Are states reporting the truth about student achievement?

Are States Being Honest with Themselves About Student Achievement?

The charts below compare the most recent National Assessment of Education Progress (NAEP) reading and math reports with the state testing reports required by the No Child Left Behind Act.

The discrepancies are surprising.  If judged by national standards, students in most states are not as proficient in reading and math as the state tests say they are. 

To some extent, the inconsistencies are explained by the differing content and purposes of the two tests.  Each state chooses its own test and the NAEP is a single test chosen by the National Assessment Governing Board.  As discussed in a recent technical briefing from the National Academy of Education, such comparisons can be difficult to interpret.   Nonetheless, the contrasts are informative

Here are ECF’s observations: 

1. According to the NAEP, no state has more than 40% of 4^th graders reading at a proficient level and twenty-three states report less than 30%.  Math scores are about the same.  These numbers are at the heart of America’s educational problems and they have undergone little change in decades.
2. Most states report significantly higher percentages of proficient students when assessed by their state test. Still, only 13 states report that more than half of their students reach the proficient level and in only 2 states do 70% of their students exceed proficient on the state’s test.
3. Granting that technical factors may account for the higher state scores, the NAEP/state differences are nonetheless eye-opening—especially since they are almost all in one direction. For example, on the 2024 fourth grade reading test, only four states find fewer proficient students than the percentage estimated by the NAEP.   In contrast, 13 states exceed the NAEP’s assessment by 20 or more points—a remarkable discrepancy considering that the NAEP is the nation’s “gold standard” for student achievement.

Are states being honest with their own officials and citizens about student achievement? 

In considering this question, it is well to recall that as recently as 1988, virtually all states were reporting that their students were above average.  Not until John Jacob Cannell’s Lake Woebegone reports were published did this anomaly become widely known. Moreover, prior to the No Child Left Behind Act of 2002, there were no national reporting requirements for student achievement.  With few exceptions, the public was truly in the dark. Now, the facts are leaking out.

Plainly, there has been progress but states are still well short of full transparency—and for familiar reasons.  Virtually all organizations seek to maintain a favorable public image and schools are no exception.  What they report to the public typically highlights accomplishments and minimizes deficiencies. The widespread expansion of school choice will further incentivize this tendency.  

We encourage you to use of our charts as a corrective.  They not only shows how each state’s overall average compares to the NAEP’s assessment, their“NAEP Adjustments” (available since 2022} can be used to put rosy school reports in perspective. 

For example, if your Vermont or North Carolina school reported that 43% of its 4^th grade students are proficient in reading, you would be able to independently estimate the quality of your school’s performance if it were measured against the national “gold standard,” i.e., the NAEP.  For both states, the estimated NAEP score would be equal to 43% (state score) x .57 (NAEP adjustment) = an estimated national standard score of 24.5% proficient. 

If you have no information as to your school’s score on the state’s 4^th grade reading test, we can furnish you a close approximation.  Just visit our third grade reading charts.  Given that third and fourth grade proficiency scores are highly correlated, the 3^rd grade number for your school will serve as a reasonable approximation of the 4^th grade. 

As another data point of interest, you can obtain an estimate of how much failed reading instruction costs your community in the form of hidden taxes.  Please see our cost-of-reading-failure calculator. 

If you are concerned about the quality of your local schools and want to take action, step one is to inform yourself.  ECF’s website is a good place to start.  

If you want to take action, find a school board candidate that shares your concern for better results or consider running yourself. 

Let us know how we can help:  https://education-consumers.org/contact/