Skip to main content

Mobile Navigation

  • National
    • Policy
      • High Expectations
      • Quality Choices
      • Personalized Pathways
    • Research
    • Commentary
      • Gadfly Newsletter
      • Flypaper Blog
    • Events
    • Scholars Program
  • Ohio
    • Policy
      • Priorities
      • Media & Testimony
    • Research
    • Commentary
      • Ohio Education Gadfly Biweekly
      • Ohio Gadfly Daily
  • Charter Authorizing
    • Application
    • Sponsored Schools
    • Resources
  • About
    • Mission
    • Board
    • Staff
    • Career
Home
Home
Advancing Educational Excellence

Main Navigation

  • National
  • Ohio
  • Charter Authorizing
  • About

National Menu

  • Topics
    • Accountability & Testing
    • Advanced Education
    • Career & Technical Education
    • Charter Schools
    • Curriculum & Instruction
    • ESSA
    • Evidence-Based Learning
    • Facilities
    • Governance
    • Personalized Learning
    • Private School Choice
    • School Finance
    • Standards
    • Teachers & School Leaders
    • Think Again
  • Research
  • Commentary
    • Gadfly Newsletter
    • Flypaper Blog
    • Gadfly Podcast
  • Events
  • Scholars Program

Beating the Odds: A City-by-City Analysis of Student Performance and Achievement Gaps on State Assessments, Results from the 2004-2005 School Year

Martin A. Davis, Jr.
4.5.2006

Michael Casserly
Council of the Great City Schools
March 2006

This is the Sixth Edition of "Beating the Odds," an ongoing analysis of how Great City Schools (i.e., schools in the nation's 66 largest urban districts) are doing in their efforts to improve student performance and shrink achievement gaps. And there's good news to share-these traditionally troubled, urban schools are making progress. "Over 80 percent of the Great City School districts have improved math scores in grades 3-10 since 1999-2000. Over 70 percent of the large cities, moreover, have improved faster than their respective states in grades 3-8." The story is similar but less dramatic for reading results. But don't jump up and down just yet. The data have a number of flaws-eleven, at least, by the report's account. Among them: 1) assessment data cannot be compared across states, because each state test is different; 2) the report didn't test the statistical significance of state test score growth rates; and 3) the report doesn't attempt to adjust for varying degrees of difficulty that state tests display. We'll add another: the state tests might be getting easier over time. What the report does do, however, is compare rising state test scores in Great City Schools with each city's state scores to determine if GCS schools are improving faster than non-GCS schools in their respective states. It also compares the gains on test scores to NAEP, specifically the Trial Urban District Assessment (TUDA), which tested several large cities similar to those that are part of Great City Schools. The TUDA data also show improvements, though less impressive. Despite all the report's flaws, there's substantial use of raw data. The report isn't definitive, but still worth a look. Read it here.

Tags: National Assessment of Educational Progress
Martin A. Davis, Jr.
Fordham Logo

© 2026 The Thomas B. Fordham Institute
Privacy Policy
Usage Agreement

National

P.O. Box 110
Burke, VA 22009

202.223.5452

[email protected]

Ohio

P.O. Box 82291
Columbus, OH 43202

614.223.1580

[email protected]

Sponsorship

130 West Second Street, Suite 410
Dayton, Ohio 45402

937.227.3368

[email protected]