Search results

The International Civic and Citizenship Education Study, 2016 (ICCS) is an international assessment of the ways in which young people are prepared to undertake their roles as citizens. It investigated student knowledge and understanding of civics and citizenship as well as students' perceptions, attitudes, and activities related to civics and citizenship. It also examined differences among countries in these outcomes and the relationship of these outcomes to students' individual characteristics and family backgrounds, to teaching practices, and to school and broader community contexts.

Like its predecessor IEA Civic Education Study, 1999 (CIVED), ICCS 2016 included a student test of civic knowledge and understanding, as well as questionnaires for students, teachers, and school principals. The comprehensive core assessment was complemented by regional modules for Europe and Latin America, designed to flexibly recognize regional interests and investigate related aspects of civic and citizenship education. The survey data were supplemented by information about the national contexts for civic and citizenship education gathered by the national research centers of the participating countries.

Data were collected in 2015-2016 under the auspices of the International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement (IEA) headquartered in Amsterdam. ICCS collected data from more than 94,000 eighth grade (or equivalent) students in about 3,800 schools from 24 countries. These student data were augmented with data from more than 37,000 teachers in those schools and further contextual data collected from school principals and national research centers.

The Community College Civic Outcomes Survey, Spring 2016 study examines the individual and institutional factors associated with greater civic agency, capacity, behavior, and knowledge among college students. In Spring 2016, two surveys were digitally administered at 13 community colleges, or community college systems. These colleges were purposively selected for diversity in terms of geography, campus setting, size, and the racial and ethnic composition of their student bodies. This data includes a sample of 1,693 surveys from those collected.

The Civic Outcomes Survey (COS) was administered to students, and included questions related to voting, political and community engagement, civic knowledge, and leadership development. The Institutional Questionnaire (IQ), was admitted to each college's liaisons to The Democracy Commitment (TDC), and included questions related to college-level factors known to influence student engagement. These questions assessed for institutional intentionality towards civic engagement through college missions and strategic planning, as well as academic and faculty focus on civic involvement. Both instruments were previously tested in a small regional pilot and were subsequently refined to allow for greater response variability. Demographic variables include race, income, gender, and enrollment status.

The Community College Civic Outcomes Survey, Spring 2017 study examines the individual and institutional factors associated with greater civic agency, capacity, behavior, and knowledge among college students. In Spring 2017, two surveys were digitally administered at 8 community colleges, or community college systems. These colleges were purposively selected for diversity in terms of geography, campus setting, size, and the racial and ethnic composition of their student bodies. This data includes a sample of 1,168 surveys from those collected.

The Civic Outcomes Survey (COS) was administered to students, and included questions related to voting, political and community engagement, civic knowledge, and leadership development. The Institutional Questionnaire (IQ), was admitted to each college's liaisons to The Democracy Commitment (TDC), and included questions related to college-level factors known to influence student engagement. These questions assessed for institutional intentionality towards civic engagement through college missions and strategic planning, as well as academic and faculty focus on civic involvement. Both instruments were previously tested in a small regional pilot and were subsequently refined to allow for greater response variability. Demographic variables include race, income, gender, and enrollment status.

The Political Engagement Project (PEP), 2003-2005 [United States] collection includes data that was collected as part of the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching Political Engagement Project. PEP was conducted to study the effects of a number of promising educational approaches that were designed to support political development. PEP data describe and assess the impact of 21 undergraduate courses and co- or extra-curricular programs in the United States designed to foster informed political engagement.

Outcome for PEP interventions were measured in four central dimensions of political engagement: knowledge and understanding, skills, motivation, and action. Political engagement was broadly defined to include a wide range of democratic involvement, including not only voting and electoral participation, but also many types of non-electoral or nonconventional activities, from informal political discussions, to involvement in community problem-solving, to boycotts, protests, and other efforts to influence political decisions or policies at any level. PEP survey instruments also included variables to explore students' political party identifications and self-descriptions to determine if these were impacted by the PEP interventions.

The courses and programs included in the study were located at a diverse set of institutions across the country and drew a wide range of students, including many racial/ethnic minorities and first generation college students. The data document the course and program goals and pedagogies, students' perspectives on their experiences in the program, and the impact of these experiences on key dimensions of political development such as knowledge, sense of political efficacy and identity, and skills of democratic participation. Students completed a survey before and after each course or program, and a small number of students from each were interviewed in depth. The faculty leaders were also interviewed and completed a survey, as well as participating in two in-depth conferences.

The student survey and other research instruments were designed to document and examine course and program goals, particular approaches to teaching and learning, student perspectives on their experiences, and the impact of these experiences on students' political learning and engagement. To that end, the survey includes a number of questions from existing national surveys that can be used to compare students to other populations, as well as many new questions the research team developed to help identify and understand students' experiences and outlooks with greater specificity and nuance.

This collection includes the following demographic variables: year in school, academic major, employment status, living environment, sex, race, age category, religion, citizenship, country of birth, parental country of origin, and parental education level.

The Community College Civic Outcomes Survey, Spring 2015 study examines the individual and institutional factors associated with greater civic agency, capacity, behavior, and knowledge among college students. In Spring 2015, two surveys were digitally administered at nine community colleges. These nine colleges were purposively selected for diversity in terms of geography, campus setting, size, and the racial and ethnic composition of their student bodies. From a total of 98,838 recipients, 4,788 usable surveys were returned, for an aggregate five percent response rate (response rates varied from two to 13% among the nine colleges). This data includes a sample of 3,897 from those surveys collected.

The Civic Outcomes Survey (COS) was administered to students, and included questions related to voting, political and community engagement, civic knowledge, and leadership development. The Institutional Questionnaire (IQ), was admitted to each college's liaisons to The Democracy Commitment (TDC), and included questions related to college-level factors known to influence student engagement. These questions assessed for institutional intentionality towards civic engagement through college missions and strategic planning, as well as academic and faculty focus on civic involvement. Both instruments were previously tested in a small regional pilot and were subsequently refined to allow for greater response variability. Demographic variables include race, income, gender, and enrollment status.

In 2011, the Stanford University Center on Adolescence initiated a longitudinal study of civic purpose development in adolescence, with a particular focus on the civic experiences, attitudes, and motivations of young people from diverse backgrounds in the state of California. A survey on civic purpose and civic engagement was completed November 2011 by 1,578 high school seniors, and 50 of those seniors participated in an interview after they completed the survey. Additionally, nine youth civic exemplars were nominated by civic and community organizations, and were included in the study. Participants were invited to partake in follow-up surveys 9 months and 21 months later. Survey and interview questions covered topics such as community involvement, political and campaign knowledge, civic engagement, perceptions of America and U.S. government, and experiences with discrimination. Additional topics include information on the participants' conceptions of American citizenship, educational setting, and parental civic and community engagement. Demographic information collected about each respondent included age, race, gender, education, and employment status.

The National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) is the largest nationally representative and continuing assessment of what students in elementary and secondary schools in the United States know and can do in various subject areas. Assessments are conducted periodically in mathematics, reading, science, writing, the arts, civics, economics, geography, United States history, and beginning in 2014, in Technology and Engineering Literacy (TEL). Since NAEP assessments are administered uniformly using the same sets of test booklets across the United States, NAEP results serve as a common metric for all states and selected urban districts. The assessment stays essentially the same from year to year, with only carefully documented changes. This permits NAEP to provide a clear picture of student academic progress over time and for teachers, principals, parents, policymakers, and researchers to use NAEP results to assess progress and develop ways to improve education in the United States. For more information, please read An Introduction to NAEP.

There are two types of assessments: main NAEP and long-term trend NAEP. Main NAEP is administered to fourth-, eighth-, and twelfth-graders across the United States in a variety of subjects. The Main NAEP is conducted between the last week of January and the first week in March every year. National results are available for all assessments and subjects. Results for states and select urban districts are available in some subjects for grades 4 and 8. The Trial Urban District Assessment (TUDA) is a special project developed to determine the feasibility of reporting district-level NAEP results for large urban districts. In 2009 a trial state assessment was administered at grade 12. Long-term trend NAEP is administered nationally every four years. During the same academic year, 13-year-olds are assessed in the fall, 9-year-olds in the winter, and 17-year-olds in the spring. Long-term trend assessments measure student performance in mathematics and reading, and allow the performance of students from recent time periods to be compared with students since the early 1970s.

For example, the 1997 and 2008 NAEP arts assessments were part of the Main NAEP Assessments. The NAEP 1997 Arts Assessment was conducted nationally at grade 8. For music and visual arts, representative samples of public and nonpublic school students were assessed. A special "targeted" sample of students took the theatre assessment. Schools offering at least 44 classroom hours of a theatre course per semester, and offering courses including more than the history or literature of theatre, were identified. Students attending those schools who had accumulated 30 hours of theatre classes by the end of the 1996-97 school year were selected to take the theatre assessment. The NAEP 2008 Arts Assessment was administered to a nationally representative sample of 7,900 eighth-grade public and private school students. Approximately one-half of these students were assessed in music, and the other half were assessed in visual arts. The music portion of the assessment measured students' ability to respond to music in various ways. Students were asked to analyze and describe aspects of music they heard, critique instrumental and vocal performances, and demonstrate their knowledge of standard musical notation and music's role in society. The visual arts portion of the assessment included questions that measured students' ability to respond to art as well as questions that measured their ability to create art. Responding questions asked students to analyze and describe works of art and design. For example, students were asked to describe specific differences in how certain parts of an artist's self-portrait were drawn. Creating questions required students to create works of art and design of their own. For example, students were asked to create a self-portrait that was scored for identifying detail, compositional elements, and use of materials.

Most recently, in 2016, a total of 8,800 eighth-graders in the nation's public and private schools responded to and critiqued existing works of music and visual art and created their own original artwork. NCES collected and analyzed the data and released the 2016 report highlighting key findings. Average music and visual arts responding scores are reported separately on a scale of 0 to 300 points. Average creating scores for visual arts are reported on a scale of 0 to 100 percent. Results are also reported by student groups, school type, and region, as well as in comparison to the 2008 assessment.

In addition, NAEP has a number of special studies that are conducted periodically. These include research and development efforts such as the High School Transcript Study and the National Indian Education Study. More information on these special studies is available on the NAEP Web site.