Are states reporting the truth about student achievement?

National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) vs State Self Reports

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 a substantial extent, the discrepancies are explained by differences in the type and content of the tests used by the states and the NAEP.  As discussed in a recent technical briefing,  such comparisons are exceedingly complex.  In fact, there is credible argument that certain of the NAEP components should not be compared to any state test.  Of course, such a restriction would be untenable if the NAEP is to be used as a national student achievement benchmark, i.e., its intended purpose. 

Here are ECF’s observations: 

1. According to the NAEP, in all but one state, less than 40% of 4^th graders read at a proficient level.  In 10 states, less than 30%.  Math scores are about the same.  These numbers are at the root of America’s educational problems and they have undergone little change in decades.
2. Most states report higher percentages of proficient students when measured by their test. Still, only a few find more than 50% of students reaching the proficient level.  
3. Presumably, technical factors account for the mostly higher state scores but the differences are substantial and in one direction. Only four states find fewer proficient students than the percentage estimated by the NAEP.   In contrast, over half of the states exceed the NAEP’s assessment by 30 or more points—a significant discrepancy considering that the NAEP is the nation’s “gold standard” for student achievement.

Are states being honest with themselves about student achievement?  In considering this question, it is well to recall that prior to the No Child Left Behind Act of 2002 there were no national reporting requirements for student achievement.  Moreover, 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. 

Are states returning to their old ways?  The present data seems to suggest that they may be. 

Virtually all organizations seek to maintain a favorable public image of themselves.  They report to the public but typically with accomplishments highlighted and deficiencies minimized. 

We, at Education Consumers Foundation, urge the use of this chart to correct for this tendency.  It not only displays the degree to which state test scores are amplified, but its “NAEP Adjustments” can be used to estimate how well your school or district would perform if its outcomes were evaluated by the NAEP. 

In other words, ECF’s NAEP Adjustment can be used to confer a greater immediacy and relevance to facts about schooling that are so often dismissed as someone else’s problem.

To see how well your local schools are teaching reading, visit our third grade reading charts.  To see how much schooling failure costs communities in the form of hidden taxes, see our cost-of-reading-failure calculator. 

If you are concerned about 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 candidate that shares your concern for better results or consider running yourself. 

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