Reading any us school – education consumers foundation income by education level

Mindful that parents, taxpayers, and their elected representatives cannot make informed distinctions about schooling without sound evidence about student achievement, our goal is to put the mountains of publicly available data into a format that it is easy to use and understandable to most stakeholders.

The centerpiece of our effort is the development of charts and interactive graphics that simplify data interpretation. should education upto secondary level be a fundamental right Much of our time, however, is consumed by simply locating, interpreting, and extracting data from online sources. Despite national reporting requirements, most states’ public reports are not particularly informative or easily rearranged into formats that would be more useful. Also, be aware that states develop their own tests and standards–ones that are (with exceptions) far less rigorous than the longstanding National Assessment of Educational Progress ( see the comparison here). For those states with a particularly high degree of score inflation, we provide an additional chart showing the percentage of “advanced” students in each school–a statistic that would represent a more realistic assessment of student achievement.

The focus of schooling changes from learning-to-read to reading-to-learn after 3rd grade. Children who have not mastered reading by that point are handicapped for a lifetime. They cannot optimally profit from subsequent schooling or be all they can be in life. Schools and teachers overloaded with weak readers are inevitably rendered costly, inefficient, and ineffective.

The most obvious implication of this data (click the “All Schools” button on each chart) is that huge numbers of children in all states are not learning to read by 3rd grade. This fact is at the heart of most of America’s educational (and economic competitiveness) problems.

The third obvious implication is that some schools substantially exceed the performance of their demographic peers while others fall well short. These differences in outcomes frequently (but not always) represent important differences in the effectiveness of the school’s reading instruction program.

Note that most states do not make the school performance data for a given school year publicly available until the midpoint of the next school year. unemployment rate by education level Also be aware that each state has its own tests and score interpretation system, so the proficiency percentages seen in ECF’s charts cannot be compared from state to state.

State tests differ with respect to standards (i.e., expected knowledge and skill levels), with respect to scale scores defined as “proficient,” and even with respect to the terminology used to designate reading performance levels. Most states, however, follow the practice of the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP): Students who have mastered reading are said to be “proficient” or “advanced” and students who fall short of mastery are said to be “basic” or “below basic.” Differences in this language will be noted in individual charts.

Because most schools have at least a small percentage of students with serious reading disabilities, most states have few schools with 95-100% proficiency rates. However, in the case of states where very many schools report proficiency rates in excess of 90%, ECF provides an additional chart showing the percentage of students who have reached an “advanced” level of reading performance, i.e., a chart showing the percentage of students who have reached a higher cut score on that state’s reading assessment. We believe that such a chart provides users a more nuanced view of reading achievement differences between schools in states with relatively low minimum standards.

A more objective assessment of the standards maintained by states can be inferred by comparing the percentages of students designated as proficient by the state with the percentages found by the NAEP’s independent assessment. Click here to view a comparison of state NAEP averages created by the U. S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences; you can also see charts here comparing each states’ proficiency rates to those of NAEP for 4th and 8th grade reading along with charts for math and science.

Not long ago, I read an online letter from an angry parent. She said my kids (ages 10 and 12) are bright, they get “A”s and “B”s in most subjects, but neither of them can spell, write a correct sentence, summarize readings accurately, or organize their thoughts on paper. My 7th grader had only two English assignments this semester and they were “collaborative.”

I know other parents who have similar concerns. Their kids get good report cards but don’t really seem to be learning. education level on job application For example, one had a son who finished high school with a “B” average but did so badly on the ACT that he had to take several remedial courses in college.

In truth, it’s hard for a parent to know what kind of education their child is getting because most parents aren’t experts and almost everything they know about their schools comes from the schools themselves. Not surprisingly, almost all of it is favorable. Even the educational accountability reports published by the state typically do not make it easy for users to compare and evaluate local schools. Often, they are like financial reports: useful mainly to experts.

Parents and communities need a way to learn about their schools that is independent of the perspective presented by the schools themselves. Parents and taxpayers are education’s consumers and the schools are its producers. Each has a unique set of interests.

Education Consumers Associations are a response to this need and one is now forming in our area. They are nonprofit grassroots organizations dedicated primarily to improved student learning and better preparation for college and the job market. For more information, call Jane Doe at 555-your-number or email her at