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

Primary Progress, Secondary Challenge: A State-by-State Look at Student Achievement Patterns

Michael J. Petrilli
3.8.2006

Daria Hall and Shana Kennedy
The Education Trust
March 2006

In this short report, Ed Trust provides a useful service by pulling together state test score trends from 2003 to 2005. We learn, for example, that 22 of the 29 states for which data are available narrowed their black/white test-score gap in reading. We also learn, as the title implies, that reading scores are improving in more states’ elementary schools than in middle and high schools. (Math gains are strong across the board.) So far so good, and the gap-closing is a heartening sign that No Child Left Behind is starting to have its intended impact. But then the report goes off the rails. It provides overall trends in math and reading, grouping states by whether their scores increased, decreased, or stayed the same from 2003-2005. If this sounds familiar, it’s because Fordham did a similar analysis—that provided a comparison of trends on state reading tests with states’ performance on NAEP (the national standard)—the day the 2005 NAEP scores were released (see here). But the Ed Trust charts don’t compare state scores to gains on NAEP, so readers of its report have no way to know whether a state’s reported progress is good news (its students are learning more) or bad news (the state might be finding ways to make its own test easier). Take Michigan, for example. The percentage of elementary students reaching the proficient level on its state reading test rose 7 points; middle schoolers bumped up 12 points. Great news, right? But on NAEP, over the same period, the percentage of 4th grade and 8th grade students reaching either proficient or “basic” actually dropped or stayed the same. To its credit, Ed Trust provides an appendix comparing state achievement scores and NAEP scores for 2005. (Remarkably enough, this turned out to be the driver for most of the report’s press coverage. See here and here.) Still, the venerable organization would have been better off sticking to its gap-closing analysis. If you want an independent assessment of whether a state is actually making progress, stick with the NAEP.

Tags: Michigan National Assessment of Educational Progress No Child Left Behind Act

President, Thomas B. Fordham Institute

Michael J. PetrilliĀ is president of the Thomas B. Fordham Institute, executive editor of Education Next, editor in chief of the Education Gadfly Weekly, host of the…

View Full Bio
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]