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
    • Our Work in Dayton
  • 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
Flypaper

Heartbreak on NAEP

Michael J. Petrilli
10.28.2015

Unfortunately, the rumors, predictions, and surmises were correct: Scores on the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) are mostly down or flat. The worst news came in eighth-grade math, where twenty-two states saw declines. One of the only bright spots is fourth-grade reading, where ten states (as well as Washington, D.C., Boston, Chicago, and Cleveland) posted gains.

Why this happened will be combed over and argued. So far, it feels like anyone’s guess (more on that below). But there’s no denying that it’s bad news. It had come to seem like NAEP scores would always go up, at least over the long term, just like it had come to seem like murder rates would always go down. Now the real world has intervened to remind us that social progress is not inevitable. Let’s not sugarcoat it: This is deeply disheartening for our country, our K–12 system, and especially our kids.

As our friends in the research community like to remind us, it’s impossible to draw causal connections from changes in NAEP data; doing so is “misNAEPery.” Yet we can’t help but search for explanations. And we can certainly float hypotheses about the trends—educated guesses that can then be tested using more rigorous methods (like these).

What might be going on? It could certainly be something happening inside our schools. Maybe the transition to the Common Core is causing disruption and growing pains (or worse), and those are reflected in these data. Maybe the political debate over standards, testing, and teacher evaluations has caused uncertainty in the classroom or discouraged kids from trying as hard. Maybe Arne Duncan’s waivers relieved the pressure on schools to boost achievement, and they consequently took their foot off the gas. Some states will explain that they altered the portions of English language learners and students with special needs who were excused from NAEP testing. All plausible.

But it’s also plausible that these trends reflect something going on outside of schools—namely, the economic condition of our country and our communities. As I argued the other day, the Great Recession and its aftermath could have acted as a stiff headwind. As schools face more challenging demographics—partly because of the decades-long surge in immigration, but also because of the economic dislocation facing many students and their families—they have to work harder just to stand still.

Do the data bear this out? Looking at state-level differences, my read is…not really. Perhaps Nevada, Rhode Island, Florida, North Carolina, Ohio, and Kentucky can blame the recession. But it’s fair to ask why the bad economy didn’t knock Georgia, Michigan, Indiana, Alabama, or Arizona off-course. And North Dakota and Texas had better find another excuse for their test score drops.

Trends in median family income versus eighth-grade mathematics scores
(Change in family median income in parentheses)

* Data are from Kids Count; I then used the Bureau of Labor Statistics’s inflation adjuster calculator to determine inflation-adjusted income. I considered the area between -2% and +2% to be flat.

Some are already using these results to attack education reforms, including Common Core, charter schools, vouchers, teacher evaluations, and anything else they don’t like. And in fairness, some reformers would have committed misNAEPery to bolster their arguments had the trends gone in the other direction. The most honest approach today is to urge patience—to reserve judgment until more sophisticated analyses emerge and wait for 2017 to see if these numbers are a one-time blip or the beginning of a disturbing trend. We certainly don’t have enough information now to justify a major change of course. But that day may yet come.

pixelheadphoto/iStock/Thinkstock

Policy Priority:
High Expectations

President, Thomas B. Fordham Institute

Michael J. Petrilli is president of the Thomas B. Fordham Institute, research fellow at Stanford University’s Hoover Institution, executive editor of Education Next, editor in chief of the…

View Full Bio

Related Content

view
Think Again logo
High Expectations

Think Again: Are Education Programs for High-achievers Inherently Inequitable?

Brandon L. Wright 10.29.2024
NationalReport
view
Ohio charter news logo
School Choice

Ohio Charter News Weekly – 10.25.24

Jeff Murray 10.25.2024
OhioOhio Gadfly Daily
view
Gadfly Bites logo
School Funding

Gadfly Bites 10/25/24—And they would have got away with it too…

Jeff Murray 10.25.2024
OhioOhio Gadfly Daily
Fordham Logo

© 2020 The Thomas B. Fordham Institute
Privacy Policy
Usage Agreement

National

1015 18th St NW, Suite 902 
Washington, DC 20036

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]