Last week the U.S. Department of Education released the results of the latest assessment of reading and mathematics in fourth and eighth grades in big-city public schools. Under the federal No Child Left Behind law, all states are required to take part in the federal test, called the National Assessment of Educational Progress. Since 2002, urban school districts have been invited to give the NAEP to samples of their students on a voluntary basis. Five cities did so in 2002; 10 in 2003; and 11 in 2005. The results are illuminating, both for New York City (where the test was administered all three times it was offered) and the nation.

Students in urban public schools generally have lower scores than the national average for their grade. This is not surprising, since urban districts tend to have more poverty, more children whose English is limited, and more families with lower educational attainment than those in non-urban districts. However, two urban districts in the 2005 federal test -tuCharlotte and Austin actually scored higher than the national average in mathematics at both grades; Charlotte also outpaced the national average in fourth-grade reading. Charlotte and Austin matched the national average in eighthgrade reading scores. Both these cities have a higher percentage of white students in their public schools (who tend to come from more advantaged circumstances) than the other districts that were tested (40% in Charlotte, 30% in Austin, compared to 15% in New York City, 12% in Houston and Boston, 22% in San Diego, 11% in Atlanta, 19% in Cleveland, 9% in Chicago and Los Angeles, and 4% in Washington, D.C.).

In 2003, to the surprise of most New Yorkers, the New York City public schools scored far better on the NAEP tests than most other urban districts. These tests were administered before the implementation of the current school reforms. In 2003, New York City ranked second, behind Charlotte, in math and reading in fourth and eighth grades, and in a virtual tie with Houston, San Diego, and Boston. Once again, in 2005, New York City placed behind Charlotte (and Austin too, which was not tested in 2003), and again was either tied with or closely followed by the public schools in San Diego, Houston, and Boston.

On the 2005 test of fourth grade reading, NAEP officials reported no significant change in overall performance for New York City between 2003 and 2005. However, the city did make some significant gains in this grade, where tens of millions of dollars have been spent for coaches, intensive remediation, and test preparation activities. The gains occurred at the low end of the scale, with a significant increase in the proportion of students reading at the “basic” level instead of “below basic.” The proportion of New York City students who attained the NAEP standard for “proficient” was flat at 22% in 2003 and 2005.

On the fourth grade reading test, the New York City public schools reduced the achievement gap between white and black students by 10 percentage points, which was impressive indeed. However, five of those 10 points represented a decline in the performance of white students in the fourth grade, which was puzzling. Indeed, the proportion of white students who attained the proficient standard fell to 36% from 45% in the past two years, while the proportion of black students reaching proficiency increased to 16% from 13%, Hispanic students declined to 15% from 16%, and Asian students rose to 47% from 39%.

On the 2005 eighth grade reading test, New York City again was second among the tested cities, trailing only Charlotte. However, New York City’s scores did not increase between 2003 and 2005, and the proportion of students who reached the proficient standard fell from 22% to 20%.Among black students, the proportion who were proficient fell from 13% to 10%; among white students, from 42% to 38%; among Hispanics, from 17% to 14%. The achievement gap between white and black students increased from 25% to 28%.

On the 2005 fourth grade mathematics test, the New York City public schools made an unusually strong showing. As in 2003, New York City students placed behind Charlotte (also Austin, a first-time participant in the tests),and tied with Houston, San Diego, and Boston. New York City registered a sizable five-point increase in the proportion of students who reached proficient, to 26% from 21%.This is impressive for a two-year period, and it is even better than the four-point national increase at the proficient level, to 35% from 31%.

Other urban districts also saw statistically significant gains in the proportion of students attaining proficiency on the fourth grade mathematics test, including Boston, where there was a ten-point gain to 22% from 12%; San Diego, to 29% from 20%; Houston, to 26% from 18%; Los Angeles, to 18% from 13%; and the District of Columbia, to 10% from 7%.

On the test of eighth grade mathematics, New York City was again, as in 2003, a top-scoring district, behind Charlotte and Austin and tied with San Diego, Boston, and Houston. How ever, between 2003 and 2005, there was no significant change in performance, with a few important exceptions. The achievement gap between black and white students decreased, but nearly half of the seven-point decrease in the gap was accounted for by a decline in white scores at the proficient level and an improvement in black performance from “below basic” to “basic.”

Where New York City unquestionably leads the nation is in the performance of poor children, as measured by their eligibility for free or reduced price lunch. In 2003, New York City outscored other cities and the nation in the performance of low-income students in mathematics in fourth and eighth grades as well as in reading in both grades. In 2005,low-income students in New York City trailed those in Austin and Charlotte in fourth grade mathematics and were tied with Houston and Boston. In eighth grade mathematics, New York City was tied with Boston in 2005.In reading, low-income students in New York City continued to lead other low-income students in the rest of the nation at both grade levels.

The lessons of this round of federal testing are clear. New York City had a far better public school system in 2003, when the reforms were initiated, than most people acknowledged. The reforms have been successful in improving the achievement of low-performing black and Hispanic students in fourth grade mathematics and reading and eighth grade mathematics and reading (but not in eighth grade reading).The stagnation of eighth grade scores in both subjects is problematic. The significant decline of white students reaching proficiency in fourth grade reading, eighth grade reading, and eighth grade mathematics should be cause for concern. Just as worrisome is the continuing poor performance of large percentages of black and Hispanic students in reading. Despite some improvement among low-performing students in the past two years, half of black and Hispanic students in the fourth and eighth grades registered “below basic” in 2005, which is alarming.

The cities that agreed to be measured by rigorous federal standards have made real gains by learning how their students have progressed and how they compare to their peers in other cities and in the nation. What they have learned should help them determine the steps needed to continue improving academic achievement.

Ms. Ravitch is research professor of education at New York University, a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution, and a former member of the National Assessment Governing Board.