I begin by saying for the zillionth time that I do not believe in miracles or panaceas in education. There is not one way of teaching that is just right for all students. Teachers know this. And yes, I believe in the value of phonics as part of teaching reading.
I am not a proponent of the “science of teaching,” because I do not believe that there is only one best way to teach reading or math or science or history. I do not believe that legislators in the state or Congress should mandate HOW to teach. Well-prepared, experienced teachers know how to teach and are at their best when they have reasonable class sizes so they can give extra time to students who can’t keep up.
When state legislators start telling surgeons how to operate on patients, let me know.
Home life affects learning outcomes. All standardized tests show that family income affects test scores; the kids from the wealthiest families are typically at the top, while the kids who grow up in poverty typically have the lowest scores.
This is not because rich kids are inherently better than poor kids but because rich kids have advantages associated with family income, such as educated parents, regular medical care, good nutrition, economic security, better -funded schools, smaller class sizes, and predictability about where and how they live.
Poor kids often do not have these advantages because they are poor. The person who said it best and pulled together the data is Richard Rothstein, in his important book, Class and Schools. I first read it in 2007, and it was pivotal in changing my views about educational achievement and score gaps, and their causes.
Mississippi–and also Louisiana and Alabama–have been hailed for their improved reading scores on the NAEP. Fourth-grade scores have improved impressively. I am very happy for them. I have no doubt that their teachers work very hard and are not paid as well as they should be.
But I looked for an external monitor to see if there had been a “miracle.” A long-lasting miracle, based on their adoption of the “science of reading.” And I landed on the ACT, because in nine states (including Mississippi), 100% of students take the same test.
Mississippi started giving ACT to all juniors in 2015. First cohort for the “reform” hit 11th grade in 2022. If reading had improved dramatically, it should be reflected in rising ACT scores for the state’s students.
Here are the Mississippi scores:
Average ACT Composite Scores for Mississippi (Junior Year Administration)
- 2025: 17.5
- 2024: 17.4
- 2023: 17.5
- 2022: 17.4
- 2021: 17.3
Key Trends and Data
- Graduating Class of 2023: Average composite score was 17.6.
- 2024 Graduates: Average score was 17.7.
- Participation: Mississippi typically reports 100% participation due to statewide testing, which contributes to a lower average compared to states with lower, self-selected participation rates.
- Demographics: As of 2025, 9.5% of juniors met all four ACT readiness benchmarks.
In states like Mississippi, Alabama, and Louisiana, the average score for Black students typically ranges from 15.0 to 16.5, roughly following national averages for this demographic (which was 16.0 in 2024).
As of 2025 and 2026, nine states have maintained 100% ACT participation because they mandate the test for all public high school graduates.
States with 100% ACT Participation
- Alabama
- Arizona
- Kentucky (Note: Kentucky plans to switch to the SAT in Spring 2026)
- Louisiana
- Mississippi
- Nevada
- Oklahoma
- Tennessee
- Wyoming
Recent and Upcoming Changes
Illinois: Switched to the ACT as its mandatory college entrance exam starting in the 2024-2025 school year, making it a graduation requirement for all public high school students.
South Dakota: Scheduled to join the list of states requiring the ACT starting in the 2025-2026 school year.
Nebraska: Frequently reports near-universal participation (often cited at 95-100%) due to state-funded testing initiatives. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]
Why Participation is 100%
In these states, the ACT is typically used as a statewide accountability assessment. The exam is provided for free during regular school hours, ensuring that every student—regardless of their college plans—takes the test. This leads to more equitable access but often results in lower statewide average scores compared to states where only high-achieving, college-bound students self-select to take the exam.
You can check the ACT State-by-State Average Scores on the official ACT Website.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
Thank you for providing some reason to all the assertions surrounding the so-called miracles. Your insights confirm what career educators understand. Poverty matters, and those with advantages generally score higher than disadvantaged students. There are no “miracles” or “magic bullets,” although it possible to produce a few high achieving outliers through hard work and effort, but overall the reality is that there will likely be a gap between those that have access to more and those that suffer the ravages and dysfunction of poverty, which has little to do with the teachers and schools.
The bigger picture of the ACT scores also confirms there has been no miracle in the South or elsewhere. Education is attained through hard work, commitment and adequate funding. There are no shortcuts. Graduation rates would be another tool to consider because it shows achievement and results over time. All districts should work to provide enough support for their students so they may complete the requirements to receive a high school diploma as it is generally needed for employment and other post high school opportunities. Likewise, districts should make an investment to improve options for students that will train students for post high school careers for those that are not college bound.
States should support and respect their public school teachers. They should support them, guide them, but allow them to instruct students according to their professional training. States and districts should assist educators in continuous education programs that will allow teachers to develop and grow, but not dictate how they they teach. It would also be helpful if politicians, special interests and the media would stop all the hype, spin as well as the unsubtantiated claims about education, that were never an issue before education became monetized, instead of examining the actual facts. Turning public education into a commodity has turned it into “the hunger games.”
LikeLiked by 1 person
Dr. Ravitch,
I agree with your stance on miracles and panaceas in education.
Years ago, one of my graduate school professors didn’t like the term “best practices,” but he was willing to let me say “effective practices.” A nurse once told me about “evidence based practice” in her field. That seems reasonable; my problem is when one method becomes mandated regardless of the needs of an individual student.
What is your view, if any, on the learning sciences (LS)?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Define the “learning sciences.”
LikeLike
Here’s a definition:
The learning sciences is an interdisciplinary field that studies teaching and learning. Learning scientists study a variety of settings, including not only the formal learning of school classrooms, but also the informal learning that takes place at home, on the job, and among peers. The goal of the learning sciences is to better understand the cognitive and social processes that result in the most effective learning and to use this knowledge to redesign classrooms and other learning environments so that people learn more deeply and more effectively. The sciences of learning include cognitive science, educational psychology, computer science, anthropology, sociology, information sciences, neurosciences, education, design studies, instructional design, and other fields (Sawyer, 2014, p. 1).
Sawyer, R.K. (2014). Introduction: The new science of learning. In R.K. Sawyer (Ed.), The Cambridge Handbook of the Learning Sciences (2nd ed.)(pp. 1-18). Cambridge University Press.
LikeLike
Joe,
I’d like to see some evidence of the efficacy of the learning sciences. How they are used, with what results.
LikeLike
Dr. Ravitch,
That’s a good question, and it’s not one to which I know the answer. The learning sciences (LS) seems to be a rather new (circa 1991) and wide field with various topics, as shown in the variety of article names in its journal. From what I can surmise, it doesn’t seem that its research has been used in any type of instructional mandates.
Due to my very brief encounters with the learning sciences, I was simply curious to know if you had an opinion in the way that you do with other topics (e.g., the “science of reading”). Since you asked further questions (a good thing to do), it seems you may not have a particular view one way or the other at the moment.
I sincerely appreciate your interaction with me here and throughout the years, as you have had a very positive influence on my life and career.
LikeLike
Thanks, Joe. I don’t know enough about the “learning sciences” to comment. But I’m quoting one of their leaders next week. He’s impressive.
LikeLike
Oh, I’d love to know the details of the quote, but I understand if it cannot be shard beforehand.
LikeLike
Expecting impacts of Mississippi’s reform to already show in ACT scores is inappropriate. There hasn’t been enough time for a K to 3 set of reforms to work up into high school.
Mississippi didn’t start getting national notice for NAEP Grade 4 Reading improvement until 2019, and that’s not surprising. While the frequently cited legislation passed in 2013 (though there were earlier efforts — more on that later), it took 2 years just for Carey Wright to set up the major programs at the MS DOE. It took more time to get a notable number of teachers retrained and proficient in the new approaches. So, 2019 seems reasonable as the point where things started to really produce.
The 4th graders of 2019 didn’t reach 8th grade until 2023, but the NAEP got cancelled that year due to COVID. So, the first time improvements seen in Grade 4 were likely to show in Grade 8 NAEP Reading was 2024. And, guess what — if you break NAEP results down and compare separately for white students and Black students in each state, Mississippi’s 8th graders moved up very notably in 2024.
Because NAEP is a sampled assessment, a good way to consider performances is looking at statistically significant results. Back in 2013, when the reform act passed, Mississippi’s white 8th graders were statistically significantly outscored by whites in 43 other states on NAEP Reading. Flash forward to 2024 and only white students in just 7 states could make the same claim.
For Black students, the changes in NAEP Grade 8 Reading were equally notable. In 2013, Black students in 27 of the 42 states that got NAEP Grade 8 Reading scores outscored those in Mississippi by a statistically significant amount. By 2024, only those Black students in Colorado and Massachusetts could make the same claim.
One other point, between 2013 and 2024 the white minus Black achievement gap on Grade 8 NAEP was decreased by 6 NAEP Scale Score points, and the NAEP Data Explorer indicates that change was statistically significant, too.
So, impacts are just now showing for Mississippi in Grade 8 NAEP Reading. We shouldn’t expect to see impacts on 11th grade ACT testing for another year, at best.
One more point: Mississippi’s reforms didn’t start in 2013. The state was doing things to improve way back around the time the Year 2000 report from the national reading panel came out. You and your readers would really benefit from Rachel Canter’s new report, “Inside the Mississippi Marathon,” online here: https://www.progressivepolicy.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/04/PPI_Mississippi-Marathon.pdf. It turns out things like a $100 million project from the Barksdale Reading Institute started bringing outcomes from the national reading panel to Mississippi’s classrooms well before 2013. This helps explain some of the state’s improvement in Grade 4 NAEP Reading prior to that year.
The Barksdale effort was a start, but it wasn’t enough, so after 2013 the state’s rate of improvement on Grade 4 NAEP Reading, which had started to stagnate, started to rise again, and at an increased rate from that in the earlier years.
Was this a miracle? No. Is it quite impressive — absolutely. As far as the ACT goes, just be a little more patient.
LikeLike
ACT scores don’t show anything other than what an individual student did on a given day taking the test. That’s it, nothing more.
The ACT is not designed for any other purpose. Discussions such as this post are nothing more than mental masturbation, or as Wilson states “vain and illusory”.
Why feed the standards and testing malpractice regime? It’s a waste of time, monies, energy and resources that could be better used to enhance more effective teaching and learning processes. Ay ay ay ay ay!
LikeLike
The ACT is a test checking the other tests.
LikeLike
No, it isn’t. It is designed to supposedly assess a student’s readiness for college. It’s superfluous as we know the best indicator is the student’s high school GPA.
“ACT, Inc., says that the ACT assessment measures high school students’ general educational development and their capability to complete college-level work with the multiple choice tests covering four skill areas: English, mathematics, reading, and (optionally) science.[1] The optional Writing Test measures skill in planning and writing a short essay.[18] Specifically, ACT states that its scores provide an indicator of “college readiness”, and that scores in each of the subtests correspond to skills in entry-level college courses in English, algebra, social science, humanities, and biology” (from wiki)
ACT Inc. is a far-profit company owned by Nexus Capital whose main concern, rightly so in our capitalist economic system, is turning a profit.
Again, it is just one of the many invalidities involved with the standards and testing malpractice regime pointed out by Wilson and others. To use test scores for anything other than what they are designed is unethical mainly because one is not being “faithful to truth” resulting in falsehoods, distortions and prevarications.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Diane is not advocating for the ACT; she’s pointing out that the so-called “miracle” isn’t showing up in ACT scores. Big claims are being made about the spike in 4rd-grade reading scores. If those claims are true, I would expect a much higher percentage of minority students to make dramatic gains on the ACT, along with higher GPAs, greater school involvement, more scholarships, and increased college acceptance rates. The ACT is one indicator suggesting that these claims of transformative outcomes are not happening.
LikeLike
Yes, she is advocating for the ACT.
The ACT indicates nothing more than what a particular student has done on the test on a given day. Nada mas.
Any other discussions about the scores are trivialities and meaningless. In other words completely invalid.
LikeLike
No, I was not advocating for the ACT.
I was using it as an external monitor of NAEP scores.
I know you think that all standardized tests are meaningless, but unfortunately, most of the world believes in them.
Hal the states in the nation have mandated the “science of reading” and outlaws “three cuing” based on “the Mississippi Miracle.”
Those states as well as others think the tests are important.
One way to check the validity of a standardized test is to compare it to other standardized tests. In Mississippi, fourth grade scores went up, eighth grade not so much, ACT scores not at all.
If the “miracle” doesn’t persist, that’s useful to know.
You can keep saying standardized tests mean nothing, but they have a huge impact on public policy that controls what teachers are required to do.
LikeLike