Could you please put this into your own words? Ive been having trouble & i am not sure how to do it.The Department of Education points to the National Assessment of Educational Progress)...

Could you please put this into your own words? Ive been having trouble & i am not sure how to do it.

The Department of Education points to the National Assessment of Educational Progress) results, released in July 2005, “showing improved student achievement in reading and math”.  More progress was made by nine-year-olds in reading in the last five years than in the previous 28 years combined. 

  • America's nine-year-olds posted the best scores in reading (since 1971) and math (since 1973) in the history of the report. America's 13-year-olds earned the highest math scores the test ever recorded.
  • Reading and math scores for black and Hispanic nine-year-olds reached an all-time high.
  • Achievement gaps in reading and math between white and black nine-year-olds and between white and Hispanic nine-year-olds are at an all-time low.
  • Forty-three states and the District of Columbia either improved academically or held steady in all categories (fourth- and eighth-grade reading and fourth- and eighth-grade math)..

Many argue that these statistics are misleading. They compare 2005 with 2000, when No Child Left Behind didn't even take effect until 2003. They point out that the increase in scores between 2000 and 2003 was roughly the same as the increase between 2003 and 2005, which calls into question how any increase can be attributed to No Child Left Behind. They also argue that some of the subgroups are cherry-picked -- that in other subgroups scores remained the same or actually fell.

Asked on by erin22

4 Answers | Add Yours

akannan's profile pic

Ashley Kannan | Middle School Teacher | (Level 3) Distinguished Educator

Posted on

I think that you have much in way of information here.  Certainly, the statistic data cannot be paraphrased.  It can be summarized to state that in short term since 2001, there had been noted gains in reading and writing within specific subgroups.  The basic premise of the excerpt is that the immediate and short term gains that have been attributed to No Child Left Behind might not necessarily be due to the specific legislation, but because of other factors that were in effect in education prior to the law being passed.  The notion of "cherry picking" data to fit the perception of the legislation's effectiveness helps to bring this idea out in that such data is cited by the supporters of the legislation where the correlation might not be as present.  I think that you could paraphrase it in the idea that specific gains in the early stages of NCLB might not be due to it.  At the same time, part of your paraphrase could be to focus on the polarization of sides both for and against the legislation.

pohnpei397's profile pic

pohnpei397 | College Teacher | (Level 3) Distinguished Educator

Posted on

My paraphrase is in bold throughout.  Each part I typed paraphrases the part above it.

The Department of Education points to the National Assessment of Educational Progress) results, released in July 2005, “showing improved student achievement in reading and math”. More progress was made by nine-year-olds in reading in the last five years than in the previous 28 years combined.

The department is asking people to notice that 9 year olds have improved more in the past 5 years than in the 28 years before that.

  • America's nine-year-olds posted the best scores in reading (since 1971) and math (since 1973) in the history of the report. America's 13-year-olds earned the highest math scores the test ever recorded.
9 year olds are better in math and reading than they have been in about 40 years, 13 year olds are better than they ever have been.
  • Reading and math scores for black and Hispanic nine-year-olds reached an all-time high.
Black and Hispanic 9s have never been better in reading and math.
  • Achievement gaps in reading and math between white and black nine-year-olds and between white and Hispanic nine-year-olds are at an all-time low.
Those two groups are closer to white kids than they've ever been (in scores).
  • Forty-three states and the District of Columbia either improved academically or held steady in all categories (fourth- and eighth-grade reading and fourth- and eighth-grade math)..
43 states and DC did as well as or better than they had been doing.

Many argue that these statistics are misleading. They compare 2005 with 2000, when No Child Left Behind didn't even take effect until 2003. They point out that the increase in scores between 2000 and 2003 was roughly the same as the increase between 2003 and 2005, which calls into question how any increase can be attributed to No Child Left Behind.

Some people say NCLB didn't cause this because it didn't go into effect until half way through the 5 year time period mentioned.  There was just as much improvement before the law as there was after.

They also argue that some of the subgroups are cherry-picked -- that in other subgroups scores remained the same or actually fell.

Some people say that the Department only announced the stats that made them look good.  Other subgroups got worse, they say.

besure77's profile pic

besure77 | Middle School Teacher | (Level 1) Senior Educator

Posted on

I would say that these results are saying that achievement scores have improved dramatically in reading and math. It also points out achievement gaps which is very important. The goal is for there to be a very narrow or non-existent achievement gap. When there is a large achievement gap it means that certain groups (such as ethnic groups or low socio-economic groups) are not receiving the same quality education that other groups are.

By "cherry picked" I believe they are saying that groups the testers knew would have higher scores were chosen to be tested or included. The groups that were not "cherry picked" had lower scores so their scores were not included.

Perhaps the study was biased in a way to make it appear that students were improving academically. In reality, they did not include all scores-just the good ones.

geosc's profile pic

geosc | College Teacher | (Level 3) Assistant Educator

Posted on

To write a paraphrase of this: Read it.  More than once if necessary.  Put it aside and write out what it said.  Compare what you have written with the original to see if you made any mistakes as to fact or left out any important points.

If you are trying to include all of the statistics in your own words, that will be hard to do.  Just try for a statement of what is shown by all the statistics.

A couple of sentences may be enough.

We’ve answered 318,911 questions. We can answer yours, too.

Ask a question