Table Of Content

2009 GENERAL ACHIEVEMENT TRENDS — ILLINOIS 1 General Achievement Trends — Illinois K-12 enrollment — 2,034,792 The raw data used to develop these state profiles, including data for additional grade levels and years before 2002, can be found on the CEP Web site at www.cep-dc.org. Click on the link on the left for No Child Left Behind. In the Document Library, look for the most recent report on student achievement since 2002. Below the name of the report, click on the link for View State Profiles and Worksheets. Scroll down the page, and click on the Worksheet links for any state. Overall Achievement — Key Findings General results The tables in this profile present state test results in reading and math at three achievement levels (basic, proficient, and advanced) and at one grade each at the elementary, middle, and high school levels. These data are more complete than the percentage of students scoring proficient that is the main indicator used to determine adequate yearly progress under the No Child Left Behind Act. Illinois made changes to its testing system in 2006, so only three years of comparable test data (2006-2008) are available, the minimum span needed to determine a trend. Nearly 100% of Illinois students are performing at the basic level or above in reading and math at the elementary and secondary grades analyzed. Results are mixed at the proficient and advanced achievement levels. Declines were more evident at the high school level than at the other two levels. Specific results  Between 2006 and 2008, the percentage of students scoring at the basic level and above in reading was at or very close to 100% at the elementary and middle school levels, wavering only slightly. There was a slight decline in the percentage of high school students reading at the basic level, but this figure was still at 90% in 2008. In math, the percentage of students performing at the basic level and above rose slightly in the elementary and middle grades analyzed, bringing these percentages very close to 100%; there was a slight decrease at the high school level.  In reading, the percentage of students performing at the proficient level and above went up slightly at the elementary grade analyzed, rose at a moderate-to-large rate in at the middle school level, and declined at a moderate-to-large rate at the high school level. In math, 2009 GENERAL ACHIEVEMENT TRENDS — ILLINOIS 2 the percentage proficient and above declined slightly at the elementary and high school grades analyzed but increased at a moderate-to- large rate at the middle school level.  In reading, the percentage of students reaching the advanced level increased slightly at the elementary grade analyzed, decreased slightly at the middle school level, and declined at a moderate-to-large rate at the high school level. In math, there was a slight gain in the percentage of advanced students at the elementary and middle grades analyzed and a moderate-to-large gain at the high school level. Data Limitations Years of comparable percentage proficient data 2006 through 2008 Years of data needed to compute effect sizes 2006 through 2008 Disaggregated data for all subgroups and comparison groups Percent proficient data not available for comparison group of students who are not English language learners (ELLs), so the ELL subgroup is compared with all tested students in the state in proficiency analyses Test Characteristics The characteristics highlighted below are for the state reading and mathematics tests used for accountability under the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB). Test(s) used for NCLB accountability Illinois Standards Achievement Test (grades 3–8) Prairie State Achievement Examination (grade 11) Illinois Alternate Assessment Grades tested for NCLB accountability 3-8, 11 State labels for achievement levels IL uses four achievement levels: Level 1, Level 2, Level 3, and Level 4. For our analyses we treated Level 2 as Basic, Level 3 as Proficient, and Level 4 as Advanced. High school NCLB test also used as an exit exam? No First year test used 2006 Time of test administration Spring 2009 GENERAL ACHIEVEMENT TRENDS — ILLINOIS 3 Major changes in testing system (2002–present) 2005–06: Changed test vendors 2005–06: Switched to a vertical scale for scoring the test; cut scores were changed accordingly (grade 8 math scores in particular were changed after a bridge study found that cut scores were too high) 2006: All students in grades 3–8 tested in reading and mathematics and included in AYP calculations 2006–07: Added another vendor 2008: Scoring of the PSAE was modified such that all items contribute equally to the overall score. A process was used to equate 2007 results from the old methodology to the new methodology. 2009 GENERAL ACHIEVEMENT TRENDS — ILLINOIS 4 Overall Achievement — Percentages Proficient Figure IL-1. Percentage of Students Scoring at the Proficient Level and Above in Reading 100% 90% e v 80% o b A 70% r o nt 60% e ci 50% fi o r P 40% e g a 30% t n e c 20% r e P 10% 0% 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 Reporting Year Grade 4 Grade 8 Grade 11 2009 GENERAL ACHIEVEMENT TRENDS — ILLINOIS 5 Table IL-1. Percentage of Students Scoring at the Proficient Level and Above in Reading Reporting Year Pre-NCLB Post-NCLB Grade Average Yearly Average Yearly Level Percentage Point Gain Percentage Point Gain 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 1999-20021 2002-20081 Grade 3 71% 73% 72% NA 0.6 Grade 4 73% 74% 73% NA 0.1 Grade 5 69% 70% 74% NA 2.6 Grade 6 73% 73% 79% NA 3.2 Grade 7 72% 73% 78% NA 2.9 Grade 8 79% 82% 81% NA 1.1 Grade 11 58% 54% 53% NA -2.6 Table reads: The percentage of 3rd graders who scored at the proficient level and above on the state reading test increased from 71% in 2006 to 72% in 2008. The average yearly gain in the percentage proficient in grade 3 reading was 0.6 percentage points per year after NCLB was enacted. 1Averages are subject to rounding error. 2009 GENERAL ACHIEVEMENT TRENDS — ILLINOIS 6 Figure IL-2. Percentage of Students Scoring at the Proficient Level and Above in Mathematics 100% 90% e v 80% o b A 70% r o nt 60% e ci fi 50% o r P 40% e g a 30% t n e c 20% r e P 10% 0% 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 Reporting Year Grade 4 Grade 8 Grade 11 2009 GENERAL ACHIEVEMENT TRENDS — ILLINOIS 7 Table IL-2. Percentage of Students Scoring at the Proficient Level and Above in Mathematics Reporting Year Pre-NCLB Post-NCLB Grade Average Yearly Average Yearly Level Percentage Point Gain Percentage Point Gain 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 1999-20021 2002-20081 Grade 3 86% 87% 85% NA -0.3 Grade 4 85% 86% 85% NA -0.1 Grade 5 79% 83% 81% NA 1.4 Grade 6 79% 81% 83% NA 1.8 Grade 7 76% 79% 80% NA 2.2 Grade 8 78% 81% 80% NA 1.1 Grade 11 54% 53% 53% NA -0.3 Table reads: The percentage of 3rd graders who scored at the proficient level and above on the state math test decreased from 86% in 2006 to 85% in 2008. The average yearly loss in the percentage proficient in grade 3 math was 0.3 percentage points per year after NCLB was enacted. 1Averages are subject to rounding error. 2009 GENERAL ACHIEVEMENT TRENDS — ILLINOIS 8 Overall Achievement — Percentages Advanced, Proficient, and Basic How to read figures 3 and 4 and tables 3 and 4 The stacked bars in figures 3 and 4 show the percentages of students scoring at the basic, proficient, and advanced levels on the state tests used for NCLB accountability. The following information may be helpful in interpreting the figures:  The percentage proficient and above—the benchmark used to determine adequate yearly progress under NCLB—is the sum of the middle and top segments of the bars (percentage proficient plus percentage advanced).  The percentage basic and above is the sum of all three segments of the bars (percentage basic plus percentage proficient plus percentage advanced).  The sums that result from adding the segments of the bars in these ways correspond with the percentages proficient and above, and basic and above, shown in tables 3 and 4. In a few instances, however, the sums in the figures may differ from those in the tables by a percentage point due to rounding.  The bars do not total 100% because students who score below the basic level are not displayed.  By looking at the percentages in each segment of the bars, one can see how achievement trends at the three levels interact. Ideally, one would want to see increases at all three levels, as more students move from below basic to basic achievement, from basic to proficient, and from proficient to advanced. But other scenarios may also be illuminating. For example, gains may occur in the percentage basic even if the percentage proficient and above has stayed the same, suggesting that progress has been made in moving students from the below basic to the basic level. Or, if the percentage proficient has grown while the percentages basic and advanced have shrunk, this suggests most of the academic attention was focused on moving “bubble kids” from the basic to proficient levels, with little or no attention to the highest- and lowest-performing students.  Some states use different labels for their achievement levels instead of basic, proficient, and advanced. The specific state labels are listed in the Test Characteristics section at the beginning of this profile. 2009 GENERAL ACHIEVEMENT TRENDS — ILLINOIS 9 Figure IL-3. Percentages of Students Scoring at the Advanced, Proficient, and Basic Levels in Reading Grade 4 Grade 8 100 100 9 12 8 90 90 26 25 27 s 80 s 80 nt nt de 70 de 70 u u e of St 5600 47 48 47 e of St 5600 70 70 73 ag 40 ag 40 ent 30 ent 30 c c er 20 er 20 P P 26 25 25 10 10 21 18 18 0 0 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 School Year School Year Basic Proficient Advanced Basic Proficient Advanced Grade 11 100 90 14 11 10 s 80 nt e 70 d u of St 5600 44 43 43 e g 40 a nt e 30 c Per 20 33 38 37 10 0 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 School Year Basic Proficient Advanced 2009 GENERAL ACHIEVEMENT TRENDS — ILLINOIS 10 Table IL-3. Percentages of Students Scoring at the Advanced, Proficient and Above, and Basic and Above Levels in Reading Reporting Year Average Yearly Achievement Level 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 Percentage Point Gain1 Grade 4 Advanced 26% 25% 27% 0.2 Proficient and Above 73% 74% 73% 0.1 Basic and Above 98% 99% 98% -0.1 Grade 8 Advanced 9% 12% 8% -0.3 Proficient and Above 79% 82% 81% 1.1 Basic and Above 100% 99% 100% -0.1 Grade 11 Advanced 14% 11% 10% -1.8 Proficient and Above 58% 54% 53% -2.6 Basic and Above 92% 92% 90% -0.8 Table reads: The percentage of 4th graders who scored at the advanced level on their state reading test increased from 26% in 2006 to 27% in 2008. During this period, the average yearly gain in the percentage advanced was 0.2 percentage points per year in grade 4 reading. 1Averages are subject to rounding error.