Test scores have barely risen since 1970 despite 245% spending increase
Jack Elbaum
Video Embed
Test scores released today from the Department of Education’s National Assessment of Educational Progress show significant drops in both reading and math among 13-year-olds. The New York Times reports that the “last time math performance was this low for 13-year-olds was in 1990. In reading, 2004.” The drops were most pronounced among students from low-income families and minority students.
While much of the discussion around this news has been focused on the recent drop in test scores associated with prolonged school closures in 2020 and 2021 — and rightfully so — looking at the data as a whole highlights even deeper policy failures.
SWEETHEART HUNTER PLEA IS GIFT TO BIDEN AND TRUMP
https://twitter.com/JenniferSey/status/1671477299177193473?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw
The NAEP graphs track test scores from the 1970s until today. In math, students scored 266 in 1973, hit a high point of 285 in 2012, and have been regressing since then to the point where scores are at 271 today. In reading, students scored 255 in 1971, hit a high point of 263 in 2012, and have been regressing since then to the point where scores are at 256 today.
What sticks out is that, particularly in reading, there were never significant improvements over time in either category. At their peaks, math scores had risen 7% and reading scores had risen a mere 3%. Comparing the 1970s scores to those today, reading scores rose by less than 1% and math scores rose by 1.8%. To put that in context, since 1971, inflation-adjusted educational funding per student has risen by more than 245%.
Yes, you read that right. Despite the fact per pupil spending has gone up by more than 245% since the 1970s, test scores rose less than 2%.
An absolute disaster.
This tells us something important: funding is not what determines educational outcomes. This has been known since at least the 1990s, when a review of 400 studies on the subject found that “there is not a strong or consistent relationship between student performance and school resources.” We can also look at the state of some of our most well-funded districts in the country such as Baltimore City Schools, which spends more than $21,000 per student, or Chicago Public Schools, which spends almost $30,000 per student. In each of those districts, there were at least a dozen schools where not a single student tested proficient in either math or reading.
On the other hand, Nicholas Kristof at the New York Times recently documented the unprecedented improvement in Mississippi schools that has come as a result of “increasing reliance on phonics and a broader approach to literacy called the science of reading.” For fourth graders, the state has moved from the bottom of NAEP rankings to the middle, and among children in poverty, the state is now at the top. Importantly, this happened despite “ranking 46th in spending per pupil in grades K-12.”
A similar story has been observed in New York City, where charter schools have achieved astounding successes despite spending less per pupil than the traditional public schools they blow out of the water on exams. These schools emphasize rigor, long days, and high standards.
What this suggests is that for an education system to flourish, it needs to stick to the fundamentals. Teaching reading well and setting high expectations go a long way. There is of course so much more schools are doing in order to excel, but much of it comes back to this basic idea.
CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER
Yet, in almost every conversation about stagnating student achievement, alleged underfunding is cited as a reason. This is particularly true when listening to the rhetoric of teachers unions. But we must put their talking points in perspective: their interests are to collect as many dues as possible, not work in the best interest of students.
It’s time to recognize this and actually prioritize the solutions that work.
Jack Elbaum is a summer 2023 Washington Examiner fellow.