Future Retirement Success
  • Politics
  • Business
  • Investing
  • Stocks
  • Politics
  • Business
  • Investing
  • Stocks

Future Retirement Success

Investing

Depicting K-12 Productivity, Continued

by April 14, 2025
April 14, 2025
Depicting K-12 Productivity, Continued

Neal McCluskey

Last month I wrote about creating an updated K‑12 productivity chart. The difficulty of any chart is balancing ease of understanding with accuracy and nuance, and that applies here.

A major concern with the trial chart I produced was complication. It was not intuitive, especially using outcomes of high school seniors surpassing certain performance benchmarks. The goal was to have roughly comparable spending and outcome measures—percentage change in spending versus percentage point change in student performance. The primary source of confusion is that the “main” National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) exam, which was added to extend the performance trend from 2012 to 2019, has a “proficiency” benchmark, but the long-term trend (LTT) exam does not. 

I used the change in the percent of students scoring “proficient” or above to demonstrate progress on the main NAEP, and passing the middle cut-score on the NAEP reporting table for the LTT. But that score could seem arbitrary (also, it is actually the second-highest cut-score overall). The NAEP does have descriptions of the benchmarks, but those would be difficult to explain on the chart.

A simpler version of that chart can be seen next, still using students surpassing cut scores, but with spending and scores compared to a base year, which varies for each trend because some tests were first administered later or earlier than others.

To remedy the benchmark problem, next is essentially the original productivity chart that ended in 2012, except rather than using inflation-adjusted total funding for a high school senior’s K‑12 career, it plots percentage change in NAEP scale scores against percentage change in inflation-adjusted per-pupil spending, and adds main NAEP scores to extend the trend to 2019. 

The problem is that a percentage change in a scale score has indeterminate meaning; a small percentage change could indicate small or large learning increases. That said, as a rule of thumb, a year of learning is equal to about 10 scale score points. This is itself controversial, but using it, the 6‑point scale-score increase from the baseline of 300 on LTT math is a 2 percent rise between the first administration in 1978 and the last in 2012, suggesting 17-year-olds had 3.6 more months’ worth of learning in the last year versus the first, assuming a 180-day school year. 

Was that a good return coinciding with a 76 percent increase in inflation-adjusted per-pupil spending—from $8,879 to $15,588? That’s a judgment call.

While the ways of presenting the productivity evidence have meaningful differences, the ultimate story seems to be the same. For high school seniors—essentially our education system’s “final” products”—outcomes in reading have been stagnant or falling. In math, they rose until 2012 but largely stagnated after, while spending has ballooned.

Of course, as bears constant repeating, NAEP—and standardized testing generally—likely does not capture nearly all that people think education should be about. Meanwhile, numerous variables impact NAEP scores beyond spending, which is one reason a version of the chart (see below) includes a line for changing GDP; other things equal, an increase in material well-being should foster an increase in academic outcomes.

In the end, life is complicated, so any chart should be taken as just one piece of evidence in analyzing broad educational outcomes.

0
FacebookTwitterGoogle +Pinterest
previous post
DP Trading Room: SPX Earnings Update
next post
Pete Marocco, mastermind behind dismantling of USAID projects, leaves State Department

You may also like

The Occupational Licensing Elves on the Shelf

December 13, 2024

Congress Should Reject a Blockbuster Christmas Stopgap Measure

December 18, 2024

Mallory v. Norfolk Southern: Boom Days Ahead for...

June 27, 2023

A US Sovereign Wealth Fund Is a Bad...

February 6, 2025

Public Schooling Culture War Cooled Considerably in 2024

January 16, 2025

Friday Feature: Tapestry Academy and Microschool Florida

July 14, 2023

Friday Feature: Expression Prep Academy

August 25, 2023

Campus Unrest: The Legal Framework

May 3, 2024

Meta Makes Major Moves to Advance Free Expression...

January 9, 2025

Orwellian Justice: The Trial Penalty Under Fire

April 28, 2025

    Get free access to all of the retirement secrets and income strategies from our experts! or Join The Exclusive Subscription Today And Get the Premium Articles Acess for Free

    By opting in you agree to receive emails from us and our affiliates. Your information is secure and your privacy is protected.

    Recent Posts

    • Trump ally stands firm against ‘big, beautiful bill’ despite pressure: ‘It’ll completely backfire’

      June 8, 2025
    • Rubio condemns assassination attempt on Colombian presidential candidate Miguel Uribe

      June 8, 2025
    • Obama WH physician says Biden doc should have performed cognitive test

      June 8, 2025
    • Trump warns of ‘serious consequences’ if Elon Musk funds Democrats

      June 7, 2025
    • Musk jokes about reconsidering stance on Big Beautiful Bill after Schiff’s praise

      June 7, 2025
    • Musk deletes explosive posts about Trump and Epstein files

      June 7, 2025

    Categories

    • Business (8,152)
    • Investing (2,019)
    • Politics (15,571)
    • Stocks (3,136)
    • About us
    • Privacy Policy
    • Terms & Conditions

    Disclaimer: futureretirementsuccess.com, its managers, its employees, and assigns (collectively “The Company”) do not make any guarantee or warranty about what is advertised above. Information provided by this website is for research purposes only and should not be considered as personalized financial advice. The Company is not affiliated with, nor does it receive compensation from, any specific security. The Company is not registered or licensed by any governing body in any jurisdiction to give investing advice or provide investment recommendation. Any investments recommended here should be taken into consideration only after consulting with your investment advisor and after reviewing the prospectus or financial statements of the company.

    Copyright © 2025 futureretirementsuccess.com | All Rights Reserved