Hispanic 6,494 5,905 6.0 9.5 34.8 249 3.8 45.8 340 5.2 6,154 94.8Multi-Racial/Other 2,178 2,070 2.1 11.0 57.6 46 2.1 50.0 62 2.8 2,116 97.2White 61,163 58,840 60.2 11.0 59.4 1,231 2.0 47.1 1,092 1.8 60,071 98.2Free and Reduced Lunch 34,714 31,702 32.4 9.6 35.8 1,895 5.5 41.1 1,117 3.2 33,597 96.8No Free and Reduced Lunch 68,946 66,094 67.6 11.0 58.9 1,144 1.7 47.6 1,708 2.5 67,238 97.5Title I 1,871 1,762 1.8 9.2 30.3 109 5.8 47.7 0 0.0 1,871 100.0Not Title I 101,789 96,034 98.2 10.6 51.8 2,930 2.9 43.4 2,825 2.8 98,964 97.2Schoolwide Title I 1,062 985 1.0 9.1 32.4 77 7.3 53.2 0 0.0 1,062 100.0Targeted Assistance 272 260 0.3 9.0 26.9 12 4.4 50.0 0 0.0 272 100.0Migrant 537 517 0.5 9.4 28.0 20 3.7 25.0 0 0.0 537 100.0Not Migrant 103,123 97,279 99.5 10.6 51.5 3,019 2.9 43.7 2,825 2.7 100,298 97.3Limited English Proficient (LEP) 3,472 2,972 3.0 8.0 14.2 241 6.9 49.8 259 7.5 3,213 92.5Not Limited English Proficient 100,188 94,824 97.0 10.7 52.6 2,798 2.8 43.0 2,566 2.6 97,622 97.4Students with Disabilities 11,971 8,769 9.0 8.3 19.1 2,836 23.7 42.8 366 3.1 11,605 96.9Students without Disabilities 91,689 89,027 91.0 10.8 54.6 203 0.2 54.7 2,459 2.7 89,230 97.3Students with IEPs 10,759 7,557 7.7 8.2 16.4 2,836 26.4 42.8 366 3.4 10,393 96.6Students without IEPs 92,901 90,239 92.3 10.8 54.3 203 0.2 54.7 2,459 2.6 90,442 97.4Not Exceptional 81,011 78,402 80.2 10.5 50.3 203 0.3 54.7 2,406 3.0 78,605 97.0Academically Gifted 9,147 9,144 9.4 12.7 84.6 3 0.0 * 0 0.0 9,147 100.0Behaviorally-Emotionally Disabled 665 532 0.5 7.7 12.4 90 13.5 37.8 43 6.5 622 93.5Hearing Impaired 128 96 0.1 8.5 25.0 30 23.4 30.0 2 1.6 126 98.4Educable Mentally Disabled 1,976 454 0.5 6.6 5.3 1,435 72.6 28.6 87 4.4 1,889 95.6Deaf-Blind 6 4 0.0 * * 1 16.7 * 1 16.7 5 83.3Visually Impaired 45 41 0.0 9.5 41.5 4 8.9 * 0 0.0 45 100.0Other Health Impaired 1,988 1,693 1.7 8.6 21.9 243 12.2 43.2 52 2.6 1,936 97.4Orthopedically Impaired 53 31 0.0 9.4 25.8 18 34.0 66.7 4 7.5 49 92.5Traumatic Brain Injured 51 31 0.0 8.0 19.4 17 33.3 58.8 3 5.9 48 94.1Severely/Profoundly Mentally Disabled 58 2 0.0 * * 53 91.4 62.3 3 5.2 55 94.8Multihandicapped 148 6 0.0 6.6 * 133 89.9 66.9 9 6.1 139 93.9Speech-Language Impaired 76 69 0.1 7.9 11.6 4 5.3 * 3 3.9 73 96.1Specific Learning Disabled 4,931 4,453 4.6 8.1 14.7 337 6.8 41.2 141 2.9 4,790 97.1Trainable Mentally Disabled 281 5 0.0 8.0 * 265 94.3 85.3 11 3.9 270 96.1Autistic 353 140 0.1 9.7 43.6 206 58.4 67.0 7 2.0 346 98.0Section 504 1,212 1,212 1.2 9.6 35.6 0 0.0 * 0 0.0 1,212 100.0

Notes: 1"Membership" is the total number of students on the 2006-07 Disag_Students data file who were present on the first day of March, 2007

*Performance data are not reported when number tested is fewer than five. Performance data that are less than or equal to 5.0 percent, or greater than or equal to 95.0 percent, are not displayed. Data received from LEAs and charter schools after August 21, 2007 are not included in this table Prepared by the NCDPI Division of Accountability Services/Test Development Section.

2 "Number Tested" is the number of students who participated in the North Carolina General Writing Assessment.

Not Tested

Number Absent or

Other

Percent Absent or

Other

CategoryPercent

Proficient General Writing

Mean General Writing Score

Number Tested2

(General Writing)

Percent Proficient Alternate Writing

Assessments

Percent Tested

(General Writing)

Percent Alternate Writing

Assessments

Number Alternate Writing

Assessments

Table 36. North Carolina Testing ProgramNorth Carolina Writing Assessments, 2006-07

Statewide Number of Students Participating in the General Assessment, Taking Alternate Assessments, and Number Not TestedGrade 10

181


Grade 10 Number Tested Level 1 Level II Level III Level IV

30,296 23,799 12,308 3,17943.5 34.2 17.7 4.6

25,592 27,220 14,730 4,55935.5 37.8 20.4 6.3

24,197 25,103 17,703 5,78633.2 34.5 24.3 7.9

17,000 31,064 25,258 5,02021.7 39.6 32.2 6.4

16,399 24,800 26,269 12,48320.5 31.0 32.9 15.6

13,777 26,258 29,881 9,74617.3 33.0 37.5 12.2

11,922 31,995 29,204 8,14014.7 39.4 35.9 10.0

8,066 27,156 32,680 13,6619.9 33.3 40.1 16.7

7,441 27,150 35,712 12,1159.0 32.9 43.3 14.7

6,448 33,192 37,512 8,8827.5 38.6 43.6 10.3

― ― ― ― ―

15,815 34,701 32,705 87218.8 41.3 38.9 1.0

8,311 33,793 46,010 5199.4 38.1 51.9 0.6

16,558 32,446 44,617 *17.6 34.6 47.5 <=5%

12,538 32,548 50,145 *13.0 33.7 52.0 <=5%

15,606 31,934 49,517 73916.0 32.7 50.6 0.8

Notes: 1The North Carolina Writing Assessment was not administered in grade 10 during the 2001-02 school year 2The writing standard, scale, and scoring model changed effective with the 2002-03 school year

Data received from LEAs and charter schools after August 21, 2007 are not included in this table. Prepared by the NCDPI Division of Accountability Services/Test Development Section

*Performance data are not reported when number tested is fewer than five. Performance data that are less than or equal to 5.0 percent, or greater than or equal to 95.0 percent, are not displayed.

93,862

88,633

96,496

97,796

2004-05

2005-06

2006-07

69,582

86,034

84,093

1998-99

79,662

81,261

81,563

72,101

1993-94 72,789

2000-01

2001-021

2002-032

1992-93

1995-96

1991-92

1999-00

1994-95

2003-04

Achievement Levels

Grade 10

Table 37. North Carolina Testing ProgramNorth Carolina General Writing Assessment, 1991-92 to 2006-07,


78,384

82,418

79,951

1996-97

1997-98

182



2004-05 336 188 113 30 *56.0 33.6 8.9 <=5%

2005-06 171 68 52 49 *39.8 30.4 28.7 <=5%

2006-07 215 25 55 119 1611.6 25.6 55.3 7.4


2006-07 2,143 716 809 572 *33.4 37.8 26.7 <=5%


2006-07 681 91 * 108 46313.4 * 15.9 68.0


Table 38. North Carolina Testing ProgramNorth Carolina Writing Assessment (NCCLAS), 2004-05 to 2006-07,


Achievement Levels


Achievement Levels

Notes: *Performance data are not reported when number tested is fewer than five. Performance data that

Grade 10

Table 39. North Carolina Testing ProgramNorth Carolina Writing Assessment (NCEXTEND2 OCS), 2006-07,


Achievement Levels



183



Level III Level III Level I Level I Level II Level II Level III Level III Level IV Level IVAll Students 97,796 100.0 50,256 51.4 15,606 16.0 31,934 32.7 49,517 50.6 * <=5%Female 49,370 50.5 28,890 58.5 5,753 11.7 14,727 29.8 28,462 57.7 * <=5%Male 48,426 49.5 21,366 44.1 9,853 20.3 17,207 35.5 21,055 43.5 * <=5%American Indian 1,206 1.2 409 33.9 345 28.6 452 37.5 407 33.7 * <=5%Asian 2,157 2.2 1,264 58.6 286 13.3 607 28.1 1,194 55.4 * <=5%Black 27,618 28.2 10,366 37.5 5,957 21.6 11,295 40.9 10,315 37.3 * <=5%Hispanic 5,905 6.0 2,054 34.8 1,516 25.7 2,335 39.5 2,031 34.4 * <=5%Multi-Racial/Other 2,070 2.1 1,192 57.6 247 11.9 631 30.5 1,175 56.8 * <=5%White 58,840 60.2 34,971 59.4 7,255 12.3 16,614 28.2 34,395 58.5 * <=5%Free and Reduced Lunch 31,702 32.4 11,359 35.8 7,488 23.6 12,855 40.5 11,314 35.7 * <=5%No Free and Reduced Lunch 66,094 67.6 38,897 58.9 8,118 12.3 19,079 28.9 38,203 57.8 * <=5%Title I 1,762 1.8 534 30.3 522 29.6 706 40.1 533 30.2 * <=5%Not Title I 96,034 98.2 49,722 51.8 15,084 15.7 31,228 32.5 48,984 51.0 * <=5%Schoolwide Title I 985 1.0 319 32.4 316 32.1 350 35.5 319 32.4 * <=5%Targeted Assistance 260 0.3 70 26.9 76 29.2 114 43.8 70 26.9 * <=5%Migrant 517 0.5 145 28.0 130 25.1 242 46.8 144 27.9 * <=5%Not Migrant 97,279 99.5 50,111 51.5 15,476 15.9 31,692 32.6 49,373 50.8 * <=5%Limited English Proficient (LEP) 2,972 3.0 423 14.2 1,258 42.3 1,291 43.4 421 14.2 * <=5%Not Limited English Proficient 94,824 97.0 49,833 52.6 14,348 15.1 30,643 32.3 49,096 51.8 * <=5%Students with Disabilities 8,769 9.0 1,673 19.1 3,435 39.2 3,661 41.7 1,662 19.0 * <=5%Students without Disabilities 89,027 91.0 48,583 54.6 12,171 13.7 28,273 31.8 47,855 53.8 * <=5%Students with IEPs 7,557 7.7 1,242 16.4 3,133 41.5 3,182 42.1 1,235 16.3 * <=5%Students without IEPs 90,239 92.3 49,014 54.3 12,473 13.8 28,752 31.9 48,282 53.5 * <=5%Not Exceptional 78,402 80.2 39,460 50.3 11,895 15.2 27,047 34.5 39,099 49.9 * <=5%Behaviorally-Emotionally Disabled 532 0.5 66 12.4 264 49.6 202 38.0 66 12.4 * <=5%Hearing Impaired 96 0.1 24 25.0 38 39.6 34 35.4 24 25.0 * <=5%Educable Mentally Disabled 454 0.5 24 5.3 292 64.3 138 30.4 24 5.3 * <=5%Deaf-Blind 4 0.0 * * * * * * * * * *Visually Impaired 41 0.0 17 41.5 13 31.7 11 26.8 17 41.5 * <=5%Other Health Impaired 1,693 1.7 370 21.9 607 35.9 716 42.3 367 21.7 * <=5%




Category

184


Number Tested1

(General)Percent2

(General)






Level III Level III Level I Level I Level II Level II Level III Level III Level IV Level IVAll Students with Disabilities (continued)Orthopedically Impaired 31 0.0 8 25.8 9 29.0 14 45.2 8 25.8 * <=5%Traumatic Brain Injured 31 0.0 6 19.4 14 45.2 11 35.5 6 19.4 * <=5%Severely/Profoundly Mentally Disabled 2 0.0 * * * * * * * * * *Multihandicapped 6 0.0 * * 4 66.7 2 33.3 * * * *Speech-Language Impaired 69 0.1 8 11.6 32 46.4 29 42.0 8 11.6 * <=5%Specific Learning Disabled 4,453 4.6 656 14.7 1,809 40.6 1,988 44.6 653 14.7 * <=5% Learning Disabled-Reading 3,041 3.1 392 12.9 1,323 43.5 1,326 43.6 388 12.8 * <=5% Learning Disabled-Mathematics 1,688 1.7 245 14.5 728 43.1 715 42.4 242 14.3 * <=5% Learning Disabled-Written Expression 3,004 3.1 402 13.4 1,264 42.1 1,338 44.5 398 13.2 * <=5% Learning Disabled-Other 189 0.2 38 20.1 61 32.3 90 47.6 38 20.1 * <=5%Trainable Mentally Disabled 5 0.0 * * 4 80.0 1 20.0 * * * *Autistic 140 0.1 61 43.6 45 32.1 34 24.3 60 42.9 * <=5%Section 504 1,212 1.2 431 35.6 302 24.9 479 39.5 427 35.2 * <=5%Academically/Intellectually Gifted 9,144 9.4 7,737 84.6 * <=5% 1,140 12.5 7,474 81.7 * <=5%AIG Reading 7,729 7.9 6,652 86.1 * <=5% 879 11.4 6,400 82.8 * <=5%AIG Mathematics 7,577 7.7 6,432 84.9 * <=5% 944 12.5 6,212 82.0 * <=5%Braille Edition 4 0.0 * * * * * * * * * *Large Print 31 0.0 6 19.4 9 29.0 16 51.6 6 19.4 * <=5%Assistive Technology 56 0.1 20 35.7 13 23.2 23 41.1 20 35.7 * <=5%Braille Writer 1 0.0 * * * * * * * * * *Cramner Abacus 0 0.0 * * * * * * * * * *Dictation to Scribe 105 0.1 * <=5% 38 36.2 63 60.0 * <=5% * <=5%Interpreter Signs Test 26 0.0 4 15.4 13 50.0 9 34.6 4 15.4 * <=5%Magnification Devices 3 0.0 * * * * * * * * * *Student Marks in Test Book 465 0.5 64 13.8 204 43.9 197 42.4 64 13.8 * <=5%Test Administrator Reads Test Aloud 2,660 2.7 180 6.8 1,425 53.6 1,055 39.7 180 6.8 * <=5%Use Of Typewriter or Word Processor 163 0.2 74 45.4 27 16.6 62 38.0 71 43.6 * <=5%Hospital/Home Testing 18 0.0 7 38.9 7 38.9 4 22.2 7 38.9 * *Multiple Test Sessions 608 0.6 73 12.0 293 48.2 242 39.8 73 12.0 * <=5%Scheduled Extended Time 7,130 7.3 1,185 16.6 2,943 41.3 3,002 42.1 1,178 16.5 * <=5%Testing in a Separate Room 5,106 5.2 663 13.0 2,345 45.9 2,098 41.1 659 12.9 * <=5%English/Native Lang. Dictionary/Electronic Translator 700 0.7 54 7.7 370 52.9 276 39.4 54 7.7 * <=5%One Item per Page 22 0.0 * <=5% 16 72.7 5 22.7 * <=5% * <=5%Read Test Aloud to Self 54 0.1 8 14.8 25 46.3 21 38.9 8 14.8 * <=5%



Number Tested1

(General)Percent2

(General)



185


2"Percent" is calculated based on the number tested in the "All Students" category. *Performance data are not reported when membership is fewer than five. Performance data that are less than or equal to 5.0 percent, or greater than or equal to 95.0 percent, are not displayed.

Category



Level III Level III Level I Level I Level II Level II Level III Level III Level IV Level IVAll Students 215 100.0 135 62.8 25 11.6 55 25.6 119 55.3 16 7.4Female 93 43.3 61 65.6 12 12.9 20 21.5 55 59.1 6 6.5Male 121 56.3 74 61.2 12 9.9 35 28.9 64 52.9 10 8.3American Indian 0 0.0 * * * * * * * * * *Asian 20 9.3 13 65.0 * <=5% 6 30.0 12 60.0 * <=5%Black 18 8.4 15 83.3 * * 3 16.7 13 72.2 2 11.1Hispanic 135 62.8 73 54.1 21 15.6 41 30.4 61 45.2 12 8.9Multi-Racial/Other 2 0.9 * * * * * * * * * *White 39 18.1 33 84.6 * <=5% 5 12.8 33 84.6 * <=5%Free and Reduced Lunch 136 63.3 82 60.3 14 10.3 40 29.4 70 51.5 12 8.8No Free and Reduced Lunch 79 36.7 53 67.1 11 13.9 15 19.0 49 62.0 4 5.1Title I 0 0.0 * * * * * * * * * *Not Title I 215 100.0 135 62.8 25 11.6 55 25.6 119 55.3 16 7.4Schoolwide Title I 0 0.0 * * * * * * * * * *Targeted Assistance 0 0.0 * * * * * * * * * *Migrant 0 0.0 * * * * * * * * * *Not Migrant 215 100.0 135 62.8 25 11.6 55 25.6 119 55.3 16 7.4Limited English Proficient (LEP) 172 80.0 100 58.1 22 12.8 50 29.1 85 49.4 15 8.7Not Limited English Proficient 43 20.0 35 81.4 3 7.0 5 11.6 34 79.1 * <=5%Students with Disabilities 37 17.2 34 91.9 2 5.4 * <=5% 34 91.9 * <=5%Students without Disabilities 178 82.8 101 56.7 23 12.9 54 30.3 85 47.8 16 9.0Students with IEPs 37 17.2 34 91.9 2 5.4 * <=5% 34 91.9 * <=5%Students without IEPs 178 82.8 101 56.7 23 12.9 54 30.3 85 47.8 16 9.0Not Exceptional 178 82.8 101 56.7 23 12.9 54 30.3 85 47.8 16 9.0Behaviorally-Emotionally Disabled 5 2.3 * * * * * * * * * *Hearing Impaired 1 0.5 * * * * * * * * * *Educable Mentally Disabled 0 0.0 * * * * * * * * * *Deaf-Blind 0 0.0 * * * * * * * * * *Visually Impaired 0 0.0 * * * * * * * * * *Other Health Impaired 7 3.3 * * * * * * * * * *Orthopedically Impaired 0 0.0 * * * * * * * * * *Traumatic Brain Injured 0 0.0 * * * * * * * * * *Severely/Profoundly Mentally Disabled 0 0.0 * * * * * * * * * *Multihandicapped 0 0.0 * * * * * * * * * *Speech-Language Impaired 1 0.5 * * * * * * * * * *Specific Learning Disabled 22 10.2 20 90.9 2 9.1 * <=5% 20 90.9 * <=5%Trainable Mentally Disabled 0 0.0 * * * * * * * * * *Autistic 1 0.5 * * * * * * * * * *Section 504 0 0.0 * * * * * * * * * *


Grade 10


(NCCLAS)Percent2

(NCCLAS)

Notes: 1"Number Tested" is the number of students who participated in the North Carolina Writing Assessment (NCCLAS). 2"Percent" is calculated based on the number tested in the "All Students" category. *Performance data are not reported when membership is fewer than five. Performance data that are less than or equal to 5.0 percent, or greater than or equal to 95.0 percent, are not displayed.


186





Level III Level III Level I Level I Level II Level II Level III Level III Level IV Level IVAll Students 2,143 100.0 618 28.8 716 33.4 867 40.5 572 26.7 * <=5%Female 780 36.4 271 34.7 215 27.6 319 40.9 242 31.0 * <=5%Male 1,363 63.6 347 25.5 501 36.8 548 40.2 330 24.2 * <=5%American Indian 44 2.1 5 11.4 23 52.3 16 36.4 5 11.4 * <=5%Asian 18 0.8 2 11.1 11 61.1 6 33.3 2 11.1 * *Black 1,090 50.9 305 28.0 357 32.8 457 41.9 278 25.5 * <=5%Hispanic 89 4.2 20 22.5 38 42.7 34 38.2 20 22.5 * <=5%Multi-Racial/Other 30 1.4 9 30.0 10 33.3 12 40.0 8 26.7 * <=5%White 872 40.7 277 31.8 277 31.8 342 39.2 259 29.7 * <=5%Free and Reduced Lunch 1,393 65.0 382 27.4 470 33.7 577 41.4 351 25.2 * <=5%No Free and Reduced Lunch 750 35.0 236 31.5 246 32.8 290 38.7 221 29.5 * <=5%Title I 52 2.4 11 21.2 24 46.2 19 36.5 11 21.2 * <=5%Not Title I 2,091 97.6 607 29.0 692 33.1 848 40.6 561 26.8 * <=5%Schoolwide Title I 31 1.4 7 22.6 15 48.4 10 32.3 7 22.6 * <=5%Targeted Assistance 5 0.2 2 40.0 2 40.0 1 20.0 2 40.0 * *Migrant 16 0.7 2 12.5 7 43.8 8 50.0 2 12.5 * *Not Migrant 2,127 99.3 616 29.0 709 33.3 859 40.4 570 26.8 * <=5%Limited English Proficient (LEP) 61 2.8 12 19.7 33 54.1 17 27.9 12 19.7 * <=5%Not Limited English Proficient 2,082 97.2 606 29.1 683 32.8 850 40.8 560 26.9 * <=5%Students with Disabilities 2,122 99.0 612 28.8 709 33.4 859 40.5 566 26.7 * <=5%Students without Disabilities 21 1.0 6 28.6 7 33.3 8 38.1 6 28.6 * <=5%Students with IEPs 2,122 99.0 612 28.8 709 33.4 859 40.5 566 26.7 * <=5%Students without IEPs 21 1.0 6 28.6 7 33.3 8 38.1 6 28.6 * <=5%Not Exceptional 21 1.0 6 28.6 7 33.3 8 38.1 6 28.6 * <=5%Behaviorally-Emotionally Disabled 85 4.0 29 34.1 25 29.4 35 41.2 23 27.1 6 7.1Hearing Impaired 26 1.2 5 19.2 14 53.8 8 30.8 5 19.2 * <=5%Educable Mentally Disabled 1,345 62.8 331 24.6 486 36.1 559 41.6 306 22.8 * <=5%Deaf-Blind 0 0.0 * * * * * * * * * *Visually Impaired 3 0.1 * * * * * * * * * *Other Health Impaired 218 10.2 82 37.6 63 28.9 78 35.8 75 34.4 * <=5%


Notes: 1"Number Tested" is the number of students who participated in the North Carolina Writing Assessment (NCEXTEND2 OCS). 2"Percent" is calculated based on the number tested in the "All Students" category. *Performance data are not reported when membership is fewer than five. Performance data that are less than or equal to 5.0 percent, or greater than or equal to 95.0 percent, are not displayed.


Table 41c. North Carolina Testing ProgramNorth Carolina Writing Assessment (NCEXTEND2 OCS), 2006-07,


187

Grade 10

Category

Number Tested1

(NCEXTEND2OCS)

Percent2

(NCEXTEND2 OCS)



Level III Level III Level I Level I Level II Level II Level III Level III Level IV Level IVAll Students with Disabilities (continued)Orthopedically Impaired 10 0.5 4 40.0 * * 6 60.0 4 40.0 * *Traumatic Brain Injured 8 0.4 4 50.0 1 12.5 3 37.5 4 50.0 * *Severely/Profoundly Mentally Disabled 0 0.0 * * * * * * * * * *Multihandicapped 14 0.7 4 28.6 4 28.6 6 42.9 4 28.6 * *Speech-Language Impaired 3 0.1 * * * * * * * * * *Specific Learning Disabled 315 14.7 119 37.8 76 24.1 134 42.5 112 35.6 * <=5% Learning Disabled-Reading 280 13.1 102 36.4 69 24.6 120 42.9 96 34.3 * <=5% Learning Disabled-Mathematics 230 10.7 94 40.9 54 23.5 92 40.0 87 37.8 * <=5% Learning Disabled-Written Expression 255 11.9 99 38.8 63 24.7 105 41.2 93 36.5 * <=5% Learning Disabled-Other 24 1.1 10 41.7 6 25.0 8 33.3 9 37.5 * <=5%Trainable Mentally Disabled 18 0.8 1 5.6 13 72.2 5 27.8 1 5.6 * *Autistic 77 3.6 28 36.4 27 35.1 23 29.9 27 35.1 * <=5%Section 504 0 0.0 * * * * * * * * * *Academically/Intellectually Gifted 3 0.1 * * * * * * * * * *AIG Reading 0 0.0 * * * * * * * * * *AIG Mathematics 3 0.1 * * * * * * * * * *Braille Edition 1 0.0 * * * * * * * * * *Large Print 7 0.3 3 42.9 4 57.1 * * 3 42.9 * *Assistive Technology 8 0.4 3 37.5 5 62.5 * * 3 37.5 * *Braille Writer 1 0.0 * * * * * * * * * *Cramner Abacus 0 0.0 * * * * * * * * * *Dictation to Scribe 58 2.7 9 15.5 15 25.9 34 58.6 9 15.5 * <=5%Interpreter Signs Test 12 0.6 2 16.7 8 66.7 2 16.7 2 16.7 * *Magnification Devices 4 0.2 * * * * * * * * * *Student Marks in Test Book 186 8.7 61 32.8 63 33.9 71 38.2 60 32.3 * <=5%Test Administrator Reads Test Aloud 1,454 67.8 411 28.3 491 33.8 589 40.5 385 26.5 * <=5%Use Of Typewriter or Word Processor 13 0.6 4 30.8 5 38.5 5 38.5 4 30.8 * *Hospital/Home Testing 2 0.1 * * * * * * * * * *Multiple Test Sessions 184 8.6 43 23.4 64 34.8 78 42.4 41 22.3 * <=5%Scheduled Extended Time 1,473 68.7 435 29.5 484 32.9 595 40.4 407 27.6 * <=5%Testing in a Separate Room 1,597 74.5 453 28.4 544 34.1 649 40.6 423 26.5 * <=5%English/Native Lang. Dictionary/Electronic Translator 6 0.3 * * 4 66.7 2 33.3 * * * *One Item per Page 7 0.3 1 14.3 1 14.3 5 71.4 1 14.3 * *Read Test Aloud to Self 10 0.5 4 40.0 3 30.0 3 30.0 4 40.0 * *




188



Category

Number Tested1

(NCEXTEND2OCS )

Percent2

(NCEXTEND2 OCS)

Notes: 1"Number Tested" is the number of students who participated in the North Carolina General Writing Assessment (NCEXTEND2 OCS). 2"Percent" is calculated based on the number tested in the "All Students" category.



Level III Level III Level I Level I Level II Level II Level III Level III Level IV Level IVAll Students 681 100.0 571 83.8 91 13.4 * <=5% 108 15.9 463 68.0Female 232 34.1 194 83.6 30 12.9 * <=5% 29 12.5 165 71.1Male 435 63.9 368 84.6 56 12.9 * <=5% 76 17.5 292 67.1American Indian 7 1.0 * * * * * * 2 28.6 5 71.4Asian 8 1.2 * * * * * * * * * *Black 293 43.0 243 82.9 43 14.7 * <=5% 44 15.0 199 67.9Hispanic 25 3.7 21 84.0 4 16.0 * <=5% 6 24.0 15 60.0Multi-Racial/Other 14 2.1 13 92.9 1 7.1 * * 4 28.6 9 64.3White 320 47.0 270 84.4 38 11.9 * <=5% 49 15.3 221 69.1Free and Reduced Lunch 366 53.7 315 86.1 41 11.2 * <=5% 62 16.9 253 69.1No Free and Reduced Lunch 315 46.3 256 81.3 50 15.9 * <=5% 46 14.6 210 66.7Title I 57 8.4 41 71.9 15 26.3 * <=5% 6 10.5 35 61.4Not Title I 624 91.6 530 84.9 76 12.2 * <=5% 102 16.3 428 68.6Schoolwide Title I 46 6.8 34 73.9 12 26.1 * <=5% 3 6.5 31 67.4Targeted Assistance 7 1.0 4 57.1 2 28.6 1 14.3 2 28.6 2 28.6Migrant 4 0.6 * * * * * * * * * *Not Migrant 677 99.4 568 83.9 90 13.3 * <=5% 107 15.8 461 68.1Limited English Proficient (LEP) 8 1.2 * * * * * * 2 25.0 6 75.0Not Limited English Proficient 673 98.8 563 83.7 91 13.5 * <=5% 106 15.8 457 67.9Students with Disabilities 677 99.4 567 83.8 91 13.4 * <=5% 108 16.0 459 67.8Students without Disabilities 4 0.6 * * * * * * * * * *Students with IEPs 677 99.4 567 83.8 91 13.4 * <=5% 108 16.0 459 67.8Students without IEPs 4 0.6 * * * * * * * * * *Not Exceptional 4 0.6 * * * * * * * * * *Behaviorally-Emotionally Disabled 0 0.0 * * * * * * * * * *Hearing Impaired 3 0.4 * * * * * * * * * *Educable Mentally Disabled 90 13.2 80 88.9 7 7.8 * <=5% 13 14.4 67 74.4Deaf-Blind 1 0.1 * * * * * * * * * *Visually Impaired 1 0.1 * * * * * * * * * *Other Health Impaired 18 2.6 16 88.9 1 5.6 1 5.6 2 11.1 14 77.8Orthopedically Impaired 8 1.2 * * * * * * * * * *Traumatic Brain Injured 9 1.3 6 66.7 3 33.3 * * 2 22.2 4 44.4Severely/Profoundly Mentally Disabled 53 7.8 33 62.3 17 32.1 3 5.7 7 13.2 26 49.1Multihandicapped 119 17.5 85 71.4 32 26.9 * <=5% 21 17.6 64 53.8Speech-Language Impaired 0 0.0 * * * * * * * * * *Specific Learning Disabled 0 0.0 * * * * * * * * * *Trainable Mentally Disabled 247 36.3 225 91.1 18 7.3 * <=5% 41 16.6 184 74.5Autistic 128 18.8 110 85.9 12 9.4 * <=5% 21 16.4 89 69.5Section 504 0 0.0 * * * * * * * * * *

When summed, gender/ethnicity N counts may not match the state N counts because a gender/ethnicity category may not have been coded on some student answer sheets. The total for "All Students with Disabilities" includes Section 504. Some categories may not add up to the total due to missing coding. Data received from LEAs and charter schools after August 21, 2007 are not included in this table.



Percent2

(NCEXTEND1 )

Notes: 1"Number Tested" is the number of students who participated in the North Carolina Writing Assessment ( NCEXTEND1 ). 2"Percent" is calculated based on the number tested in the "All Students" category.

189




(NCEXTEND1 )



All Students 97,796 100.0 10.6 7.6 2.9 410 0.4Female 49,370 50.5 11.0 7.8 3.2 114 0.1Male 48,426 49.5 10.1 7.4 2.7 296 0.3American Indian 1,206 1.2 9.3 6.8 2.4 10 0.0Asian 2,157 2.2 11.3 8.2 3.0 17 0.0Black 27,618 28.2 9.8 7.1 2.6 135 0.1Hispanic 5,905 6.0 9.5 7.1 2.3 56 0.1Multi-Racial/Other 2,070 2.1 11.0 7.8 3.1 7 0.0White 58,840 60.2 11.0 7.8 3.2 185 0.2Free and Reduced Lunch 31,702 32.4 9.6 7.1 2.5 195 0.2No Free and Reduced Lunch 66,094 67.6 11.0 7.9 3.1 215 0.2Title I 1,762 1.8 9.2 6.9 2.2 10 0.0Not Title I 96,034 98.2 10.6 7.6 2.9 400 0.4Schoolwide Title I 985 1.0 9.1 6.8 2.3 7 0.0Targeted Assistance 260 0.3 9.0 6.7 2.2 3 0.0Migrant 517 0.5 9.4 7.3 2.2 0 0.0Not Migrant 97,279 99.5 10.6 7.6 2.9 410 0.4Limited English Proficient (LEP) 2,972 3.0 8.0 6.4 1.5 61 0.1Not Limited English Proficient 94,824 97.0 10.7 7.6 3.0 349 0.4Students with Disabilities 8,769 9.0 8.3 6.5 1.8 121 0.1Students without Disabilities 89,027 91.0 10.8 7.7 3.0 289 0.3Students with IEPs 7,557 7.7 8.2 6.4 1.7 114 0.1Students without IEPs 90,239 92.3 10.8 7.7 3.0 296 0.3Not Exceptional 78,402 80.2 10.5 7.5 2.9 284 0.3Behaviorally-Emotionally Disabled 532 0.5 7.7 5.9 1.6 18 0.0Hearing Impaired 96 0.1 8.5 6.5 1.9 0 0.0Educable Mentally Disabled 454 0.5 6.6 5.4 1.0 14 0.0Deaf-Blind 4 0.0 10.5 7.0 3.5 0 0.0Visually Impaired 41 0.0 9.5 6.9 2.4 1 0.0Other Health Impaired 1,693 1.7 8.6 6.6 1.9 17 0.0Orthopedically Impaired 31 0.0 9.4 7.0 1.5 3 0.0


Number Tested1

(General)


Average Score,

Percent2

(General)

Notes: 1"Number Tested" is the number of students who participated the North Carolina General Writing Assessment.

Grade 10

Category



190



All Students with Disabilities (continued)Traumatic Brain Injured 31 0.0 8.0 5.9 2.1 0 0.0Severely/Profoundly Mentally Disabled 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2 0.0Multihandicapped 6 0.0 6.6 4.7 0.8 1 0.0Speech-Language Impaired 69 0.1 7.9 6.2 1.6 1 0.0Specific Learning Disabled 4,453 4.6 8.1 6.4 1.6 46 0.0Learning Disabled-Reading 3,041 3.1 7.9 6.3 1.5 32 0.0Learning Disabled-Mathematics 1,688 1.7 8.0 6.4 1.6 17 0.0Learning Disabled-Written Expression 3,004 3.1 8.0 6.4 1.5 38 0.0Learning Disabled-Other 189 0.2 8.6 6.5 2.0 1 0.0Trainable Mentally Disabled 5 0.0 8.0 1.6 0.0 4 0.0Autistic 140 0.1 9.7 6.8 2.4 7 0.0Section 504 1,212 1.2 9.6 7.0 2.5 7 0.0Academically/Intellectually Gifted 9,144 9.4 12.7 8.9 3.8 3 0.0 AIG Reading 7,729 7.9 12.8 9.0 3.8 2 0.0 AIG Mathematics 7,577 7.7 12.7 8.9 3.8 1 0.0AccommodationsBraille Edition 4 0.0 14.0 7.5 3.0 1 0.0Large Print 31 0.0 8.5 6.8 1.6 0 0.0Assistive Technology 56 0.1 9.8 7.3 1.9 3 0.0Braille Writer 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1 0.0Cramner Abacus 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0Dictation to Scribe 105 0.1 7.3 6.9 0.0 6 0.0Interpreter Signs Test 26 0.0 7.7 6.0 1.7 0 0.0Magnification Devices 3 0.0 10.0 7.3 2.7 0 0.0Student Marks in Test Book 465 0.5 7.9 6.3 1.6 7 0.0Test Administrator Reads Test Aloud 2,660 2.7 7.2 5.9 1.2 48 0.0Use Of Typewriter or Word Processor 163 0.2 10.7 7.7 2.3 10 0.0Hospital/Home Testing 18 0.0 8.9 6.6 2.3 0 0.0Multiple Test Sessions 608 0.6 7.6 6.1 1.4 11 0.0Scheduled Extended Time 7,130 7.3 8.2 6.4 1.7 100 0.1Testing in a Separate Room 5,106 5.2 7.8 6.2 1.5 80 0.1English/Native Lang. Dictionary/Electronic Translator 700 0.7 7.3 6.0 1.1 20 0.0One Item per Page 22 0.0 6.1 5.1 0.8 1 0.0Read Test Aloud to Self 54 0.1 7.8 6.1 1.5 1 0.0

*Performance data are not reported when number tested is fewer than five. The total for "All Students with Disabilities" includes Section 504. Some categories may not add up to the total due to missing coding. Data received from LEAs and charter schools after August 21, 2007 are not included in this table. Prepared by the NCDPI Division of Accountability Services/Test Development Section.

North Carolina General Writing Assessment, 2006-07,Average Score,

Grade 10 (continued)

Category

Notes: 1"Number Tested" is the number of students who participated the North Carolina General Writing Assessment. 2"Percent" is calculated based on the number tested in the "All Students" category.


Number Tested1

(General)Percent2

(General)

191



All Students 215 100.0 10.1Female 93 43.3 10.1Male 121 56.3 10.2American Indian 0 0 0Asian 20 9.3 10.1Black 18 8.4 11.4Hispanic 135 62.8 9.7Multi-Racial/Other 2 0.9 10White 39 18.1 11.2Free and Reduced Lunch 136 63.3 10.1No Free and Reduced Lunch 79 36.7 10.1Title I 0 0 0Not Title I 215 100 10.1Schoolwide Title I 0 0 0.0Targeted Assistance 0 0 0Migrant 0 0 0Not Migrant 215 100 10.1Limited English Proficient (LEP) 172 80 9.9Not Limited English Proficient 43 20 10.9Students with Disabilities 37 17.2 11.4Students without Disabilities 178 82.8 9.9Students with IEPs 37 17.2 11.4Students without IEPs 178 82.8 9.9Not Exceptional 178 82.8 9.9Behaviorally-Emotionally Disabled 5 2.3 11.8Hearing Impaired 1 0.5 12Educable Mentally Disabled 0 0 0.0Deaf-Blind 0 0 0Visually Impaired 0 0 0Other Health Impaired 7 3.3 12Orthopedically Impaired 0 0 0Traumatic Brain Injured 0 0 0.0Severely/Profoundly Mentally Disabled 0 0 0Multihandicapped 0 0 0.0Speech-Language Impaired 1 0.5 11Specific Learning Disabled 22 10.2 11.1Trainable Mentally Disabled 0 0 0Autistic 1 0.5 9.0Section 504 0 0 0

*Performance data are not reported when membership is fewer than five. The total for "All Students with Disabilities" includes Section 504. Some categories may not add up to the total due to missing coding. Data received from LEAs and charter schools after August 21, 2007 are not included in this table.





(NCCLAS) Percent2

(NCCLAS)


Notes: 1"Number Tested" is the number of students who participated the North Carolina Writing Assessment (NCCLAS).

192



All Students 2,143 100.0 8.9 6.8 1.8 78 3.6Female 780 36.4 9.6 7.2 2.1 27 1.3Male 1,363 63.6 8.6 6.5 1.7 51 2.4American Indian 44 2.1 7.2 5.6 1.4 1 0.0Asian 18 0.8 7.1 5.4 1.1 1 0.0Black 1,090 50.9 9.0 6.8 1.8 40 1.9Hispanic 89 4.2 8.3 6.3 1.4 6 0.3Multi-Racial/Other 30 1.4 9.0 6.9 1.7 1 0.0White 872 40.7 9.1 6.8 1.9 29 1.4Free and Reduced Lunch 1,393 65.0 8.9 6.8 1.8 49 2.3No Free and Reduced Lunch 750 35.0 9.1 6.7 2.0 29 1.4Title I 52 2.4 8.0 6.4 1.4 1 0.0Not Title I 2,091 97.6 9.0 6.8 1.9 77 3.6Schoolwide Title I 31 1.4 7.9 6.3 1.5 0 0.0Targeted Assistance 5 0.2 10.5 6.4 2.0 1 0.0Migrant 16 0.7 7.5 6.5 1.0 0 0.0Not Migrant 2,127 99.3 8.9 6.8 1.9 78 3.6Limited English Proficient (LEP) 61 2.8 7.9 5.6 1.2 8 0.4Not Limited English Proficient 2,082 97.2 9.0 6.8 1.9 70 3.3Students with Disabilities 2,122 99.0 8.9 6.8 1.8 76 3.5Students without Disabilities 21 1.0 9.1 6.4 2.2 2 0.1Students with IEPs 2,122 99.0 8.9 6.8 1.8 76 3.5Students without IEPs 21 1.0 9.1 6.4 2.2 2 0.1Not Exceptional 21 1.0 9.1 6.4 2.2 2 0.1Behaviorally-Emotionally Disabled 85 4.0 9.7 7.4 2.0 3 0.1Hearing Impaired 26 1.2 7.5 5.5 1.5 2 0.1Educable Mentally Disabled 1,345 62.8 8.6 6.6 1.7 51 2.4Deaf-Blind 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0Visually Impaired 3 0.1 * * * * *Other Health Impaired 218 10.2 9.6 7.2 2.2 7 0.3Orthopedically Impaired 10 0.5 10.4 8.2 2.2 0 0.0


193

Notes: 1"Number Tested" is the number of students who participated the North Carolina Writing Assessment (NCEXTEND2 OCS). 2"Percent" is calculated based on the number tested in the "All Students" category.



Average Score,


(NCEXTEND2 OCS)

Percent Tested2

(NCEXTEND2 OCS)

Grade 10



All Students with Disabilities (continued)Traumatic Brain Injured 8 0.4 10.1 7.8 2.4 0 0.0Severely/Profoundly Mentally Disabled 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0Multihandicapped 14 0.7 8.8 6.9 1.9 0 0.0Speech-Language Impaired 3 0.1 * * * * *Specific Learning Disabled 315 14.7 9.7 7.4 2.2 5 0.2Learning Disabled-Reading 280 13.1 9.5 7.3 2.1 3 0.1Learning Disabled-Mathematics 230 10.7 9.8 7.4 2.3 4 0.2Learning Disabled-Written Expression 255 11.9 9.6 7.3 2.2 3 0.1Learning Disabled-Other 24 1.1 10.1 7.8 2.3 0 0.0Trainable Mentally Disabled 18 0.8 5.9 5.1 0.4 1 0.0Autistic 77 3.6 9.4 6.3 2.2 7 0.3Section 504 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0Academically/Intellectually Gifted 3 0.1 * * * * * AIG Reading 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 AIG Mathematics 3 0.1 * * * * *AccommodationsBraille Edition 1 0.0 * * * * *Large Print 7 0.3 8.6 6.6 2.0 0 0.0Assistive Technology 8 0.4 8.9 6.5 1.3 1 0.0Braille Writer 1 0.0 * * * * *Cramner Abacus 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0Dictation to Scribe 58 2.7 8.1 8.0 0.0 1 0.0Interpreter Signs Test 12 0.6 6.7 4.8 1.3 1 0.0Magnification Devices 4 0.2 9.0 6.5 2.5 0 0.0Student Marks in Test Book 186 8.7 8.8 6.6 2.0 4 0.2Test Administrator Reads Test Aloud 1,454 67.8 8.9 6.7 1.8 51 2.4Use Of Typewriter or Word Processor 13 0.6 7.9 5.8 2.0 0 0.0Hospital/Home Testing 2 0.1 * * * * *Multiple Test Sessions 184 8.6 8.6 6.7 1.7 6 0.3Scheduled Extended Time 1,473 68.7 9.0 6.8 1.9 50 2.3Testing in a Separate Room 1,597 74.5 8.8 6.7 1.8 54 2.5English/Native Lang. Dictionary/Electronic Translator 6 0.3 5.6 4.0 0.7 1 0.0One Item per Page 7 0.3 10.2 6.9 1.9 1 0.0Read Test Aloud to Self 10 0.5 9.0 6.8 2.2 0 0.0


194






(NCEXTEND2 OCS)

Percent Tested2

(NCEXTEND2 OCS)

Notes: 1"Number Tested" is the number of students who participated the North Carolina Writing Assessment (NCEXTEND2 OCS).



All Students 681 100.0 13.6Female 232 34.1 13.8Male 435 63.9 13.6American Indian 7 1.0 14.9Asian 8 1.2 16Black 293 43.0 13.5Hispanic 25 3.7 13.4Multi-Racial/Other 14 2.1 14.0White 320 47.0 13.7Free and Reduced Lunch 366 53.7 13.9No Free and Reduced Lunch 315 46.3 13.4Title I 57 8.4 12.4Not Title I 624 91.6 13.7Schoolwide Title I 46 6.8 12.7Targeted Assistance 7 1.0 10.6Migrant 4 0.6 *Not Migrant 677 99.4 13.6Limited English Proficient (LEP) 8 1.2 15Not Limited English Proficient 673 98.8 13.6Students with Disabilities 677 99.4 13.6Students without Disabilities 4 0.6 *Students with IEPs 677 99.4 13.6Students without IEPs 4 0.6 *Not Exceptional 4 0.6 *Behaviorally-Emotionally Disabled 0 0.0 0.0Hearing Impaired 3 0.4 *Educable Mentally Disabled 90 13.2 14.4Deaf-Blind 1 0.1 *Visually Impaired 1 0.1 *Other Health Impaired 18 2.6 14.4Orthopedically Impaired 8 1.2 16Traumatic Brain Injured 9 1.3 11.3Severely/Profoundly Mentally Disabled 53 7.8 11.3

Multihandicapped 119 17.5 12Speech-Language Impaired 0 0.0 0Specific Learning Disabled 0 0.0 0.0Trainable Mentally Disabled 247 36.3 14.4Autistic 128 18.8 13.9Section 504 0 0 0

*Performance data are not reported when membership is fewer than five. The total for "All Students with Disabilities" includes Section 504. Some categories may not add up to the total due to missing coding. Data received from LEAs and charter schools after August 21, 2007 are not included in this table.


(NCEXTEND1 ) Percent2

(NCEXTEND1 )


Notes: 1"Number Tested" is the number of students who participated the North Carolina Writing Assessment (NCEXTEND1) . 2"Percent" is calculated based on the number tested in the "All Students" category.



195



LOW SCORE 4


90 14MEAN 10.6 75 12


VARIANCE 8.6


20 180 97,796 0.2 100.019 0 97,616 0.0 99.818 554 97,616 0.6 99.817 5 97,062 0.0 99.2

16 4,357 97,057 4.5 99.215 102 92,700 0.1 94.814 8,476 92,598 8.7 94.713 1,053 84,122 1.1 86.012 35,529 83,069 36.3 84.9

11 2,339 47,540 2.4 48.610 17,191 45,201 17.6 46.29 6,105 28,010 6.2 28.68 6,299 21,905 6.4 22.4

7 3,174 15,606 3.2 16.06 5,116 12,432 5.2 12.75 2,522 7,316 2.6 7.54 4,384 4,794 4.5 4.9

NS 410 410 0.4 0.4






IV

III

II

I

196



LOW SCORE 4



50 (median) 1125 8

VARIANCE 8.1 10 6


16 9 215 4.2 100.015 2 206 0.9 95.814 5 204 2.3 94.9

13 3 199 1.4 92.612 77 196 35.8 91.211 16 119 7.4 55.310 23 103 10.7 47.9

9 14 80 6.5 37.28 33 66 15.3 30.77 8 33 3.7 15.3

6 8 25 3.7 11.65 3 17 1.4 7.94 14 14 6.5 6.5

Notes: The range used for the NCCLAS Writing Assessment is different from the range used for the North Carolina Writing Assessment. Data received from LEAs and charter schools after August 21, 2007 are not included in this table. Prepared by the NCDPI Division of Accountability Services/Test Development Section.




IV

III

II

I

197



LOW SCORE 4


90 14MEAN 8.9 75 12


VARIANCE 13.9


20 27 2,143 1.3 100.019 0 2,116 0.0 98.718 17 2,116 0.8 98.717 2 2,099 0.1 97.9

16 76 2,097 3.5 97.915 3 2,021 0.1 94.314 100 2,018 4.7 94.213 1 1,918 0.0 89.512 392 1,917 18.3 89.5

11 0 1,525 0.0 71.210 409 1,525 19.1 71.29 99 1,116 4.6 52.18 205 1,017 9.6 47.57 96 812 4.5 37.9

6 144 716 6.7 33.45 60 572 2.8 26.74 434 512 20.3 23.9

NS 78 78 3.6 3.6

Notes: The range used for the NCEXTEND2 OCS Writing Assessment is different from the range used for the North Carolina Writing Assessment Data received from LEAs and charter schools after August 21, 2007 are not included in this table. Prepared by the NCDPI Division of Accountability Services/Test Development Section.



Distribution of Total Scores, Grade 10


IV

III

II

I

198


HIGH SCORE 16681

LOW SCORE 4MEAN 13.6

TOTALSTANDARD PERCENTILES SCOREDEVIATION 4.2 90 16

75 16VARIANCE 17.3 50 (median) 16

25 1210 4


16 463 681 68.0 100.015 0 218 0.0 32.0

14 21 218 3.1 32.013 0 197 0.0 28.912 87 197 12.8 28.911 0 110 0.0 16.2

10 6 110 0.9 16.29 0 104 0.0 15.38 13 104 1.9 15.37 0 91 0.0 13.4

6 1 91 0.1 13.45 0 90 0.0 13.24 90 90 13.2 13.2

Notes: The range used for the NCEXTEND1 Writing Assessment is different from the range used for the North Carolina Writing Assessment Data received from LEAs and charter schools after August 21, 2007 are not included in this table. Prepared by the NCDPI Division of Accountability Services/Test Development Section.


Distribution of Total Scores, Grade 10


IV

I


II

III

199

201

2006-07


Grade 10

Copies of Grade 10


The North Carolina Writing Assessment Scoring Model is comprised of a content component with a 1-4 score range and a conventions component with a 0-2 score range. To report a total writing scale score for each student, the score is computed by combining the content and conventions scores using the following model: Total Writing Assessment Score = sum of the (content component scores from two independent readers multiplied by 2) + the sum of the (conventions component scores from two independent readers multiplied by 1). The following pages provide copies of sample student responses from the North Carolina Writing Assessment at grade 10. The total content score, total conventions score, total writing score, Achievement Level, and annotated explanations of the scores are provided for each response.

203


204

Grade 10-North Carolina General Writing Assessment-Sample Students Response #1

Rubric Content Score: 1 Rubric Convention Score: 0 Total Content Score: 4 Total Writing Score: 4 Total Conventions Score: 0 Achievement Level: I Content Annotation:

The topic is confusing and unfocused. The student seems to focus on equality in the world today, but the organizational structure fails to establish connections between and among ideas about “The Meaning of Human Rights.” The sparse details and elaboration attempt to support the topic (When our parents were kids they had blacks on one side and whites on another which back then. They had the whites rule over the blacks . . . . And see people with weight problems not other people to ecourage them to loss the weight), but is confusing. The response lacks precise and purposeful vocabulary (Therefore you should look past all the things you see like if they are overweight, not smart enough, also they carry theirself).

Conventions Annotation: This response exhibits lack of control of grammatical conventions appropriate to the writing task. Numerous sentence formation errors, usage errors, spelling errors, and mechanical errors impede the reader’s understanding of the ideas conveyed.

205

206


207


Rubric Content Score: 2 Rubric Convention Score: 1 Total Content Score: 8 Total Writing Score: 10 Total Conventions Score: 2 Achievement Level: II Content Annotation:

While the topic is clear (When I think about the meaning of human rights I think about being equal, having freedom, and being able to accomplish more in life), the organizational structure establishes little relationship between ideas (You should be judged on what counts and not one your race or religion . . . or on any other status that makes you different from other people . . . . The freedom to speak your own mind and your opinion). Support has major weaknesses in relatedness to the topic, and elaboration is general (If you don’t have the freedom to do any of those things then you don’t have human rights). Precise and purposeful vocabulary is minimal (In order to have human rights you must be equal and treated the same no matter how different you really are . . . .Without human rights you wouldn’t have freedom and without freedom you can accomplish only so much in life), and sentence fluency is minimal. Conventions Annotation: This response exhibits minimal control of grammatical conventions. Errors include run-on sentences (when women couldn’t vote that meant that women didnt have human rights and it wasn’t right that women couldn’t chose who would run their country in fact women had very little say), usage errors (chose for choose), and missing punctuation.

208

209


210


Rubric Content Score: 2 Rubric Convention Score: 2 Total Content Score: 8 Total Writing Score: 12 Total Conventions Score: 4 Achievement Level: III Content Annotation: Although the student establishes a topic (The meaning of human rights is being able to express ones individuality, standing up for what is right, and having the freedom to live life the way that you want to), the organizational structure establishes little connection between and among ideas (All humans should be entitled to express their individuality, and human rights allows this. For instance, let us briefly reflect upon the history of our country . . . . 32 percent of high school students believe individuality is a right . . . . A positive prospect that human rights imposes, is the idea that one can be whom ever they chose to. A teenage girl is channel surfing one day . . .), leading to major lapses in the logical progression of the essay. Support and elaboration exhibit major weaknesses (They chose to use their outlooks to run this land, and this eventually did lead to human rights. Another scenario that comes to mind when the word individuality is used, is high school students) and consist of general and undeveloped details (Rosa Parks helped to shine a light on this issue, by standing up for the morally correct thing . . . . Human rights allows us to express ourselves in a positive manner with no consequences, and there is no greater gift than that). The response exhibits minimal use of vocabulary that is precise and purposeful (human rights was a huge factor that they wished to mold into our country . . . . They were forced to live the way that Great Britain saw fit . . . Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. was a man based solely upon achieving human rights . . . . It amazes her how many people have little or no rights at all), and demonstrates minimal use of sentence fluency. Conventions Annotation: The response exhibits reasonable control of grammatical conventions appropriate to the writing task. The few errors present do not impede the reader’s understanding of the ideas conveyed.

211

212


213

Grade 10-North Carolina General Writing Assessment - Sample Student Response #4 Rubric Content Score: 3 Rubric Convention Score: 2 Total Content Score: 12 Total Writing Score: 16 Total Conventions Score: 4 Achievement Level: III Content Annotation: The topic of this essay is clear (human rights are generally understood to mean that everyone is born free and equal in dignity and rights, and that they have the right to life, liberty, and security of person). The response remains focused on the idea, and the organizational structure establishes relationships between ideas. Elaboration consists of specific, developed details that support the student’s ideas (Slaves were forced to have children with people they did not know, simply because their master wanted more money. . . . [Hitler] almost achieved his goal, too, killing over 6,000 Jews and 6,000 people of differing nationalities . . . . Harriet Tubman, who put herself in jeopardy to stand up for what she believed in, knowing that although it may never help her, she would possibly make a difference for someone in the future). The use of vocabulary is reasonably precise and purposeful (Thousands and thousands of African Americans were tortured and beaten if they did not perform the tasks their masters had bestowed upon them. Family members were stripped apart and sold to the highest bidder. . . . Although slavery was horrible, it was more humane than what happened to those of Jewish nationality . . . . Adolf Hitler . . . was bent on their total annihilation . . . . hopefully we could live in a world without ignorance). Sentence fluency is reasonable. Conventions Annotation:

The essay exhibits reasonable control of sentence formation, word usage, and mechanics. Very few errors are present.

214

215


216

Grade 10-North Carolina General Writing Assessment - Sample Student Response #5 Rubric Content Score: 4 Rubric Convention Score: 2 Total Content Score: 16 Total Writing Score: 20 Total Conventions Score: 4 Achievement Level: IV Content Annotation:

The topic of this philosophical and abstract essay is clear, although not explicitly stated until the John Locke quote in the final paragraph (“Everyman is entitled to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness”). The focus is maintained throughout the response, and the organizational structure serves to connect ideas and to engage the reader. The paper is unified and complete. The writer’s ideas are supported by many specific details (She closes her eyes and makes a wish. When she opens them she is met by an extravegant explosion, and just like that, her dreams are gone. This was a dipiction of the bombing of the Kurds in the late 1980s and 1990s . . . .”I am 22 years old and about to take the ride to my death, all I ever wanted was the chance to live” . . . she wrote this statement right before being deported to Ausuite where they gassed hundreds of thousands of Jews . . . . In her mind she could be killed for talking about these things even in America. It was not until a few months ago when her Prezident died that she felt comfortable talking about what horrors occured in the past). The essay exhibits skillful use of both purposeful vocabulary and sentence fluency (The night is warm and dry with a slight breeze, it feels as if God has rapped a blanket over Northern Iraq and every once and a while cool air is coming through the sheets. A beautiful young girl lays her ebony curls on the sand and looks up at the millions of stars, like nightlights in the sky . . . . From 2000 to 2007 my answer was generally “no” because I did not agree with President Bush, and I though he was making a mockery of our nation . . . . If everyone was given their rights then that beautiful Kurdish girl with hair like ebony shining in the moonlight might have been an astronaut one day). Conventions Annotation: Despite a few sentence formation errors (The night is warm and dry with a slight breeze, it feels as if God has rapped a blanket over Northern Iraq . . . . She has her eye on one star that is brighter then all the others, it seems to be moving closer to her. . . . “I am 22 years old and about to take the ride to my death, all I ever wanted was the chance to live”, this was a caption from Thenesienstadt to Ausuite by Ruth Solomon . . .), and a few spelling errors (rapped for wrapped . . . extravegant . . . dipiction . . . antonymn . . . payed . . . poled . . . though for thought . . . prezident . . .. truly), the essay includes sufficient correct writing to exhibit reasonable control of sentence formation, word usage, and mechanics.

217

2006-07


Grade 10 - NCEXTEND2 OCS

Copies of Grade 10


The North Carolina Writing Assessment Scoring Model is comprised of a content component with a 1-4 score range and a conventions component with a 0-2 score range. To report a total writing scale score for each student, the score is computed by combining the content and conventions scores using the following model: Total Writing Assessment Score = sum of the (content component scores from two independent readers multiplied by 2) + the sum of the (conventions component scores from two independent readers multiplied by 1). The following pages provide copies of sample student responses from the North Carolina Writing Assessment (NCEXTEND2 OCS) at grade 10. The total content score, total conventions score, total writing score, Achievement Level, and annotated explanations of the scores are provided for each response.

219


220

Grade 10-North Carolina Writing Assessment (NCEXTEND2 OCS)- Sample Student Response #1

Rubric Content Score: 1 Rubric Convention Score: 0 Total Content Score: 4 Total Writing Score: 4 Total Conventions Score: 0 Achievement Level: I

Content Annotation: The response fails to establish focus on the topic/subject, lacks organization, and does not present any specific details, or establish relationships among ideas. The student begins by addressing the prompt (I would prepare by think about what i would say and wear to the intervi.), but quickly digresses (I can problem get the job we both know That it takes tim) resulting in a major lapse of focus. Conventions Annotation: The response lacks control of conventions. Sentence formation, standard usage, and mechanics errors are present which confuse the reader (my best in all For the Job and go out there. for it little bit of times . . .).

221


222



Content Annotation: The brief response focuses on the topic/subject and lists ideas in a somewhat chronological order, but lacks support and elaboration. The writing exhibits undeveloped details in a list-like fashion ( . . . I would dress up niceley and be ready for it and then I would pratice . . . ). Conventions Annotation: This response exhibits minimal control of grammatical conventions. The brief amount of writing includes some sentence formation, usage and mechanics errors. The student exhibits correct capitalization and spelling of most basic words.

223


224

Grade 10-North Carolina Writing Assessment (NCEXTEND2 OCS)- Sample Student Response #3 Rubric Content Score: 2 Rubric Convention Score: 2 Total Content Score: 8 Total Writing Score: 12 Total Conventions Score: 4 Achievement Level: III

Content Annotation: This response demonstrates major lapses in the logical progression of ideas and is minimally complete. The writing consists of general details and weak elaboration ( . . . I will buy some nice dress close. Because you need to make a good first look.). The student does use transitional phrases (Before I go . . .When your going . . . And when I going . . .), but these phrases do not lead to a logical progression. Conventions Annotation: The student exhibits reasonable control of conventions. There are some errors in sentence formation, usage, and mechanics, but these errors do not impede the writer’s meaning.

225

226


227


Rubric Content Score: 3 Rubric Convention Score: 2 Total Content Score: 12 Total Writing Score: 16 Total Conventions Score: 4 Achievement Level: III Content Annotation: This response uses number ordering to create organization with support and elaboration for each statement. There is an introduction, which establishes focus on the topic and a concluding statement, which reiterates the focus. The numerical statements have minor lapses in progression (6th say yes or no . . 7th shake their hand . . . .8th get good rest . . ). The student uses some specific details ( . . . shake their hand to show respect and thanks . . . .Get good rest the day before so you can be well rested and well aware of whats going on). Conventions Annotation: The student exhibits control of conventions (sentence formation, usage, and mechanics). In this response, the numbers to begin sentences are not considered errors.

228


229

Grade 10-North Carolina Writing Assessment (NCEXTEND2 OCS) - Sample Student Response #5

Rubric Content Score: 4 Rubric Convention Score: 2 Total Content Score: 16 Total Writing Score: 20 Total Conventions Score: 4 Achievement Level: IV Content Annotation: This response presents a strong focus on practicing for the interview. The student elaborates on how he/she would practice using specific details (I would act as If I were really being interviewed. I would have the other people being the boss and one being a employee. I would have them ask me questions . . .). The piece progresses to physical preparation, and what to do at the interview ( . . . what your name is. Tell them what it is and shake their hand firmly), ending with a concluding sentence (So when ever you get called to a interview start getting prepared about a couple days eairler), which makes the response complete. Conventions Annotation: The response exhibits reasonable control of conventions. The student demonstrates standard usage (subject/verb agreement and verb tense agreement), and the errors that are present in this response do not impede the writer’s meaning.

231

2006-07


Grade 10


Tables 46a through 46l provide the number of students participating and the percent of students at or above Achievement Level III for each of the LEAs by region (former six Technical Assistance Centers configurations). Performance by ethnicity, gender, Title I and migrant students is also provided for each LEA.


State Percent† 2007 LEA Performance * Grandfather Academy**, J.H. Baker Jr High** … 90 Raleigh Charter HS** … 79 Chapel Hill-Carrboro City … 76 Gray Stone Day** … 68 Elkin City, Franklin Academy** 67 Roanoke Rapids City 66 Clay, Wake … 64 Charlotte/Mecklenburg 63 Gaston College Prep**, Kannapolis City 62 Mount Airy City 61 Cleveland, Thomas Jefferson** 60 Brunswick, Dare, Polk 59 Camden, Transylvania

2000 State 58 McDowell, Moore, Mooresville City, Winston-Salem/Forsyth1999 State 57 Guilford

56 Henderson, Watauga, Wayne 55 Burke, Johnston, Pender, Rocky Mount Prep Sch**

2001 State 54 Ashe, Lincoln Charter**, Lincoln, Rockingham, Union Academy**2004, 2006 State 53 Alamance-Burlington, Cabarrus, Davidson, Haywood, Warren

52 Carteret, Cumberland, Harnett, Montgomery2007 State 51 Davie

1997 State 50 Alexander, Asheville City, Buncombe, C.G. Woodson**, Franklin, New Hanover, Onslow, Orange, Pace Academy**, Sampson1996 State 49 Catawba, Craven, Mitchell, Northampton2005 State 48 Durham, Gaston, Hickory City

47 Avery, Chatham, Newton-Conover City, River Mill Academy**, Thomasville City, Wilkes1998 State 46 Clinton City, Duplin

45 Caldwell, Granville, Iredell-Statesville, Yadkin 44 Cherokee County, Lee, Martin, Pitt, Wilson 43 Rowan-Salisbury, Stanly, Stokes, Surry, Yancey 42 Currituck, Elizabeth City/Pasquotank, Jackson, Pamlico 41 Alleghany, Randolph, Woods Charter**

2003 State 40 Gates, Graham, Swain, Union1995 State 39 Community Partners High**, Rutherford

38 Macon 37 Lenoir 36 Columbus, Crossroads Charter**, Scotland 35 Greene, Lexington City, Nash-Rocky Mount, Richmond, Robeson, Whiteville City 34 Beaufort, Hoke, Hyde, Jones

1994 State 33 Anson, Edenton/Chowan, Haliwa-Saponi Tribal**, Hertford, Washington 32 Caswell, Clover Garden**, East Wake Academy** 31 Madison, Roxboro Community** 30 Edgecombe 29 New Century Charter**, Tyrrell 28 Person, Weldon City

1993 State 27 Vance 26 Bertie, Perquimans

25 Piedmont Community** … 23 Bladen … 21 Kestrel Heights** … 19 Halifax … 14 Crossnore Academy** 13 Cape Lookout Marine** … 9 Kennedy Charter** 8 Laurinburg Homework**, Provisions Academy** Notes: †Percents are rounded to the nearest whole percent. *Performance data are not reported when number tested is fewer than five. Performance data that are less than or equal to 5.0 percent, or greater than or equal to 95.0 percent, are not displayed. **Denotes a charter school. For reporting purposes the charter school name has been abbreviated; the complete charter school name can be found in the Appendix. Beginning in 2003, data are reported using the revised standard and are generated using the new scoring model. Data for 2003 are from the pilot test administration. Data received from LEAs and charter schools after August 21, 2007 are not included in this table. Prepared by the NCDPI Division of Accountability Services/Test Development Section.


Percent of Students Scoring At or Above Level III, by LEA,Grade 10

233


State Mean Score† 2007 LEA Performance 13.5 Raleigh Charter HS** … 12.5 Chapel Hill-Carrboro City 12.3 Elkin City, Gray Stone Day** … 12.0 Grandfather Academy**, J.H. Baker Jr High** … 11.7 Clay, Gaston College Prep**, Thomas Jefferson** 11.5 Charlotte/Mecklenburg, Franklin Academy**, Mount Airy City, Roanoke Rapids City, Wake 11.3 Brunswick, Camden, Cleveland, Kannapolis City, Moore, Watauga

2004 State 11.1 Dare, Winston-Salem/Forsyth 11.0 Ashe, Asheville City, Cabarrus, McDowell, Polk

2006 State 10.9 Burke, Guilford, Henderson, Mooresville City, Pender, Transylvania2003, 2007 State 10.7 Alamance-Burlington, Avery, Cumberland, Davidson, Davie, Harnett, Haywood, Hickory City, Johnston

Lincoln Charter**, Lincoln, Newton-Conover City, Rockingham, Thomasville City, Union Academy**, Wayn 10.5 Alexander, Buncombe, Carteret, Craven, Durham, Franklin, Montgomery, New Hanover, Onslow, Orange River Mill Academy**, Rocky Mount Prep Sch**, Sampson, Woods Charter**

2005 State 10.3 Caldwell, Catawba, Duplin, Gaston, Granville, Iredell-Statesville, Jackson, Martin, Northampton, Stokes Warren, Wilkes, Yadkin 10.1 Chatham, Clover Garden**, Gates, Surry, Swain, Yancey 10.0 Clinton City, Crossroads Charter**, Elizabeth City/Pasquotank, Lee, Mitchell, Pamlico, Pitt, Rowan-Salisbury, Stanly, Wilson 9.9 Columbus, Graham, Randolph, Roxboro Community** 9.7 Alleghany, C.G. Woodson**, Cherokee County, Currituck, Edgecombe, Hertford, Hoke, Hyde, Jones, Lenoir, Lexington City, Madison, Union, Washington 9.5 Anson, Edenton/Chowan, Macon, Perquimans, Richmond, Robeson, Rutherford, Scotland 9.3 Beaufort, Caswell, Greene, Nash-Rocky Mount, Pace Academy**, Tyrrell, Whiteville City 9.1 Person 9.0 Bertie 8.9 East Wake Academy**, Piedmont Community** 8.7 Bladen, Community Partners High**, Vance, Weldon City 8.5 New Century Charter** … 8.1 Kestrel Heights** 7.9 Cape Lookout Marine**, Halifax 7.7 Crossnore Academy** 7.5 Haliwa-Saponi Tribal** 7.3 Kennedy Charter** 7.1 Provisions Academy** … 6.0 Laurinburg Homework**

Notes: †Scale scores are rounded up to the nearest two-tenths of a point. *Performance data are not reported when number tested is fewer than five. **Denotes a charter school. For reporting purposes the charter school name has been abbreviated; the complete charter school name can be found in the Appendix. Beginning in 2003, data are reported using the revised standard and are generated using the new scoring model. Data for 2003 are from the pilot test administration. Data received from LEAs and charter schools after August 21, 2007 are not included in this table. Prepared by the NCDPI Division of Accountability Services/Test Development Section.


Average Total Writing Score, by LEA,Grade 10

234

Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


State 97,796 51.4 1,206 33.9 2,157 58.6 27,618 37.5 5,905 34.8 2,070 57.6 58,840 59.4Western Region 6,947 49.2 77 40.3 52 53.8 423 26.5 300 30.3 123 49.6 5,972 51.9Asheville City 308 50.0 1 * 4 * 103 25.2 17 41.2 12 33.3 171 67.3Buncombe 1,862 50.2 8 62.5 13 76.9 116 25.0 84 33.3 47 48.9 1,594 52.6Cherokee County 266 43.6 6 66.7 0 * 2 * 7 28.6 1 * 250 43.6Clay 108 65.7 1 * 0 * 0 * 0 * 1 * 106 65.1Graham 65 40.0 7 28.6 1 * 0 * 1 * 1 * 55 41.8Haywood 531 52.5 3 * 2 * 2 * 14 7.1 8 12.5 502 54.6Henderson 876 56.1 6 50.0 12 50.0 31 41.9 82 30.5 18 50.0 727 59.8Jackson 269 42.4 22 22.7 3 * 5 60.0 6 33.3 3 * 230 43.9Macon 290 37.9 0 * 3 * 2 * 11 9.1 1 * 273 39.6Madison 186 31.2 0 * 0 * 0 * 6 33.3 1 * 179 30.7McDowell 450 58.0 1 * 8 37.5 14 50.0 15 46.7 2 * 410 59.3Mitchell 154 48.7 0 * 0 * 0 * 5 20.0 1 * 148 49.3Polk 173 60.1 0 * 0 * 12 25.0 5 20.0 7 71.4 149 63.8Rutherford 726 39.0 0 * 2 * 115 21.7 28 28.6 13 30.8 568 43.1Swain 141 40.4 20 50.0 0 * 2 * 5 40.0 1 * 113 38.9Transylvania 285 58.9 2 * 3 * 13 23.1 6 50.0 3 * 258 60.9Yancey 211 43.1 0 * 1 * 3 * 8 12.5 2 * 197 43.7Thomas Jefferson** 46 60.9 0 * 0 * 3 * 0 * 1 * 42 61.9

Notes: *Performance data are not reported when number tested is fewer than five. Performance data that are less than or equal to 5.0 percent, or greater than or equal to 95.0 percent, are not displayed The ethnic categories may not sum to total number tested because ethnic category may not have been coded on some student answer sheet **Denotes a charter school. For reporting purposes the charter school name has been abbreviated; the complete name can be found in the Appendix Alternate assessment data by LEA school are available at http://report.ncsu.edu/ncpublicschools

Data received from LEAs and charter schools after August 21, 2007 are not included in this table Prepared by the NCDPI Division of Accountability Services/Test Development Section


Grade 10, by LEA and EthnicityWestern Region

Total



American Indian White

235

Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


State 97,796 51.4 49,370 58.5 48,426 44.1 1,762 30.3 96,034 51.8 985 32.4 260 26.9 517 28.0Western Region 6,947 49.2 3,444 58.4 3,503 40.3 45 31.1 6,902 49.3 35 34.3 9 22.2 1 *Asheville City 308 50.0 164 61.0 144 37.5 0 * 308 50.0 0 * 0 * 0 *Buncombe 1,862 50.2 920 57.5 942 43.0 1 * 1,861 50.2 0 * 0 * 1 *Cherokee County 266 43.6 135 57.8 131 29.0 0 * 266 43.6 0 * 0 * 0 *Clay 108 65.7 63 77.8 45 48.9 0 * 108 65.7 0 * 0 * 0 *Graham 65 40.0 40 47.5 25 28.0 0 * 65 40.0 0 * 0 * 0 *Haywood 531 52.5 253 65.2 278 41.0 0 * 531 52.5 0 * 0 * 0 *Henderson 876 56.1 433 60.7 443 51.5 0 * 876 56.1 0 * 0 * 0 *Jackson 269 42.4 122 54.1 147 32.7 19 21.1 250 44.0 19 21.1 0 * 0 *Macon 290 37.9 135 45.2 155 31.6 16 50.0 274 37.2 16 50.0 0 * 0 *Madison 186 31.2 93 47.3 93 15.1 0 * 186 31.2 0 * 0 * 0 *McDowell 450 58.0 215 71.2 235 46.0 0 * 450 58.0 0 * 0 * 0 *Mitchell 154 48.7 76 60.5 78 37.2 0 * 154 48.7 0 * 0 * 0 *Polk 173 60.1 88 68.2 85 51.8 0 * 173 60.1 0 * 0 * 0 *Rutherford 726 39.0 372 47.3 354 30.2 0 * 726 39.0 0 * 0 * 0 *Swain 141 40.4 72 50.0 69 30.4 0 * 141 40.4 0 * 0 * 0 *Transylvania 285 58.9 132 68.9 153 50.3 0 * 285 58.9 0 * 0 * 0 *Yancey 211 43.1 105 57.1 106 29.2 0 * 211 43.1 0 * 0 * 0 *Thomas Jefferson** 46 60.9 26 53.8 20 70.0 9 22.2 37 70.3 0 * 9 22.2 0.0 *




Grade 10, by LEA, Gender, Title I, and Migrant StudentsWestern Region

Total



Female MigrantServed by Title I

236

Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


State 97,796 51.4 1,206 33.9 2,157 58.6 27,618 37.5 5,905 34.8 2,070 57.6 58,840 59.4Northwest Region 15,166 50.9 37 45.9 406 42.6 2,176 34.5 885 31.6 301 53.8 11,361 55.7Alexander 363 50.4 1 * 14 * 21 33.3 17 41.2 2 * 308 54.5Alleghany 108 40.7 0 * 0 * 0 * 9 33.3 2 * 97 41.2Ashe 239 53.6 0 * 0 * 2 * 5 40.0 1 * 231 53.7Avery 141 46.8 0 * 1 * 0 * 3 * 2 * 135 47.4Burke 1,104 55.3 1 * 105 38.1 94 36.2 39 38.5 31 58.1 834 60.3Caldwell 963 45.4 2 * 7 57.1 64 35.9 34 26.5 23 34.8 833 47.1Catawba 1,279 48.6 5 20.0 105 38.1 80 32.5 76 40.8 23 47.8 990 51.7Davidson 1,487 53.0 6 50.0 14 64.3 35 37.1 57 40.4 13 46.2 1,362 53.9Davie 490 51.0 3 * 1 * 43 23.3 35 11.4 5 60.0 403 56.8Elkin City 93 67.7 0 * 0 * 4 * 8 37.5 0 * 81 70.4Hickory City 337 47.8 0 * 20 40.0 81 25.9 29 10.3 16 43.8 191 63.9Iredell-Statesville 1,473 44.9 3 * 36 33.3 228 22.4 85 31.8 22 63.6 1,099 50.7Lexington City 182 34.6 0 * 14 21.4 84 20.2 24 20.8 10 60.0 50 64.0Mooresville City 372 57.5 2 * 6 33.3 61 31.1 9 55.6 3 * 291 63.9Mount Airy City 146 61.6 0 * 3 * 19 42.1 6 50.0 5 40.0 113 67.3Newton-Conover City 204 47.1 1 * 16 31.3 34 17.6 22 22.7 5 40.0 126 61.9Stokes 534 42.7 2 * 0 * 35 22.9 12 25.0 16 43.8 469 44.3Surry 607 42.7 1 * 4 * 20 35.0 65 29.2 7 42.9 510 44.7Thomasville City 172 46.5 1 * 2 * 102 41.2 23 34.8 4 * 40 62.5Watauga 371 56.1 0 * 7 71.4 2 * 4 * 3 * 355 56.3Wilkes 677 47.3 1 * 2 * 23 26.1 36 27.8 8 12.5 607 49.6Winston-Salem/Forsyth 3,354 57.8 7 42.9 49 77.6 1,114 39.4 241 32.4 95 66.3 1,848 71.2Yadkin 445 44.9 0 * 0 * 20 20.0 45 37.8 5 40.0 375 47.2C.G. Woodson** 10 50.0 0 * 0 * 10 50.0 0 * 0 * 0 *Crossnore Academy** 14 14.3 1 * 0 * 0 * 1 * 0 * 12 16.7Grandfather Academy** 1 * 0 * 0 * 0 * 0 * 0 * 1 *



Northwest Region




237

Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


IIINumber Tested


State 97,796 51.4 49,370 58.5 48,426 44.1 1,762 30.3 96,034 51.8 985 32.4 260 26.9 517 28.0Northwest Region 15,165 50.9 7,639 58.5 7,526 43.1 65 21.5 15,100 51.0 51 15.7 10 50.0 4 *Alexander 363 50.4 180 58.9 183 42.1 0 * 363 50.4 0 * 0 * 0 *Alleghany 108 40.7 56 46.4 52 34.6 2 * 106 41.5 0 * 0 * 2 *Ashe 239 53.6 106 64.2 133 45.1 0 * 239 53.6 0 * 0 * 0 *Avery 141 46.8 79 57.0 62 33.9 0 * 141 46.8 0 * 0 * 0 *Burke 1,103 55.3 572 65.2 531 44.6 0 * 1,103 55.3 0 * 0 * 0 *Caldwell 963 45.4 483 52.8 480 37.9 15 20.0 948 45.8 15 20.0 0 * 0 *Catawba 1,279 48.6 638 58.0 641 39.2 0 * 1,279 48.6 0 * 0 * 0 *Davidson 1,487 53.0 734 60.6 753 45.6 0 * 1,487 53.0 0 * 0 * 0 *Davie 490 51.0 257 56.4 233 45.1 0 * 490 51.0 0 * 0 * 0 *Elkin City 93 67.7 57 77.2 36 52.8 0 * 93 67.7 0 * 0 * 0 *Hickory City 337 47.8 185 53.0 152 41.4 21 9.5 316 50.3 21 9.5 0 * 0 *Iredell-Statesville 1,473 44.9 695 51.8 778 38.7 0 * 1,473 44.9 0 * 0 * 0 *Lexington City 182 34.6 97 38.1 85 30.6 0 * 182 34.6 0 * 0 * 0 *Mooresville City 372 57.5 191 61.8 181 53.0 0 * 372 57.5 0 * 0 * 0 *Mount Airy City 146 61.6 73 69.9 73 53.4 0 * 146 61.6 0 * 0 * 0 *Newton-Conover City 204 47.1 103 53.4 101 40.6 0 * 204 47.1 0 * 0 * 0 *Stokes 534 42.7 282 52.5 252 31.7 0 * 534 42.7 0 * 0 * 0 *Surry 607 42.7 301 51.2 306 34.3 1 * 606 42.6 0 * 0 * 1 *Thomasville City 172 46.5 72 62.5 100 35.0 0 * 172 46.5 0 * 0 * 0 *Watauga 371 56.1 182 62.1 189 50.3 0 * 371 56.1 0 * 0 * 0 *Wilkes 677 47.3 335 58.2 342 36.5 0 * 677 47.3 0 * 0 * 0 *Winston-Salem/Forsyth 3,354 57.8 1,724 63.5 1,630 51.7 1 * 3,353 57.8 0 * 0 * 1 *Yadkin 445 44.9 225 53.8 220 35.9 0 * 445 44.9 0 * 0 * 0 *C.G. Woodson** 10 50.0 4 * 6 50.0 10 50.0 0 * 0 * 10 50.0 0 *Crossnore Academy** 14 14.3 7 28.6 7 * 14 14.3 0 * 14 14.3 0 * 0 *Grandfather Academy** 1 * 1 * 1 * 0 * 1 * 0 * 0 *



Northwest Region


Table 46d. North Carolina Testing ProgramNorth Carolina General Writing Assessment, 2006-07,


238

Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


State 97,796 51.4 1,206 33.9 2,157 58.6 27,618 37.5 5,905 34.8 2,070 57.6 58,840 59.4Southwest Region 22,001 53.3 190 35.8 592 56.8 6,491 41.8 1,511 36.1 373 59.0 12,844 61.0Anson 314 32.5 0 * 9 33.3 206 23.3 4 * 0 * 95 53.7Cabarrus 1,785 53.4 5 * 26 61.5 290 37.9 114 32.5 51 52.9 1,299 58.4Charlotte/Mecklenburg 7,883 64.1 39 53.8 380 63.9 3,306 52.5 789 41.6 117 71.8 3,252 81.2Cleveland 1,190 60.9 1 * 14 71.4 330 42.4 24 45.8 20 85.0 801 68.2Gaston 2,417 47.5 3 * 27 44.4 493 33.5 89 29.2 29 48.3 1,776 52.4Hoke 414 33.8 47 19.1 3 * 205 30.7 30 40.0 15 53.3 114 42.1Kannapolis City 260 63.1 0 * 4 * 89 55.1 30 36.7 9 44.4 128 76.6Lincoln 905 53.6 1 * 4 * 54 31.5 56 33.9 11 36.4 779 56.9Montgomery 299 51.5 0 * 12 66.7 86 32.6 44 43.2 4 * 153 63.4Moore 811 58.2 4 * 13 46.2 150 36.7 40 35.0 19 52.6 585 65.8Richmond 520 35.0 19 42.1 8 37.5 234 26.9 15 13.3 4 * 240 43.3Rowan-Salisbury 1,466 42.5 7 28.6 22 36.4 293 26.6 82 20.7 32 62.5 1,030 48.3Scotland 424 36.3 57 28.1 7 42.9 179 25.7 7 42.9 5 60.0 169 49.1Stanly 714 43.1 0 * 33 21.2 121 20.7 17 23.5 15 40.0 528 50.4Union 2,332 39.9 3 * 30 43.3 363 19.8 165 23.6 41 46.3 1,730 45.5Crossroads Charter** 42 35.7 0 * 0 * 39 35.9 2 * 0 * 1 *Gray Stone Day** 74 75.7 2 * 0 * 1 * 1 * 0 * 70 75.7Kennedy Charter** 32 9.4 0 * 0 * 31 9.7 0 * 0 * 1 *Laurinburg Homework** 13 7.7 2 * 0 * 9 * 0 * 0 * 2 *Lincoln Charter** 41 53.7 0 * 0 * 2 * 0 * 0 * 39 51.3Piedmont Community** 24 25.0 0 * 0 * 7 42.9 0 * 1 * 16 18.8Union Academy** 41 53.7 0 * 0 * 3 * 2 * 0 * 36 58.3

Notes: *Performance data are not reported when number tested is fewer than five. Performance data that are less than or equal to 5.0 percent, or greater than or equal to 95.0 percent, are not displayed. The ethnic categories may not sum to total number tested because ethnic category may not have been coded on some student answer sheet **Denotes a charter school. For reporting purposes the charter school name has been abbreviated; the complete name can be found in the Appendix Alternate assessment data by LEA school are available at http://report.ncsu.edu/ncpublicschools



Southwest Region

Total American Indian


Table 46e. North Carolina Testing ProgramNorth Carolina General Writing Assessment, 2006-07,


White

239

Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


State 97,796 51.4 49,370 58.5 48,426 44.1 1,762 30.3 96,034 51.8 985 32.4 260 26.9 517 28.0 Southwest Region 22,001 53.3 11,130 60.2 10,871 46.2 86 22.1 21,915 53.4 85 22.4 0 * 1 *Anson 314 32.5 156 41.7 158 23.4 0 * 314 32.5 0 * 0 * 0 *Cabarrus 1,785 53.4 880 61.3 905 45.7 0 * 1,785 53.4 0 * 0 * 0 *Charlotte/Mecklenburg 7,883 64.1 4,130 69.9 3,753 57.8 0 * 7,883 64.1 0 * 0 * 0 *Cleveland 1,190 60.9 605 66.8 585 54.9 0 * 1,190 60.9 0 * 0 * 0 *Gaston 2,417 47.5 1,240 55.2 1,177 39.5 1 * 2,416 47.6 0 * 0 * 1 *Hoke 414 33.8 212 42.5 202 24.8 0 * 414 33.8 0 * 0 * 0 *Kannapolis City 260 63.1 138 69.6 122 55.7 0 * 260 63.1 0 * 0 * 0 *Lincoln 905 53.6 440 64.3 465 43.4 0 * 905 53.6 0 * 0 * 0 *Montgomery 299 51.5 142 56.3 157 47.1 0 * 299 51.5 0 * 0 * 0 *Moore 811 58.2 403 64.3 408 52.2 0 * 811 58.2 0 * 0 * 0 *Richmond 520 35.0 242 43.8 278 27.3 0 * 520 35.0 0 * 0 * 0 *Rowan-Salisbury 1,466 42.5 738 46.7 728 38.2 0 * 1,466 42.5 0 * 0 * 0 *Scotland 424 36.3 200 42.5 224 30.8 0 * 424 36.3 0 * 0 * 0 *Stanly 714 43.1 322 51.9 392 36.0 0 * 714 43.1 0 * 0 * 0 *Union 2,332 39.9 1,141 47.5 1,191 32.7 0 * 2,332 39.9 0 * 0 * 0 *Crossroads Charter** 42 35.7 19 36.8 23 34.8 41 36.6 1 * 41 36.6 0 * 0 *Gray Stone Day** 74 75.7 43 88.4 31 58.1 0 * 74 75.7 0 * 0 * 0 *Kennedy Charter** 32 9.4 17 11.8 15 6.7 31 9.7 1 * 31 9.7 0 * 0 *Laurinburg Homework** 13 7.7 6 16.7 7 * 13 7.7 0 * 13 7.7 0 * 0 *Lincoln Charter** 41 53.7 19 52.6 22 54.5 0 * 41 53.7 0 * 0 * 0 *Piedmont Community** 24 25.0 16 31.3 8 12.5 0 * 24 25.0 0 * 0 * 0 *Union Academy** 41 53.7 21 42.9 20 65.0 0 * 41 53.7 0 * 0 * 0 *




Southwest Region

Total Female


Table 46f. North Carolina Testing ProgramNorth Carolina General Writing Assessment, 2006-07,


MigrantServed by Title I

240

Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


State 97,796 51.4 1,206 33.9 2,157 58.6 27,618 37.5 5,905 34.8 2,070 57.6 58,840 59.4Northeast Region 6,000 40.5 30 26.7 41 56.1 2,795 29.2 151 25.8 66 45.5 2,917 51.9Beaufort 478 34.3 0 * 1 * 166 20.5 17 5.9 8 50.0 286 43.7Bertie 192 26.0 1 * 0 * 167 23.4 0 * 1 * 23 47.8Camden 137 59.1 0 * 2 * 16 75.0 0 * 1 * 118 56.8Currituck 308 41.9 1 * 3 * 26 15.4 3 * 6 50.0 269 44.6Dare 382 59.7 0 * 0 * 11 27.3 16 31.3 5 60.0 350 62.0Edenton/Chowan 197 32.5 0 * 1 * 80 16.3 5 20.0 1 * 110 44.5Edgecombe 487 29.6 0 * 2 * 289 23.5 10 30.0 3 * 183 38.3Elizabeth City/Pasquotank 437 41.6 1 * 4 * 202 30.2 10 10.0 11 45.5 209 54.1Gates 158 39.9 1 * 0 * 61 31.1 1 * 1 * 94 45.7Halifax 324 19.1 16 12.5 0 * 300 19.7 0 * 0 * 8 12.5Hertford 231 33.3 4 * 1 * 174 29.3 4 * 0 * 48 45.8Hyde 50 34.0 0 * 0 * 22 27.3 2 * 0 * 26 38.5Martin 272 43.8 1 * 1 * 135 33.3 7 14.3 3 * 125 56.8Northampton 145 49.0 1 * 0 * 108 42.6 1 * 2 * 33 75.8Perquimans 111 26.1 0 * 2 * 36 16.7 4 * 0 * 69 30.4Pitt 1,576 44.3 2 * 21 57.1 710 34.1 65 35.4 19 36.8 759 54.4Roanoke Rapids City 194 66.5 2 * 1 * 35 48.6 2 * 1 * 153 70.6Tyrrell 38 28.9 0 * 0 * 15 26.7 2 * 0 * 21 33.3Washington 151 33.1 0 * 0 * 120 26.7 2 * 2 * 27 59.3Weldon City 64 28.1 0 * 1 * 62 25.8 0 * 0 * 1 *Gaston College Prep** 68 63.2 0 * 1 * 60 63.3 0 * 2 * 5 80.0 Notes: *Performance data are not reported when number tested is fewer than five. Performance data that are less than or equal to 5.0 percent, or greater than or equal to 95.0 percent, are not displayed The ethnic categories may not sum to total number tested because ethnic category may not have been coded on some student answer sheet **Denotes a charter school. For reporting purposes the charter school name has been abbreviated; the complete name can be found in the Appendix Alternate assessment data by LEA school are available at http://report.ncsu.edu/ncpublicschools



Northeast Region



Table 46g. North Carolina Testing ProgramNorth Carolina General Writing Assessment, 2006-07,


241

Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


State 97,796 51.4 49,370 58.5 48,426 44.1 1,762 30.3 96,034 51.8 985 32.4 260 26.9 517 28.0Northeast Region 6,000 40.5 3,057 47.1 2,943 33.6 1,067 27.9 4,933 43.2 402 26.6 188 26.1 477 29.8Beaufort 478 34.3 243 39.9 235 28.5 0 * 478 34.3 0 * 0 * 0 *Bertie 192 26.0 93 34.4 99 18.2 188 26.1 4 * 0 * 188 26.1 0 *Camden 137 59.1 61 67.2 76 52.6 0 * 137 59.1 0 * 0 * 0 *Currituck 308 41.9 151 51.7 157 32.5 0 * 308 41.9 0 * 0 * 0 *Dare 382 59.7 180 71.1 202 49.5 6 33.3 376 60.1 6 33.3 0 * 0 *Edenton/Chowan 197 32.5 101 42.6 96 21.9 0 * 197 32.5 0 * 0 * 0 *Edgecombe 487 29.6 255 38.0 232 20.3 476 29.6 11 27.3 0 * 0 * 476 29.6242 Elizabeth City/Pasquotank 437 41.6 233 47.6 204 34.8 0 * 437 41.6 0 * 0 * 0 *Gates 158 39.9 83 43.4 75 36.0 0 * 158 39.9 0 * 0 * 0 *Halifax 324 19.1 184 22.8 140 14.3 322 18.9 2 * 322 18.9 0 * 0 *Hertford 231 33.3 124 33.9 107 32.7 0 * 231 33.3 0 * 0 * 0 *Hyde 50 34.0 26 34.6 24 33.3 0 * 50 34.0 0 * 0 * 0 *Martin 272 43.8 133 53.4 139 34.5 0 * 272 43.8 0 * 0 * 0 *Northampton 145 49.0 81 50.6 64 46.9 7 28.6 138 50.0 6 16.7 0 * 1 *Perquimans 111 26.1 48 35.4 63 19.0 0 * 111 26.1 0 * 0 * 0 *Pitt 1,576 44.3 790 51.4 786 37.2 0 * 1,576 44.3 0 * 0 * 0 *Roanoke Rapids City 194 66.5 94 74.5 100 59.0 0 * 194 66.5 0 * 0 * 0 *Tyrrell 38 28.9 22 31.8 16 25.0 0 * 38 28.9 0 * 0 * 0 *Washington 151 33.1 77 36.4 74 29.7 0 * 151 33.1 0 * 0 * 0 *Weldon City 64 28.1 39 38.5 25 12.0 0 * 64 28.1 0 * 0 * 0 *Gaston College Prep** 68 63.2 39 71.8 29 51.7 68 63.2 0 * 68 63.2 0 * 0 * Notes: *Performance data are not reported when number tested is fewer than five. Performance data that are less than or equal to 5.0 percent, or greater than or equal to 95.0 percent, are not displayed. The gender, Title I, and Migrant categories may not sum to total number tested because these categories may not have been coded on some student answer sheets. **Denotes a charter school. For reporting purposes the charter school name has been abbreviated; the complete name can be found in the Appendix. Alternate assessment data by LEA school are available at http://report.ncsu.edu/ncpublicschools. Data received from LEAs and charter schools after August 21, 2007 are not included in this table. Prepared by the NCDPI Division of Accountability Services/Test Development Section.

Schoolwide Title I Program Targeted Assistance

Northeast Region

Total Female MigrantMale Not Served by Title IServed by Title I


Table 46h. North Carolina Testing ProgramNorth Carolina General Writing Assessment, 2006-07,


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


State 97,796 51.4 1,206 33.9 2,157 58.6 27,618 37.5 5,905 34.8 2,070 57.6 58,840 59.4Southeast Region 16,600 47.8 750 31.2 175 58.9 5,926 36.5 885 40.9 438 55.5 8,426 57.3Bladen 423 23.4 2 * 0 * 214 14.0 19 * 5 60.0 183 35.5Brunswick 732 59.6 7 28.6 3 * 170 43.5 26 50.0 15 73.3 511 65.6Carteret 640 52.3 3 * 7 57.1 37 37.8 10 30.0 14 35.7 569 54.0Clinton City 261 46.0 9 55.6 2 * 115 39.1 27 29.6 7 57.1 101 55.4Columbus 510 35.7 30 23.3 0 * 209 32.1 10 10.0 2 * 259 40.5Craven 953 49.0 1 * 13 46.2 310 36.5 20 55.0 24 41.7 585 55.9Cumberland 4,023 52.2 61 49.2 69 63.8 1,982 41.9 262 56.5 142 66.2 1,507 63.4Duplin 571 46.2 0 * 1 * 205 35.6 87 39.1 3 * 275 56.4Greene 206 35.0 0 * 1 * 98 27.6 15 13.3 2 * 90 47.8Jones 96 34.4 0 * 0 * 62 33.9 2 * 3 * 29 37.9Lenoir 717 36.8 1 * 6 * 344 27.3 23 <=5% 7 28.6 336 47.9New Hanover 1,747 49.6 5 20.0 20 50.0 402 25.1 56 33.9 39 41.0 1,225 58.7Onslow 1,573 49.6 14 21.4 20 70.0 387 40.6 84 42.9 106 50.0 962 53.7Pamlico 152 42.1 0 * 1 * 37 21.6 6 16.7 2 * 106 50.9Pender 571 54.6 0 * 1 * 135 37.8 21 23.8 11 54.5 403 61.8Robeson 1,414 34.7 602 29.2 12 50.0 417 26.4 57 36.8 12 41.7 314 55.1Sampson 487 49.9 10 40.0 0 * 165 47.3 68 30.9 11 72.7 233 56.7Wayne 1,321 56.2 2 * 16 31.3 559 46.0 89 42.7 30 70.0 625 67.2Whiteville City 171 34.5 2 * 3 * 74 18.9 1 * 2 * 89 46.1Cape Lookout Marine** 32 12.5 1 * 0 * 4 * 2 * 1 * 24 16.7

Notes: *Performance data are not reported when number tested is fewer than five. Performance data that are less than or equal to 5.0 percent, or greater than or equal to 95.0 percent, are not displayed The ethnic categories may not sum to total number tested because ethnic category may not have been coded on some student answer sheet **Denotes a charter school. For reporting purposes the charter school name has been abbreviated; the complete name can be found in the Appendix Alternate assessment data by LEA school are available at http://report.ncsu.edu/ncpublicschools



Southeast Region


Table 46i. North Carolina Testing ProgramNorth Carolina General Writing Assessment, 2006-07,


243

Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


State 97,796 51.4 49,370 58.5 48,426 44.1 1,762 30.3 96,034 51.8 985 32.4 260 26.9 517 28.0Southeast Region 16,600 47.8 8,334 55.7 8,266 39.8 447 39.4 16,153 48.0 400 42.8 32 12.5 15 6.7

Bladen 423 23.4 198 27.3 225 20.0 5 * 418 23.7 1 * 0 * 4 *

Brunswick 732 59.6 356 73.6 376 46.3 0 * 732 59.6 0 * 0 * 0 *

Carteret 640 52.3 316 62.3 324 42.6 0 * 640 52.3 0 * 0 * 0 *

Clinton City 261 46.0 140 52.9 121 38.0 0 * 261 46.0 0 * 0 * 0 *

Columbus 510 35.7 224 47.3 286 26.6 2 * 508 35.8 2 * 0 * 0 *

Craven 953 49.0 495 60.8 458 36.2 0 * 953 49.0 0 * 0 * 0 *244 Cumberland 4,023 52.2 1,976 58.2 2,047 46.5 388 43.6 3,635 53.2 388 43.6 0 * 0 *

Duplin 571 46.2 303 55.1 268 36.2 0 * 571 46.2 0 * 0 * 0 *

Greene 206 35.0 103 38.8 103 31.1 0 * 206 35.0 0 * 0 * 0 *

Jones 96 34.4 40 32.5 56 35.7 0 * 96 34.4 0 * 0 * 0 *

Lenoir 717 36.8 365 42.2 352 31.3 9 22.2 708 37.0 9 22.2 0 * 0 *

New Hanover 1,747 49.6 899 59.1 848 39.5 1 * 1,746 49.6 0 * 0 * 1 *

Onslow 1,573 49.6 792 57.4 781 41.6 0 * 1,573 49.6 0 * 0 * 0 *

Pamlico 152 42.1 72 51.4 80 33.8 0 * 152 42.1 0 * 0 * 0 *

Pender 571 54.6 270 63.0 301 47.2 4 * 567 55.0 0 * 0 * 4 *

Robeson 1,414 34.7 758 39.7 656 29.0 2 * 1,412 34.8 0 * 0 * 2 *

Sampson 487 49.9 241 60.6 246 39.4 3 * 484 50.0 0 * 0 * 3 *

Wayne 1,321 56.2 688 64.8 633 46.9 0 * 1,321 56.2 0 * 0 * 0 *

Whiteville City 171 34.5 85 41.2 86 27.9 1 * 170 34.7 0 * 0 * 1 *Cape Lookout Marine** 32 12.5 13 30.8 19 * 32 12.5 0 * 0 * 32 12.5 0 *



Southeast Region


Table 46j. North Carolina Testing ProgramNorth Carolina General Writing Assessment, 2006-07,


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


State 97,796 51.4 1,206 33.9 2,157 58.6 27,618 37.5 5,905 34.8 2,070 57.6 58,840 59.4Central Region 31,082 54.8 122 41.8 891 67.5 9,807 38.8 2,173 33.9 769 61.9 17,320 65.6Alamance-Burlington 1,535 52.8 3 * 15 60.0 364 40.7 151 32.5 28 46.4 974 60.6Caswell 215 31.6 1 * 1 * 94 20.2 2 * 9 44.4 108 40.7Chapel Hill-Carrboro City 887 79.3 1 * 83 80.7 120 59.2 54 53.7 38 86.8 591 84.9Chatham 541 47.0 1 * 2 * 108 30.6 80 21.3 6 66.7 344 58.1Durham 2,094 47.8 4 * 48 64.6 1,117 38.2 162 26.5 57 59.6 706 66.0Franklin 533 50.3 1 * 2 * 195 40.5 42 42.9 7 85.7 286 57.0Granville 600 45.3 0 * 4 * 232 35.8 33 24.2 11 54.5 320 54.1Guilford 5,208 57.1 24 54.2 218 50.5 2,133 43.7 275 32.7 165 58.2 2,393 72.5Harnett 1,275 52.2 9 33.3 12 83.3 352 38.6 104 34.6 47 48.9 751 60.9Johnston 1,916 55.0 7 14.3 11 81.8 383 36.3 194 35.1 36 58.3 1,285 63.5Lee 635 43.6 4 * 7 42.9 157 30.6 98 30.6 14 78.6 355 52.1Nash-Rocky Mount 1,265 34.7 4 * 11 36.4 618 24.6 64 28.1 21 38.1 547 46.8Orange 584 49.7 2 * 6 * 119 35.3 34 23.5 11 54.5 412 54.9Person 416 28.1 2 * 1 * 150 17.3 15 20.0 7 28.6 241 34.9Randolph 1,567 40.5 6 * 21 38.1 109 25.7 160 16.9 33 30.3 1,238 45.4245 Rockingham 1,014 54.2 6 33.3 4 * 242 38.4 35 40.0 23 60.9 704 60.4Vance 558 27.4 0 * 2 * 340 20.3 28 14.3 4 * 184 42.9Wake 8,726 66.1 28 64.3 425 75.8 2,299 45.5 584 43.2 225 74.2 5,165 76.7Warren 199 52.8 8 37.5 0 * 144 46.5 3 * 6 83.3 38 73.7Wilson 817 43.5 0 * 11 63.6 434 31.6 45 37.8 8 37.5 319 59.9Clover Garden** 28 32.1 0 * 0 * 1 * 0 * 1 * 26 34.6Community Partners High** 23 39.1 0 * 0 * 6 16.7 0 * 0 * 17 47.1East Wake Academy** 47 31.9 0 * 0 * 6 16.7 2 * 1 * 38 34.2Franklin Academy** 72 68.1 0 * 0 * 1 * 2 * 0 * 69 68.1Haliwa-Saponi Tribal** 12 33.3 10 30.0 0 * 2 * 0 * 0 * 0 *J.H. Baker Jr High** 1 * 0 * 0 * 1 * 0 * 0 * 0 *Kestrel Heights** 28 21.4 0 * 0 * 20 25.0 3 * 1 * 4 *New Century Charter** 14 28.6 1 * 0 * 1 * 0 * 0 * 12 33.3Pace Academy** 16 50.0 0 * 0 * 4 * 1 * 1 * 10 50.0Provisions Academy** 12 8.3 0 * 0 * 10 * 0 * 0 * 2 *Raleigh Charter HS** 129 89.9 0 * 6 * 4 * 0 * 5 * 114 89.5River Mill Academy** 36 47.2 0 * 0 * 9 55.6 1 * 3 * 23 34.8Rocky Mount Prep Sch** 44 54.5 0 * 1 * 28 46.4 1 * 1 * 13 69.2Roxboro Community** 13 30.8 0 * 0 * 3 * 0 * 0 * 10 30.0Woods Charter** 22 40.9 0 * 0 * 1 * 0 * 0 * 21 42.9

Notes: *Performance data are not reported when number tested is fewer than five. Performance data that are less than or equal to 5.0 percent, or greater than or equal to 95.0 percent, are not displayed The ethnic categories may not sum to total number tested because ethnic category may not have been coded on some student answer sheets. **Denotes a charter school. For reporting purposes the charter school name has been abbreviated; the complete name can be found in the Appendix Alternate assessment data by LEA school are available at http://report.ncsu.edu/ncpublicschools.


Hispanic Multi-Racial White




Grade 10, by LEA and EthnicityCentral Region

Total American Indian Asian Black

Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


Number Tested


State 97,796 51.4 49,370 58.5 48,426 44.1 1,762 30.3 96,034 51.8 985 32.4 260 26.9 517 28.0Central Region 31,082 54.8 15,765 61.0 15,317 48.4 52 25.0 31,030 54.9 12 16.7 21 47.6 19 5.3

Alamance-Burlington 1,535 52.8 811 61.9 724 42.7 0 * 1,535 52.8 0 * 0 * 0 *Caswell 215 31.6 104 40.4 111 23.4 0 * 215 31.6 0 * 0 * 0 *Chapel Hill-Carrboro City 887 79.3 438 84.0 449 74.6 0 * 887 79.3 0 * 0 * 0 *Chatham 541 47.0 273 57.1 268 36.6 4 * 537 47.3 0 * 0 * 4 *Durham 2,094 47.8 1,049 51.5 1,045 44.1 0 * 2,094 47.8 0 * 0 * 0 *Franklin 533 50.3 263 59.7 270 41.1 0 * 533 50.3 0 * 0 * 0 *Granville 600 45.3 316 51.6 284 38.4 1 * 599 45.4 0 * 0 * 1 *Guilford 5,208 57.1 2,683 63.4 2,525 50.5 0 * 5,208 57.1 0 * 0 * 0 *Harnett 1,275 52.2 641 60.1 634 44.2 3 * 1,272 52.3 0 * 0 * 3 *Johnston 1,916 55.0 959 61.0 957 49.0 2 * 1,914 55.1 0 * 0 * 2 *Lee 635 43.6 299 52.5 336 35.7 5 * 630 44.0 0 * 0 * 5 *Nash-Rocky Mount 1,265 34.7 640 41.1 625 28.2 2 * 1,263 34.8 0 * 0 * 2 *Orange 584 49.7 286 59.1 298 40.6 0 * 584 49.7 0 * 0 * 0 *Person 416 28.1 229 31.4 187 24.1 0 * 416 28.1 0 * 0 * 0 *246 Randolph 1,567 40.5 778 47.3 789 33.8 1 * 1,566 40.5 0 * 0 * 1 *Rockingham 1,014 54.2 470 62.1 544 47.4 0 * 1,014 54.2 0 * 0 * 0 *Vance 558 27.4 292 29.1 266 25.6 0 * 558 27.4 0 * 0 * 0 *Wake 8,726 66.1 4,430 71.5 4,296 60.5 1 * 8,725 66.1 0 * 0 * 1 *Warren 199 52.8 99 63.6 100 42.0 0 * 199 52.8 0 * 0 * 0 *Wilson 817 43.5 429 52.4 388 33.5 0 * 817 43.5 0 * 0 * 0 *Clover Garden** 28 32.1 15 40.0 13 23.1 0 * 28 32.1 0 * 0 * 0 *Community Partners High** 23 39.1 9 44.4 14 35.7 0 * 23 39.1 0 * 0 * 0 *East Wake Academy** 47 31.9 29 41.4 18 16.7 0 * 47 31.9 0 * 0 * 0 *Franklin Academy** 72 68.1 43 74.4 29 58.6 0 * 72 68.1 0 * 0 * 0 *Haliwa-Saponi Tribal** 12 33.3 9 22.2 3 * 0 * 12 33.3 0 * 0 * 0 *J.H. Baker Jr High** 1 * 0 * 1 * 1 * 0 * 1 * 0 * 0 *Kestrel Heights** 28 21.4 16 18.8 12 25.0 0 * 28 21.4 0 * 0 * 0 *New Century Charter** 14 28.6 5 20.0 9 33.3 0 * 14 28.6 0 * 0 * 0 *Pace Academy** 16 50.0 9 55.6 7 42.9 0 * 16 50.0 0 * 0 * 0 *Provisions Academy** 12 8.3 4 * 8 * 11 9.1 1 * 11 9.1 0 * 0 *Raleigh Charter HS** 129 89.9 72 93.1 57 86.0 0 * 129 89.9 0 * 0 * 0 *River Mill Academy** 36 47.2 23 56.5 13 30.8 0 * 36 47.2 0 * 0 * 0 *Rocky Mount Prep Sch** 44 54.5 23 47.8 21 61.9 21 47.6 23 60.9 0 * 21 47.6 0 *Roxboro Community** 13 30.8 8 37.5 5 20.0 0 * 13 30.8 0 * 0 * 0 *Woods Charter** 22 40.9 11 27.3 11 54.5 0 * 22 40.9 0 * 0 * 0 *

Notes: *Performance data are not reported when number tested is fewer than five. Performance data that are less than or equal to 5.0 percent, or greater than or equal to 95.0, percent are not displayed. The gender, Title I, and Migrant categories may not sum to total number tested because these categories may not have been coded on some student answer sheets. **Denotes a charter school. For reporting purposes the charter school name has been abbreviated; the complete name can be found in the Appendix. Alternate assessment data by LEA school are available at http://report.ncsu.edu/ncpublicschools. Data received from LEAs and charter schools after August 21, 2007 are not included in this table. Prepared by the NCDPI Division of Accountability Services/Test Development Section.

Targeted Assistance Migrant




Grade 10, by LEA, Gender, Title I, and Migrant StudentsCentral Region

Total Female Male Not Served by Title ISchoolwide Title I

ProgramServed by Title I

247

Appendices

249

Appendix A


Grade Levels and Types of Writing by Year


251

Appendix A

North Carolina, believing that an emphasis on writing instruction was needed and that the measurement of writing would enhance instruction, began a statewide writing assessment program in 1983-84. Since that time, students' writing skills have improved as evident by assessment results, comments from university personnel, and business leaders. Changes in the program have occurred over time as illustrated below.

Grade Levels and Types of Writing by Year

Year Grade 4 Grade 6 Grade 7 Grade 8 Grade 9 Grade 10 1983-84 Descriptive Persuasive 1984-85 Expository Expository 1985-86 Expository Persuasive 1986-87 Descriptive Expository 1987-88 Expository Persuasive 1988-89 Descriptive Expository 1989-90 Expository Persuasive 1990-91 Descriptive Expository 1991-92 Expository Persuasive Expository 1992-93 Narrative Descriptive Expository Expository 1993-94 Narrative Expository Persuasive Expository 1994-95 Narrative Expository Expository 1995-96 Narrative Expository Expository 1996-97 Narrative Expository Expository

1997-98 Narrative Expository Expository

1998-99 Narrative Expository Expository 1999-00 Narrative Expository Expository 2000-01 Narrative Expository Expository 2001-02 Narrative Expository 2002-03 Narrative Argumentative Informational 2003-04 Narrative Argumentative Informational

2004-05 Narrative Argumentative Informational

2005-06 Narrative Argumentative Informational

2006-07 Narrative Argumentative Informational Prepared by the NCDPI Division of Accountability Services/Test Development Section.

253

Appendix B

North Carolina Writing Assessments

1992-93 to 2006-07 Percent of Students Scoring At or Above Level III

Grade 4


Notes: 1The writing standard, scale, and scoring model changed changed effective with the 2002-03 school year and the data are reported from the pilot test administration. The vertical line indicates the NCAAAI was discontinued and replaced by NCCLAS, and NCCLAS and NCEXTEND2 were operationalized in 2005-06. The NCAAP was discontinued and NCEXTEND1 is a newly developed writing assessment in 2006-07. Data received from LEAs and charter schools after August 21, 2007 are not included in this figure. Prepared by the NCDPI Division of Accountability Services/Test Development Section.

255

Appendix B

Figure 16. North Carolina Testing Program North Carolina Writing Assessments, 1992-93 to 2006-07,

Percent of Students Scoring At or Above Level III,Grade 4

49.9 52.7

71.1

22.3

32.8

14.88.1

81.7

49.4

68.8

57.6

46.8

24.0

34.4

52.9 51.548.6 51.7 55.2

38.6 38.7

12.18.1 9.7

50.7

68.2

56.4

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

1992-93 1993-94 1994-95 1995-96 1996-97 1997-98 1998-99 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07

Perc

ent o

f Stu

dent

s

GENERAL ASSESSMENT

NCAAAI

NCAAP

NCCLAS

NCEXTEND2

NCEXTEND1

1

257

Appendix C



Grade 7


Notes: 1The writing standard, scale, and scoring model changed effective with the 2002-03 school year and the data are reported from the pilot administration. The vertical line indicates the NCAAAI was discontinued and replaced by NCCLAS, and NCCLAS and NCEXTEND2 were operationalized in 2005-06. The NCAAP was discontinued and NCEXTEND1 is a newly developed writing assessment in 2006-07. Data received from LEAs and charter schools after August 21, 2007 are not included in this figure. Prepared by the NCDPI Division of Accountability Services/Test Development Section.

Appendix C

259


Figure 17. North Carolina Testing Program North Carolina Writing Assessments, 1995-96 to 2006-07,

50.849.5

72.7

33.6

7.5

83.9

46.2

45.5 46.7

62.9

73.271.970.3

62.5

54.959.4

40.9

6.511.7 13.0

58.0

62.7

27.0

4.7

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

1995-96 1996-97 1997-98 1998-99 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07

Perc

ent o

f Stu

dent

s

NCAAAI

GENERALASSESSMENT

NCAAP

NCCLAS

NCEXTEND2

1

NCEXTEND1

261

Appendix D



Grade 10


was an English II end-of-course test administered at the end of English II courses which are typically offered at grade 10.

The NCAAP was discontinued and the NCEXTEND2 OCS and the NCEXTEND1 assessments were operationalized in 2006-07. Data received from LEAs and charter schools after August 21, 2007 are not included in this figure. Prepared by the NCDPI Division of Accountablility Services/Test Development Section.

2The writing standard, scale, and scoring model changed effective with the 2002-03 school year and the data from 2002-03 are reported from the pilot test administration.

Appendix D

263

Figure 18. North Carolina Testing ProgramNorth Carolina Writing Assessments, 1991-92 to 2006-07,


Notes: 1No writing assessment was administered in grade 10 during the 2001-02 school year. Prior to 2001-02, the writing assessment administered at grade 10

The vertical line indicates the NCAAAI was discontinued and replaced by NCCLAS in 2005-06.

51.4

62.8

28.8

83.8

53.353.9

47.852.5

39.9

58.056.8

22.326.8

32.3

38.6

48.549.7

46.0

9.811.17.9

67.1

53.157.8

50.0

29.8

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

1991-92 1992-93 1993-94 1994-95 1995-96 1996-97 1997-98 1998-99 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07

Perc

ent o

f Stu

dent

s

1 2

GENERAL ASSESSMENT

NCAAAI

NCAAPNCCLAS

NCEXTEND2 OCS

NCEXTEND1

265

Appendix E

List of North Carolina Charter Schools, 2006-07


Alpha Academy (K-8) Metrolina Regional Scholars' Academy (K-8) American Renaissance (K-8) Millennium Charter Academy (K-7)Arapahoe Charter School (K-8) Mountain Discovery Charter (K-8)Arts Based Elementary (K-5) Neuse Charter School (K-5)ArtSpace Charter School (K-8) New Century School (9-12)Bethany Community Middle (6-8) Omuteko Gwamaziima (K-8) Bethel Hill Charter School (K-6) Orange Charter School (K-8)Brevard Academy (K-8) PACE Academy (9-12)Bridges (K-8) Phoenix Academy (K-9)Cape Fear Center for Inquiry (K-8) Piedmont Community School (K-11)Cape Lookout Marine Science (9-12) Pine Lake Preparatory (K-2)Carolina International School (K-10) PreEminent Charter School (K-8) Carter Community School (K-8) Provisions Academy (6-12)Casa Esperanza Montessori (K-6) Quality Education Academy (3-8)Charlotte Secondary School (6) Queen's Grant Community Schools (K-8)Charter Day School (K-8) Quest Academy (K-8)Chatham Charter School (K-8) Raleigh Charter High School (9-12)Children's Community School (K-5) Research Triangle Charter Academy (K-8)CIS Academy (6-8) River Mill Academy (K-12)Clover Garden (K-12) Rocky Mount Prep. School (K-12)Columbus Charter School (K-2) Roxboro Community School (7-11)Community Partners High (9-12) Sallie B. Howard School (K-8)Crosscreek Charter (K-8) Sandhills Theatre Arts Renaissance School (STARS) (K-8)Crossnore Academy (K-12) Socrates Academy (K-2)Crossroads Charter High (9-12) SPARC Academy (K-8)Dillard Academy (K-4) Sterling Montessori Academy (K-8)East Wake Academy (K-12) Success Institute (K-8)Evergreen Community Charter (K-8) Sugar Creek Charter School (K-8)Exploris Middle School (6-8) Summit Charter School (K-8)Forsyth Academies (K-8) The Academy of Moore County (K-8)Francine Delany New School for Children (K-8) The Carter G. Woodson School (K-12)Gaston College Preparatory (5-10) The Central Park School for Children (K-5)Grandfather Academy (4-12) The Children's Village Academy (K-6)Gray Stone Day School (9-12) The Community Charter School (K-5)Greensboro Academy (K-8) The Downtown Middle School (5-8)Guilford Prep Academy (K-8) The Franklin Academy (K-12)Haliwa-Saponi Tribal (K-11) The Laurinburg Homework Center (8-12)Healthy Start Academy Charter (K-8) The Mountain Community School (K-8)Highland Charter Public School (K-3) The New Dimensions School (K-5)Hope Elementary School (K-5) The Woods Charter School (1-12)Kennedy School (6-12) Thomas Jefferson Classical Academy (K-12)Kestrel Heights School (6-11) Tiller School (K-8)Kinston Charter Academy (K-8) Torchlight Academy (K-6)KIPP: Charlotte (5) Two Rivers Community School (K-8)Lake Norman Charter School (5-8) Union Academy (K-11)Learning Center (K-7) Vance Charter School (K-8)Lincoln Charter School (K-12) Voyager Academy (4-8)Magellan Charter School (4-8) Washington Montessori (K-8)Maureen Joy Charter School (K-8) Wilmington Preparatory Academy (K-4)

List of North Carolina Charter Schools, 2006-07

267

269

Appendix F

North Carolina

Writing Assessment

Committee

2006-07

271

North Carolina Writing Assessment at Grades 4, 7, and 10

General Assessment and NCEXTEND2 Assessment Information about the Writing Advisory Committees Committee members are qualified individuals who are divergent thinkers, possess leadership skills, support the NC Writing Assessment at Grades 4, 7, and 10, have a positive record of service, and will devote the necessary time required to the Writing Advisory Committee to ensure that the objectives of the committee are achieved. Efforts are made to ensure that the committees reflect the racial and ethnic diversity of North Carolina’s fourth, seventh, and tenth grade student populations; furthermore, special attention is given to make sure that each geographic region in the state is represented. Committee membership is based on staggered terms and consists of:

• at least six grade-level specific practicing classroom teachers (3 year term) • at least five grade-span specific practicing classroom teachers (2 year term) • at least one professional from the English/Language Arts department of NCDPI • at least one post secondary professional with experience relevant to the specific grade level of

the committee (3 year term) • at least one professional in the area of special education (2 year term) • at least one professional in the area of limited English proficiency (2 year term) • at least one professional from the Test Development Section of NCDPI

There are currently six Writing Advisory Committees: Grade 4 General, Grade 4 NCEXTEND2, Grade 7 General, Grade 7 NCEXTEND2, Grade 10 General, and Grade 10 NCEXTEND2 OCS. Purpose of the Writing Advisory Committees The primary purpose of the Writing Advisory Committees is to make recommendations to NCDPI Test Development/Accountability Services based not on what students can do, but what students should be expected to do as outlined in the NC Standard Course of Study (SCS) for English/Language Arts. Additional responsibilities of the Writing Advisory Committees include selecting prompts as well as providing advice and input for the selection of anchor papers to be used in the scoring of student responses. Beginning in September of each school year, Writing Advisory Committees are assembled to select the operational and secondary prompts for the current school year, as well as prompts necessary for field testing. All committee members are required to sign test security and confidentiality agreements in order to protect secure information about the prompts. After the selection of prompts, Writing Advisory Committees are convened to conduct the first round of range-finding. This first round of range-finding often occurs in February. Range-finding is a major step in the development process after the field test prompts have been administered to students. The range-finding process involves the scoring contractor, Writing Advisory Committees, NCDPI Accountability Services/Test

272

Development Section staff, NCSU-TOPS staff, NCDPI Instructional Services, English/Language Arts staff, and NCDPI Exceptional Children staff. The contractor gathers samples of student responses from the field test. The Writing Advisory Committees view and score responses to establish “anchor papers.” Anchor papers represent examples of particular score points and are referenced by the scorers during the scoring process. They are used in conjunction with scoring rubrics to help in deciding what score points student responses are assigned. This helps to ensure that consistency in standards is applied to all responses. Days after the operational administration in March, round two of range-finding occurs. The second stage of the range-finding process is the same as above EXCEPT that the samples gathered from students are “Live” responses. “Live” student responses refer to responses that students wrote during the operational administration. A representative sample of schools are contacted to submit their test materials to NCDPI instead of shipping them to the contractor. The contractor uses these student responses as samples to conduct round two of range-finding prior to the start of the scoring project. All of the papers scored by the Writing Advisory Committees during both range-finding sessions are used in the scoring project. Guide sets, Training sets, and Qualification sets are constructed using the student samples scored by the committees during range-finding. Scorers use these sets to learn the scoring rubric, practice applying the scoring rubric, and qualify for a position to score the assessment. Scorers must pass all eligibility requirements in order to work on the North Carolina Writing Assessment at Grades 4, 7, and 10. Participation on the Writing Advisory Committees The following lists show the members of the current North Carolina Writing Advisory Committees at Grades 4, 7, and 10. These members participate on the General Assessment and/or NCEXTEND2 Assessment based on their education and credentials as well as their current teaching assignments. The Writing Advisory Committee is always looking for experienced educators to participate in the next round of meetings. Ethnic diversity and regional diversity is appreciated among our membership. For more information, please contact:

Jim Kroening, NCDPI, Director of Performance Assessments at [email protected] Akia Beverly-Worsley, NCSU-TOPS, Writing Assessments at [email protected]

All information about the North Carolina Writing Assessment at Grades 4, 7, and 10 can be found at: http://www.ncpublicschools.org/accountability/testing/writing/ All information about the North Carolina Testing Program can be found on the NCDPI website: http://www.ncpublicschools.org/

273

Writing Advisory Committee Membership Grade 4 2006-07 Alexander, Brenda General/ NCEXTEND2 Cabarrus County Region 3 Allen, Elizabeth General Mecklenburg County Region 3 Barnes, Jennifer General/ NCEXTEND2 Currituck County Region 4 Bester, Laura General/ NCEXTEND2 Craven County Region 5 Brooks, Kristi NCEXTEND2 Gaston County Region 3 Carruthers, Barbara General/ NCEXTEND2 Wake County Region 6 Coleman, Karen NCEXTEND2 Davidson County Region 2 Day, Karen General Davie County Region 2 Flynt, Jamie General Rockingham County Region 6 Galloway, Tara NCEXTEND2 Gaston County Region 3 Goodman, Jean General Alamance County Region 6 Gray, K. Lynn General/ NCEXTEND2 Currituck County Region 4 Grimes, Valaida General Pitt County Region 4 Harris, Frances General/ NCEXTEND2 Onslow County Region 5 Holcomb, Vicki General Buncombe County Region 1 Huggins, Stephanie General Cumberland County Region 5 Hutchinson, Tamara General Ashe County Region 2 Logan, Jill General/ NCEXTEND2 Forsyth County Region 2 Meyerhoeffer, V. Hope General Wayne County Region 5 Moore, Deborah NCEXTEND2 Davidson County Region 2 Neal, Amy NCEXTEND2 Pitt County Region 4 Oxendine, Olivia General UNC—Pembroke Region 5 Pearson, Roberta General/NCEXTEND2 Guilford County Region 6 Ray, M. Elizabeth General Buncombe County Region 1 Rose, Mary General/ NCEXTEND2 Harnett County Region 6 Walker, Brad General UNC—Wilmington Region 5 Ware, Beth General Wake County Region 6 Wishart, Lisa General Lee County Region 6 NCDPI ELA Curriculum Specialists: Almeida, Tara NCDPI ELA Consultant Southerland, Carolyn NCDPI ELA Consultant Weaver, Michelle NCDPI ELA Consultant

274

Writing Advisory Committee Membership Grade 7 2006-07 Alverson, Jodi General Cherokee County Region 1 Annas, Linda NCEXTEND2 Cumberland County Region 5 Brown, Mary A. NCEXTEND2 Mecklenburg County Region 3 Elliott, Debra General/ NCEXTEND2 Chowan County Region 4 Eudy, Julie General/ NCEXTEND2 Alexander County Region 2 Faulconer, Johna General East Carolina University Region 4 Fedock, Barbara General/ NCEXTEND2 Polk County Region 1 Klutz, Wendy General Davidson County Region 2 Lee, Renate General/ NCEXTEND2 Craven County Region 5 Leonard, Dana NCEXTEND2 Davidson County Region 2 Levi, Stacie NCEXTEND2 Mecklenburg County Region 3 Lewis, Dacia General Wayne County Region 5 Lilly-Bowyer, Karen General/ NCEXTEND2 Forsyth County Region 2 Little, Gregory General Halifax County Region 4 McCall, Sara General Yadkin County Region 2 Miller, Laura NCEXTEND2 Pitt County Region 4 Morings, Lori General Hertford County Region 4 Peterson Gibbs, Jo General Buncombe County Region 1 Teague, Jane General/ NCEXTEND2 Randolph County Region 6 NCDPI ELA Curriculum Specialists: Blackmon, Phyllis NCDPI ELA Consultant Chalmers, Patricia NCDPI ELA Consultant

275

Writing Advisory Committee Membership Grade 10 2006-07 Abourjilie, Karen NCEXTEND2 OCS Guilford County Region 6 Alston, Dorothea NCEXTEND2 OCS Wake County Region 6 Annas, Linda General/NCEXTEND2 OCS Cumberland County Region 5 Bobbe, Peter General Yancey County Region 1 Boehm, Jodee General Mecklenburg County Region 3 Claytor, Margaret NCEXTEND2 OCS Nash County Region 6 Dunbar, Deanie General Hyde County Region 4 Godfrey, Holly NCEXTEND2 OCS Cleveland County Region 3 Hill, Guy General/NCEXTEND2 OCS Harnett County Region 6 Jarvis, Joy NCEXTEND2 OCS Beaufort County Region 4 Johnson, Wendy NCEXTEND2 OCS Cumberland County Region 5 Jones, Polly General/ NCEXTEND2 OCS Ashe County Region 2 Killela, Christine NCEXTEND2 OCS Wake County Region 6 Lemire, Deborah NCEXTEND2 OCS Harnett County Region 6 McCall, Harriet NCEXTEND2 OCS Onslow County Region 5 Memminger, Abigail NCEXTEND2 OCS Cumberland County Region 5 Pope, Bettina General Wake County Region 6 Shiflett, H. Randy General/NCEXTEND2 OCS Guilford County Region 6 Siegel, Scott NCEXTEND2 OCS Johnston County Region 6 Smith, William General/NCEXTEND2 OCS Buncombe County Region 1 Stephens, Susan NCEXTEND2 OCS Harnett County Region 6 Steverson, Lendia NCEXTEND2 OCS Wake County Region 6 Tart, Michael General/NCEXTEND2 OCS Craven County Region 5 Walker, Paul NCEXTEND2 OCS Wake County Region 6 Worley, Michele NCEXTEND2 OCS Johnston County Region 6 NCDPI ELA Curriculum Specialists: Lee, Freda NCDPI ELA Consultant Bowen, Kim NCDPI ELA Consultant Burner, Louise NCDPI ELA Consultant Shayne Goodrum NCDPI ELA Consultant

Documents

Report of Student Performance in Writing - · PDF fileReport of Student Performance in Writing on The North Carolina General Writing Assessment Grades 4, 7, 10 North Carolina Checklist