Skip to content
Subscribe

Below the Curve in Education

By Indy
Published:

California'sAfrican-American, white, Latino and low-income students all have improved significantlyon national tests in fourth-grade reading and eight-grade math over the pastdecade, and at a slightly better pace than the nation as a whole, accordingto a new report.

California leadsthe nation in financial aid offered to low-income college students. It's in themiddle of the pack - 25th - nationally when it comes to college affordability.

That'sabout the end of the good news for the Golden Statein The Education Trust's series of annual Education Watchseries released recently.

The 52reports - each state, the District of  Columbia and the nation as a whole - use data fromfederal and state education departments, the U.S. Census bureau and severalprivate foundations to compare student achievement and opportunity across thenation.

Californiadidn't fare well for the most part.

  • 34th in per-student funding, with a 7 percent gap     between students in high-poverty and low-poverty districts.
  • Ahead of only Mississippi in eighth-grade science     scores on the National Assessment of Educational Progress. Data were     unavailable for seven states, though, so California can delude itself that it's     not really that bad.
  • 47th in math scores for low-income     eighth-graders. High-income students performed only slightly better,     coming in at 45th
  • Low-income fourth-graders' reading scores ranking     51st.
  • California     has made no statistically significant progress in narrowing the     achievement gap between African-American and white students or Latino and     white students in fourth-grade reading sine 1998 or eight-grade math since     2000.
  • The California Standards Test showed 51 percent     of the state's fourth-graders at proficient or above in reading in 2007,     but NAEP results showed only 23 percent proficient or better.

There's avalid reason for that difference, a difference that disappears by the way ifyou look at the 53 percent of Californiastudents who are basic or above on NAEP.

NAEP wasdesigned to test against the ultimate education experience - everythingteachers would want students to know in an ideal world. CST, and moststate-level exams, is designed to measure what students need to know. Not eventhe highest-performing countries would have 100 percent of their students reachNAEP's "basic" level, experts say.

"Simplyput, NAEP's standard for proficiency is set at a level we want every student toreach, while states set their standard for proficiency at a level we expectevery student to reach," the nonprofit Center for Public Education says.

It's yetanother gap that Californiahas to be concerned about nonetheless, given that U.S. Education Secretary ArneDuncan is a NAEP fan.

"Wehave states that tell the public that 90 percent of kids are meeting statestandards, but when we look at how they're doing on the NationalAssessment of Educational Progress, it's nowhere close," Duncantold The New York Times inFebruary. "I'm not going to reward that. I want to be transparentabout the good, bad and the ugly."

The stateand national results do dovetail when it comes to patterns.

When themost recent CST scores were release in August, EducationTrust West also noted achievement gains across ethnic and income groupswhile stressing that achievement gaps persist.

EducationTrust West also noted concerns about inadequate progress in helping studentswho score below basic and far below basic, and that's one of the great ironiesof No Child Left Behind.

Aseducators focus on students close to proficient, more children on the very highand low extremes are being left behind. Someresearch shows that the problem is even more acute for high-achievingstudents

Adhere to the IVN etiquette

By posting a comment, you agree to adhere to our etiquette rules: No partisan attacks, no personal attacks, substantiate your sources, no self-promotion.

Contact IVN

Questions about this article or our coverage? Send us a message. A free IVN member account is required.

Message sent

Thanks, we’ll review it and get back to you if needed.

Message not sent

Sorry, something went wrong. Please try again.

Sign in to send a message

Messages are tied to your IVN member account. Signing in is free and takes a few seconds.

Contact IVN

Questions about this article or our coverage? Send us a message. A free IVN member account is required.

Message sent

Thanks, we’ll review it and get back to you if needed.

Message not sent

Sorry, something went wrong. Please try again.

Sign in to send a message

Messages are tied to your IVN member account. Signing in is free and takes a few seconds.

Republish this article

Republishing guidelines

Republish IVN articles for free. Independent Voter News articles may be republished online or in print under a Creative Commons BY-NC-ND 4.0 license, on these terms:

  1. Credit the author and IVN. Keep the byline ("By Author Name, Independent Voter News") and the attribution note at the end, which links to the original.
  2. Keep the meaning. You may update time and place references and apply your house style. You may trim for length, as long as the cuts don't change the meaning or misrepresent the author. Keep the headline. Mark any additions as your own (for example "Additional reporting by ...").
  3. Translations are welcome. Translate faithfully, add "Translated from English by [your outlet]", and tell us at editor@ivn.us.
  4. Keep the links, including the link to the original article.
  5. Keep the tracking image. The HTML includes a 1-pixel image that counts readers on your page. It collects no personal information.
  6. Photos and illustrations. Images credited to IVN may be used with this article only. Images credited to others (AP, Getty, Unsplash, Wikimedia and so on) stay under their owners' terms. Secure the rights or switch "Include images" off.
  7. Don't sell it. You can't sell our articles or sell ads specifically against them. Your normal site advertising is fine.
  8. No implied endorsement. Don't suggest that IVN or the author endorses you, your candidates or your causes, or that donations to you support IVN.
  9. Keep labels. Opinion or analysis pieces keep that label.
  10. Point search engines to the original. Where your CMS allows, set the canonical URL to the original IVN article.
  11. No bulk or automated republishing, and don't submit our articles to aggregators (Apple News, Google News, MSN) as your own.
  12. Corrections and removals. Update your copy when we correct it, and remove it promptly if we ask. We'll contact you at the email you give us.
  13. Questions or print republication: editor@ivn.us.

IVN staff: fill in who you're inviting above, then create the invite.

Preparing the article

Below the Curve in Education

Choose a format
  • HTML
  • Email HTML
  • Markdown
  • Formatted (.docx)
  • Plain text
  • WordPress blocks
  • PDF
Choose a platform

Photos credited to others need their owners' permission.

To for

Republishing somewhere else? Questions? editor@ivn.us