State School Standards Vary Widely in Study

Source: New York Times

In essence, the report issued today creates a common yardstick of proficiency, by examining the minimum proficiency score on each state’s tests of reading and math and then determining what the equivalent score would be on the math and reading components of the National Assessment of Educational Progress. The results illustrated starkly that some states’ standard for proficiency are much lower than others’.
For example, an eighth grader in Tennessee can meet that state’s standards for math proficiency with a state test score that is the equivalent of a 230 on the national test. But in Missouri, an eighth grader would need the equivalent of a 311. And while a Mississippi fourth grader can meet the state’s reading proficiency standard with a state score that corresponds to a 161 on the national test, a Massachusetts fourth grader would need the equivalent of a 234. Such score differences represent a gap of several grade levels.

In some cases, the differences between one state’s proficiency standards and another’s were more than twice as large as the national gap between minority and white students’ reading levels, which averages about 30 points on the national assessment test, according to Grover J. Whitehurst. Mr. Whitehurst is the director of the education department’s Institute of Education Sciences; he and the Secretary of Education, Margaret Spellings, spoke to reporters about the report by telephone on Wednesday.

The national test divides students’ scores into three achievement levels: basic, proficient and advanced. Mr. Whitehurst said the achievement level that many states call proficient is closer to what the national test rates as basic.

“This puts N.A.E.P. and the state tests on the same scale, and that hasn’t been done before,” Mr. Whitehurst said of the report. “One of the interesting findings of this report is that there’s no real correlation between where the state sets proficiency standard and how students perform on N.A.E.P. There’s states that set the bar high and have low N.A.E.P. scores, and states that set the bar low and have high N.A.E.P. scores.”



Read more: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/07/education/07cnd-scores.html?_r=1&hp=&oref=slogin&pagewanted=print

---

much more in the article.

It shows how nonsensical No Child Left Behind is right now.

The state tests are not valid.