The charts below allow for comparisons to be made between district scores and the scores for the nation and large cities nationally.
- Click on any "sort" button to rank districts numerically by the data in that column.
- Click on a jurisdiction to see how other jurisdictions compare in terms of statistical significance.
See district results for grade 8 for a more detailed report with average scores, achievement levels, and percentile results for the nation, large cities, and districts.
When comparing overall student performance, 6 districts had higher scores than large cities nationally, while 10 had lower scores.
Average scale scores for all students in eighth-grade NAEP mathematics, by jurisdiction: 2011
> Score was higher or gap was wider than selected jurisdiction
< Score was lower or gap was narrower than selected jurisdiction
X Not significantly different from selected jurisdiction
The order of jurisdictions is based solely on unrounded values (up to eight decimal places) rather than the rounded values reported in the table, and does not take into consideration whether the scores between two or more districts are significantly different from one another. Information on whether there is a significant difference between jurisdictions is located in the column “Cross-jurisdiction significant difference."
A negative number in the average score gap column indicates that the latter group in the comparison is higher than the group that it is compared to.
When scores for a single student group (e.g., all students) are compared, the significant differences are displayed using adjustments for multiple comparisons. When gaps are compared, the significant differences displayed are based on single pairwise tests of statistical significance.
For complete data, visit the NAEP Data Explorer. See scale score results for all students, by race/ethnicity, and family income.
When comparing the results for urban districts to results for the nation and large cities, it is important to consider how the demographics of the jurisdictions are different. For example, large cities and participating urban districts differ from the nation in the proportion of students eligible for the National School Lunch Program (an indicator of lower family income). While the percentages of lower-income students eligible for free/reduced-price school lunch in the nation in 2011 were 52 percent at grade 4 and 48 percent at grade 8, the percentages of lower-income students in the districts ranged from 52 to 100 percent.