{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.01346389228886169, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.816666666666666, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Two Plausible Indicators to Use with State Accountability Measures: An Analysis of NAEP Math Data

Abstract Using National Assessment of Educational Progress mathematics data, a predictive model indicated that states could be classified as “No Score Gain” or “Score Gain” states based on median household income and the percentage of students participating in free and reduced-price lunch. Implications associated with the findings suggested that these two indicators could be used in adjusting or customizing Adequate Yearly Progress targets in schools serving impoverished communities. The result would be that Adequate Yearly Progress targets would be more realistic, and schools and their stakeholders would realize continuous improvement if incremental increases in expected growth were monitored and maintained.