How NAEP Created a Perpetual Reading Crisis
カートのアイテムが多すぎます
カートに追加できませんでした。
ウィッシュリストに追加できませんでした。
ほしい物リストの削除に失敗しました。
ポッドキャストのフォローに失敗しました
ポッドキャストのフォロー解除に失敗しました
How NAEP Created a Perpetual Reading Crisis
-
ナレーター：
-
著者：
The NAEP proficiency levels were arbitrarily defined (Bracey, 2008; Ravitch, 2012; Reinking, Hruby, & Risko, 2023). These levels should be interpreted with extreme caution (Vaulton, 2025). The National Center for Education Statistics website provides three reasons for this (NCES, 2025):
1. Proficiency levels are based on desired expectations. Meaning that these levels are aspirational not mathematical.
2. These proficiency levels are currently being used on a trial basis.
3. Further evidence is needed to determine if these proficiency levels are “reasonable, valid, and informative”.
If you’re looking for accessible, research-based information that slices through the endless loads of overly worded baloney, I would encourage you to subscribe to my free Substack, The Reading Instruction Show.
Substack: The Reading Instruction Show
https://thereadinginstructionshow.substack.com/