1997-98 Knowledge and Concepts Examinations

Results for Grade 10

Disaggregated Results: A Closer Look

Summary of Results

While Wisconsin tenth-grade students scored at higher levels in the subjects tested than tenth-grade students nationally, many Wisconsin students are not proficient or advanced. Analysis of these proficiency reports show:

Fewer students scored at or above the proficient level in enhanced language and mathematics than the other subject areas; overall performance was the highest in reading and social studies.
Females scored higher than males in reading and enhanced language; the performance of females and males in other subjects was about the same.
Proficiency levels, when reported by student mobility status, showed that students who have not been in the same school district for a full year had lower levels of proficiency than students who had been in the district for a full year. The relationship between mobility and proficiency is stronger at grade 10 than at grade 4 or 8. The educational benefits of staying in one district for a year or more appear less significant for disadvantaged student groups than for other students.
The gaps in achievement between racial/ethnic minorities and white students and between economically disadvantaged and advantaged students are large. The differences in achievement across racial/ethnic groups are very large even among students who stayed in a single district for a full academic year and who are not economically disadvantaged.
Student groups demonstrating the lowest achievement levels also had the highest percentages of students who were not included in statewide testing. Many students who are required by law to be included in WSAS testing were not tested.
The percentage of all students enrolled who took the WSAS tests was lower at grade 10 than at grade 4 or 8 despite the fact that grade 10 has the lowest percentage of students with disabilities and limited-English proficiency.

It is hoped that the information contained in this section and in this entire book will lead to a wider understanding of what we know, and what we don't know, about the achievement of student groups and schools in Wisconsin. It is also hoped that this analysis, and similar analyses conducted locally, will promote constructive, focused discussions involving staff, parents, and the community about ways to improve the learning of all students in each school.

Data Characteristics

All demographic and achievement data in this section are based on data collected by CTB/McGraw-Hill from school districts as part of the WSAS testing program. The data are as of October 1997 and are cross-sectional, not longitudinal.

Demographic data were provided by school districts for all students enrolled in grade 10 at the time of testing, October 1997. These data were not audited by CTB/McGraw-Hill or the Department of Public Instruction. Students demographic characteristics were coded for reporting purposes according to standardized definitions.

In order to reduce the data collection burden, default codes were used when the vast majority of students statewide were in a specific demographic category. For example, districts were only required to report a code for "students with disabilities." All students without a code were automatically coded "nondisabled." No default codes were used for race/ethnicity. Missing race/ethnicity codes were reported as "missing" or "N/A."

All achievement data are based on the results of standardized tests published by CTB/McGraw-Hill. These tests measure a wide range of important knowledge and skills but probably do not measure everything a local community believes is important for students to learn in school.

Students tested received a score in each of five subjects (reading, enhanced language, mathematics, science, and social studies). Each proficiency category ("minimal performance," "basic," "proficient," and "advanced") is associated with a range of scores. In all WSAS reports, percentages of students scoring in each of the four proficiency categories are based on percentages of students enrolled rather than percentages of students tested. Students who are not tested are included in a fifth category ("not tested on WSAS").

Due to space limitations, all graphs provided in this section of the report are for the WSAS science test at grade 10. Results for other subject areas suggest similar relationships between achievement and demographic characteristics of students.

Test Participation

MYTH: School achievement reports based on the results of students tested provide an accurate picture of overall achievement at the school.

FACT: This statement is true only if all or nearly all students are tested or students tested are comparable academically to students not tested. However, while many schools test all or nearly all students enrolled, many other schools do not. Student groups with the lowest achievement levels typically have the highest percentages of students who were not included in statewide testing.

School results based only on students tested would be higher for schools that do not test lower achieving students. Students who are disadvantaged by mobility, economic status, disabilities or limited-English proficiency are tested at lower rates than other more advantaged students. Participation rates for racial/ethnic minorities are also lower than for white students.

Table 1 displays the percentages of students not taking WSAS tests at tenthgrade by disadvantaged and nondisadvantaged student groups.

Table 1:

Percent of Students Not Taking WSAS Tests at Tenth Grade by Student Group

*EEN stands for Exceptional Educational Needs. **Percentages vary by subject. *** Percentages vary by racial/ethnic group and by subject.

According to state law, districts may exclude two categories of students from WSAS testing. These are (1) EEN students with severe disabilities whose individualized education program (IEP) supports the need for exemption from WSAS tests and (2) LEP students who are at the earliest levels of English proficiency. Actual practices regarding exclusions vary widely across schools with many excluding all or nearly all students in one or both of these groups and many others excluding none. State law also permits parents to excuse their children from statewide tests; the number of students affected statewide at Grade 10 is 0.5%. State law requires that school districts administer the WSAS to all other students.

A three-week testing window is provided to allow local flexibility in scheduling and for administering makeup tests to students who are absent on test day. WSAS test participation rates vary across schools and school districts due in part to different local make-up testing practices.

As can be seen in Figure 1, 14% of EEN students and 22% of LEP students were not tested in Science and were not excluded or excused. Figure 1 also shows that nearly 5% of nondisabled English-proficient students were not tested and were not excused. This latter rate was higher than the rate for grades 4 and 8. Overall, almost 9% of students enrolled at tenthgrade were not tested on WSAS in Science.

Achievement by Student Demographic Group

MYTH: Schools with higher overall student test results are more effective schools.

FACT: Schools vary in their effectiveness in addressing the needs of students in various demographic groups. Schools with higher overall test results often have fewer disadvantaged students and less racial/ethnic diversity than schools with lower overall results. Comparing results by demographic group provides a more complete picture of achievement at each school.

The educational task facing each school and each community is complicated by the specific needs and characteristics of students being served and by other factors. The relationships between student test scores and poverty, disability status, English proficiency, and racial/ethnic group are strong.

Figures 2 through 4 illustrate the relationships for one subject, science. Results for other subjects reveal similar relationships.

How to Read the Graphs

In the graphs labeled Figure2 through Figure 6, the relationship between between test scores and economic status can be seen in the vertical distance between the dotted line for economically disadvantaged students in any given group and the solid line for students in the same group who are not economically disadvantaged. The greater the vertical distance, the stronger the relationship.

The relationships between test scores and disability status, limited-English proficiency, or race/ethnicity can be seen by the vertical distance between lines for the student groups being compared. If economically disadvantaged students are being compared, then the distance between the dotted lines is of interest. If students who are not economically disadvantaged are being compared, then the distance between the solid lines should be considered.

The strength of the association between test scores and mobility status of students who are not economically disadvantaged is seen in the slope of each solid line. For economically disadvantaged students the slope of the dotted lines should be considered. The steeper the line, the stronger the association.

Results for students who are limited-English-proficient (LEP) are displayed separately in Figures 3 and 6. Limited-English-proficient students are only 1.3% of students enrolled at grade 10 but are disproportionately represented in certain student groups. For example, 25% of all tenth-grade Asians are LEP. Inclusion of LEP students in the other graphs would have made interpretation of the relationships between groups more complicated.

Achievement by Disability and Economic Status

Note that, in Figure 2, results for EEN students are indicated by triangles, and results for nondisabled students are indicated by diamonds. Figure 2 indicates that students who are not EEN scored at higher levels than EEN students regardless of economic or mobility status. The highest EEN group had 9% proficient or above in science. The lowest not EEN group had 17% proficient or above in science.

The association between rates of proficiency in science and economic status appears strongest for students enrolled in a district for a full year who are not EEN (vertical distance between lines is 27%). The relationship between rates of proficiency in science and economic status appears relatively weak for EEN students (vertical distance 5% for students in a district for a full year).

The association appears strong between mobility and achievement levels of students who are not EEN and not economically disadvantaged. Note that the solid line for this group has a steep slope. The association between mobility and achievement levels of EEN students appears relatively weak. Note that the dotted line for EEN students who are economically disadvantaged and the solid line for EEN students who are not economically disadvantaged are almost flat. These results also suggest that the benefits of a stable educational environment as measured by mobility may be far less for students with disabilities, particularly those who are economically disadvantaged, than for more advantaged students.

Achievement by English Proficiency and Economic Status

A strong association exists between rates of proficiency in science and economic status for English-proficient students, but the association is weak for LEP students. The association is also weak between rates of proficiency and mobility for limited -English-proficient students. See Figure 3.

Table 2 provides the percent of students in each racial/ethnic group that achieved scores at the proficient level or above in each of the five subject areas.

Achievement by Racial/Ethnic Group

Substantial differences in achievement exist across racial/ethnic groups and subject areas. African American students generally scored lower than students in other racial/ethnic groups. The scores for white students exceeded the scores for other racial/ethnic groups in all five subject areas.

Table 2:
Proficiency Summaries
By Racial/Ethnic Group

While some of the differences in achievement across racial/ethnic groups are associated with mobility, economic status, or limited-English proficiency, Figure 4 indicates that these differences exist even among students who are not disadvantaged. The low proportions of certain racial/ethnic minorities scoring at the proficient level or above in science do not appear to be explained by differences in mobility status, poverty, or English proficiency.

The slopes of the lines in Figure 4 indicate possible effects of mobility on achievement of students in each one of the 10 student groups. The relationships between mobility and achievement are stronger for students who are not economically disadvantaged. Note that the slopes of the solid lines are generally steeper than the slopes of the dotted lines.

The data suggest that the benefits of a stable educational environment as measured by mobility may be less for African Americans (regardless of economic status) and for economically disadvantaged Hispanic and Native American students than for other student groups. Most African American students statewide are enrolled in Milwaukee Public Schools.

The strength of the relationship between economic status and achievement can be seen for any given racial/ethnic group by looking at the vertical distance between the dotted line on Figure 4 for students in that group who are economically disadvantaged and the solid line for those in the same racial/ethnic group who are not economically disadvantaged. Among students who have been in a district for a full year, the relationship between economic status and achievement seems to be strongest for Asian students (vertical distance 23%) and weakest for African American students (vertical distance 7%).

Figure 5 is a simplified version of Figure 4. It includes only the results for the two racial/ethnic groups with the highest and lowest scores, whites and African Americans.

Figure 6 summarizes results for LEP students by race/ethnicity and economic status.

Note that complete results are displayed only for LEP Hispanics who are not economically disadvantaged. Results are reported in Figure 6 when there are at least 25 students in a group. Results are not reported for many groups because only 1.3% of students in grade 10 statewide are LEP. 86% of LEP students at grade 10 are either Asian or Hispanic. 48% of tenth-grade LEP students are economically disadvantaged. Except in the case of Hispanics, the numbers of students in each racial/ethnic group who were not in district for a full year were very small (less than 25 students).

Achievement levels in science for all LEP student groups are low.

Implications of the Disaggregated Results

MYTH: Schools with higher proportions of disadvantaged students are expected to have lower overall student test results than schools with higher proportions of advantaged students.

FACT: The expectations for all students and all schools is the same. The long-term goal is for all students, including disadvantaged students, to progress to the proficient and advanced levels.

Some schools and communities have a long way to go towards the goal of having all students achieve the proficient level. This is especially true for many schools with large concentrations of disadvantaged students.

Educators, parents, and community members need to look at what is being done to improve learning for all student groups. What is being done to motivate unmotivated students and support their efforts to learn what's important? What programs are successful and should be continued or expanded and what programs are not and should be eliminated?

Possible ideas for change might come from schools that have higher than average achievement levels for disadvantaged groups.

For example, 54% and 52% of economically disadvantaged students at Hurley and Ladysmith High Schools (Hurley and Ladysmith School Districts) for a full academic year scored at the proficient level or above in science. Statewide, 43% of all student scored in this range.

On the science test, 32% of students with disabilities at North High in Waukesha School District for a full academic year scored at the proficient level or above. Statewide only 8% of students with disabilities scored at the proficient level or above in science at tenth grade.

For more information about these exam results go to:

For more complete information regarding statewide tests and other school performance indicators, see:

Wisconsin Student Assessment System (WSAS)

For questions about this information, contact dpistats@dpi.wi.gov (608) 267-3166

Last updated on 12/15/2011 3:46:35 PM