The indefatigable Bruce Baker is at his best in this post, where he puts the NAEP scores into perspective. As he notes, it is not useful to look at a two-year test score change as a reliable indicator. It is far wiser to look at scores in a longitudinal fashion and, when possible, look at other factors that may affect test scores. Then, too, he notes that the NAEP results do not align well with Michelle Rhee’s scorecard for the states. Some of the states she considered to be tops don’t do well on NAEP, either short term or long term.
Even with Baker’s fine analysis, it makes me uneasy to see this maniacal national and international race to get the highest scores. As long as our policymakers and federal policy continue to ignore the undying factors of child health and well-being, and the well-being of families and communities, the NAEP scores are like shadows on the wall, interesting but a distraction from the more important factors that create the conditions for a good life, including a respect for and love of learning.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
“. . . continue to ignore the undying factors of child health and well-being, and the well-being of families and communities, the NAEP scores are like shadows on the wall, interesting but a distraction from the more important factors that create the conditions for a good life, including a respect for and love of learning.”
You’re getting there, Diane, getting there.
I don’t consider them “interesting” but “vain and illusory” that when given any credence whatsoever cause harm to many students, and by extension teachers and schools.
Señor Swacker: thank you as always for your comments.
Food for thought—although I am already leaning in your direction.
😃
I would add that I have noticed a shift in the edubullies’ arguments. I have repeatedly drawn attention to Secretary of Education Arne Duncan’s speech of April 30, 2013 to the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association. Among other politically motivated inconsistencies, he espoused every position on high-states standardized testing [for/against/somewhat for-somewhat against] whilst chastising his expert critics in the audience by invoking Campbell’s Law and admonishing THEM to stop fooling around and get to work making those same hazing rituals more effective and less abusive.
😏
Leave aside the stunning incoherencies. I have noticed that lately the purveyors of CCSS and high-stakes standardized testing and the like have amped up the volume on declaring themselves absolved of any responsibility for the failures of their programs and plans and initiatives. Rather, they declaim, any major difficulties and problems are the result of the perverse obstruction and inadequacies of special interests like teachers, administrators and school districts across the country—and lately they’ve begun adding parents to that list.
This is classic “kiss up, kick down.” The edubullies and educrats pander to edupreneurs and wealthy edufrauds while taking out their inadequacies on those they consider below them. Meaning, the vast majority of us.
They won’t stop on their own. They can’t. Too much $tudent $ucce$$ involved.
That is why I applaud the growing opt-out movement.
😎
It appears to me that the only recurring item in the scoring improvement is the teacher. No matter how the “reformers” change things, the teacher is the common thread. he/she will continue to adapt and meet the neeeds of the children under their care. they will continue to be the buffer between the garbage that is handed to them and what they present to the children.
We must be firm on this. Test results are a classic case of begging the question. Deformers begin by assuming that high test scores mean better education. We must refuse to go beyond that initial highly questionable assertion.
“We must refuse to go beyond that initial highly questionable assertion.”
If I may modify your statement “We must REFUTE AND CONDEMN that initial FALSE assertion ‘that high test scores mean better education’.”
Sorry, off-topic, but here’s a refreshing article from writers who get it: http://www.thenation.com/blog/177108/new-public-poverty-and-education
I am no statistician BUT… how can you do a study of this nature without factoring in the mobility of students in title one schools? Every month new students are coming and others are leaving… THIS IS THE NORM. The students come in from all over… newly arrived, shuffled from school to school for a variety of issues often behavioral, out of state etc… Would this not interfere with the holy grail “baseline” making it ever-in-flux???? Just thinking a bit and out of my area of expertise for sure…
Well, let’s just put it this way, artseagal: There is no such beast as a “standadized” test because the conditions under which the tests are taken are all different for all students.