Congressional Budget OfficeSkip Navigation
Home Red Bullet Publications Red Bullet Cost Estimates Red Bullet About CBO Red Bullet Press Red Bullet Careers Red Bullet Contact Us Red Bullet Director's Blog Red Bullet   RSS
PDF
TRENDS IN EDUCATIONAL ACHIEVEMENT
 
 
April 1986
 
 
NOTES

Except where otherwise noted, dates used in this paper are school years rather than calendar years. For example, the results of a test administered in the fall of 1979 and the spring of 1980 are both labeled 1979. As a result, the dates used here are in some instances a year earlier than those in other published sources. This discrepancy is particularly common in the case of college admissions tests and other tests administered to high school seniors, which are often labeled in other sources in terms of the calendar year in which students would graduate.

Details in the text and tables of this report may not add to totals because of rounding.
 
 
PREFACE

At the request of the Subcommittee on Education, Arts, and Humanities of the Senate Committee on Labor and Human Resources, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) prepared this assessment of trends in the educational achievement of elementary- and secondary-school students. This volume presents the analysis of the trends themselves; a forthcoming companion volume, Educational Achievement: Explanations and Implications of Recent Trends, evaluates many common explanations of the trends and discusses their implications for education policy. In accordance with CBO's mandate to provide objective and impartial analysis, neither volume contains recommendations.

Daniel Koretz of CBO's Human Resources and Community Development Division prepared the analysis under the direction of Nancy M. Gordon and Martin D. Levine. Paul L. Houts edited the report. Ronald Moore typed the many drafts and prepared the manuscript for publication.

The author thanks the following organizations for providing essential data, much of which is unpublished: the National Assessment of Educational Progress, the American College Testing Program, the Iowa Testing Programs, the College Board, CTB-McGraw Hill, Science Research Associates, the state departments of education in New York, Virginia, Texas, North Carolina, Nevada, California, and Illinois, and the school districts of Cleveland, Montgomery County (Maryland), and Houston.

Many individuals contributed in various ways to this work. Particular thanks are due H. D. Hoover of the Iowa Testing Program and Lawrence Rudner of the Office of Educational Research and Improvement, U.S. Department of Education, who provided insightful contributions at many stages of the project. Other individuals whose assistance is gratefully acknowledged include Robert Cameron and Harlan Hanson of the College Board; Douglas Coulson of the Office of Technology Assessment, U.S. Congress; Robert Forsyth of the Iowa Testing Programs; Gene Guest of CTB/McGraw-Hill; Eric Hanushek of the University of Rochester; Lyle Jones of the University of North Carolina; Jackie Woods of the American College Testing Program; and Edward M. Gramlich, Jack Rodgers, and Roberton Williams of CBO. Kenneth Rubin of CBO also provided particularly valuable comments.
 
 

CONTENTS
 

SUMMARY

CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION

CHAPTER II. UNDERSTANDING MEASURES OF EDUCATIONAL ACHIEVEMENT

CHAPTER III. AGGREGATE TRENDS IN EDUCATIONAL ACHIEVEMENT

CHAPTER IV. GROUP DIFFERENCES IN ACHIEVEMENT TRENDS

APPENDIX A. DESCRIPTION OF MAJOR DATA SOURCES

APPENDIX B. EVIDENCE OF A COHORT EFFECT IN THE RECENT UPTURN IN ACHIEVEMENT

APPENDIX C. DIFFERENCES IN TRENDS BY SUBJECT AREA

APPENDIX D. VARIATION AMONG ACHIEVEMENT SUBGROUPS

APPENDIX E. DIFFERENCES IN ACHIEVEMENT TRENDS AMONG BLACK, HISPANIC, AND NONMINORITY STUDENTS

 
TABLE III-1.  ONSET AND END OF THE ACHIEVEMENT DECLINE, SELECTED TESTS
TABLE III-2.  SIZE OF THE ACHIEVEMENT DECLINE, INDICATED BY SELECTED TESTS AT GRADE 6 AND ABOVE
TABLE III-3.  SUMMARY OF NATIONAL ASSESSMENT RESULTS IN THREE SUBJECTS, AGES 9, 13, AND 17
TABLE III-4.  RECENT TRENDS ON STANDARDIZED TESTS AMONG HIGH SCHOOL SENIORS AND JUNIORS, WITH TRENDS OVER THE SAME PERIODS ON THE SAT
TABLE III-5.  NAEP MATHEMATICS CHANGES 1972-1977, AGE 17, BY AREA
TABLE III-6.  NAEP READING CHANGES 1970-1979, AGE 17, BY AREA
TABLE IV-1.  AVERAGE MATHEMATICS ACHIEVEMENT IN DISADVANTAGED URBAN COMMUNITIES AND IN THE NATION, NAEP, 1972-1981
TABLE IV-2.  AVERAGE READING ACHIEVEMENT IN DISADVANTAGED URBAN COMMUNITIES AND IN THE NATION, NAEP, 1970-1983
TABLE IV-3.  AVERAGE MATHEMATICS ACHIEVEMENT IN HIGH-MINORITY AND LOW-MINORITY SCHOOLS, NAEP, 1977 AND 1981
TABLE B-l.  TIMING OF THE END OF THE ACHIEVEMENT DECLINE, BY TEST
TABLE C-l.  MAGNITUDE OF THE ACHIEVEMENT DECLINE, BY SUBJECT
TABLE D-l.  RECENT TRENDS IN THE NATIONAL ASSESSMENT, BY ACHIEVEMENT SUBGROUP AND ETHNICITY
TABLE D-2.  CHANGE ON THE ILLINOIS DECADE TEST AMONG STUDENTS AT THE 25th AND 75th PERCENTILE
TABLE E-l.  AVERAGE ACHIEVEMENT OF BLACK AND OTHER STUDENTS IN THE NLS AND HSB, BY SUBJECT
TABLE E-2.  READING PERFORMANCE OF BLACK AND NONMINORITY STUDENTS IN THE NATIONAL ASSESSMENT
TABLE E-3.  MATHEMATICS PERFORMANCE OF BLACK AND NON MINORITY STUDENTS IN THE NATIONAL ASSESSMENT
TABLE E-4.  AVERAGE ACHIEVEMENT OF HISPANIC AND OTHER STUDENTS IN THE NLS AND HSB, BY SUBJECT
TABLE E-5.  MATHEMATICS PERFORMANCE OF NONMINORITY AND HISPANIC STUDENTS IN THE NATIONAL ASSESSMENTS
TABLE E-6.  READING PERFORMANCE OF NONMINORITY AND HISPANIC STUDENTS IN THE NATIONAL ASSESSMENTS
 
 
SUMMARY FIGURE 1.  IOWA AVERAGE TEST SCORES, GRADES 5, 8, AND 12, DIFFERENCES FROM POST-1964 LOW POINT
SUMMARY FIGURE 2.  SAT-MATHEMATICS SCORES BY ETHNICITY: BLACK AND NONMINORITY STUDENTS
FIGURE I-1.  SHARES OF ELEMENTARY/SECONDARY EDUCATION FUNDING BY LEVEL OF GOVERNMENT
FIGURE II-l.  HYPOTHETICAL TEST RESULTS EXPRESSED IN STANDARD DEVIATIONS (SDs), BASED ON THE SAT-MATHEMATICS (SAT-M)
FIGURE III-l.  HYPOTHETICAL PERIOD, COHORT, AND AGE EFFECTS, AVERAGE SCORES
FIGURE III-2.  ITBS COMPOSITE SCORES, IOWA ONLY, BY TEST YEAR AND GRADE AT TESTING
FIGURE III-3.  ITED COMPOSITE SCORES, IOWA ONLY, BY TEST YEAR AND GRADE AT TESTING
FIGURE III-4.  AVERAGE SAT SCORES, BY SUBJECT, DIFFERENCES FROM LOWEST YEAR
FIGURE III-5.  IOWA MATHEMATICS ACHIEVEMENT, DIFFERENCES FROM LOWEST YEAR
FIGURE IV-1.  IOWA COMPOSITE, ITBS, GRADES 3-8, DIFFERENCES FROM POST-1964 LOW POINT
FIGURE IV-2.  IOWA COMPOSITE, ITED, GRADES 9-12, DIFFERENCES FROM LOWEST YEAR
FIGURE IV-3.  ITBS COMPOSITE, BY BIRTH YEAR
FIGURE IV-4.  ITED COMPOSITE, BY BIRTH YEAR
FIGURE IV-5.  TRENDS IN AVERAGE READING PROFICIENCY FOR WHITE, BLACK, AND HISPANIC STUDENTS, BY BIRTH YEAR
FIGURE B-l.  ITBS COMPOSITE SCORES, IOWA ONLY
FIGURE B-2.  ITED COMPOSITE SCORES, IOWA ONLY
FIGURE B-3.  AVERAGE SAT SCORES
FIGURE B-4.  ACT SCORES
FIGURE B-5.  PERCENT OF NEW YORK STUDENTS SCORING ABOVE REFERENCE POINT
FIGURE B-6.  CALIFORNIA STATE ASSESSMENT TEST SCORES
FIGURE B-7.  VIRGINIA COMPOSITE ACHIEVEMENT
FIGURE B-8.  NAEP MATHEMATICS SCORES
FIGURE B-9.  NAEP SCIENCE SCORES
FIGURE B-10.  NAEP READING PROFICIENCY SCORES
FIGURE B-11.  NAEP READING (INFERENTIAL COMPREHENSION) SCORES
FIGURE B-12.  ITBS NATIONAL NORMING DATA
FIGURE D-l.  PERCENT OF SAT SCORES ABOVE 700
FIGURE D-2.  SAT MATHEMATICS SCORES FOR SELECTED PERCENTILES
FIGURE D-3.  SAT SCORES BY PERCENTILE OF CLASS RANK
FIGURE D-4.  ETS/CEEB SCORES AND PERCENT OF GRADUATES TAKING TEST
FIGURE D-5.  AVERAGE ADVANCED PLACEMENT SCORES AND PERCENT OF GRADUATES TAKING TESTS
FIGURE E-l.  MINORITY/NONMINORITY DIFFERENCES ON THE SAT
FIGURE E-2.  BLACK/NONBLACK DIFFERENCES ON THE ACT
FIGURE E-3.  NORTH CAROLINA BLACK/WHITE DIFFERENCES ON CAT
FIGURE E-4.  PERCENTAGES OF GRADE-NINE TEXAS STUDENTS PASSING MATHEMATICS AND READING TESTS, FOR THREE ETHNIC GROUPS


 
SUMMARY

Over the past several years, the educational achievement of American students has become a focus of intense public discussion and has led to a serious reexamination of schooling in America. A number of developments have contributed to this concern, including a substantial decline in test scores in the 1960s and 1970s, the weak performance of American students relative to their peers in some other countries, and the large gap in average test scores between some minority groups and nonminority students. More positive trends, though significant, have gained less notice--for example, the end of the overall achievement decline in the 1970s, a subsequent upturn in average scores, and recent gains of black and Hispanic students relative to nonminority students.

With the growing concern about public education has come an increasing reliance on achievement tests as indicators of the performance of students and schools. This trend has taken many forms and is apparent from the local to the national level. Many states and localities have expanded their programs of routine testing, sometimes as a result of legislation; the additional tests are often used as minimum criteria for promotion into higher grades or for graduation. Furthermore, average test scores have become a common basis of comparisons among schools and districts, and in some communities, newspapers routinely publish test results to facilitate such comparisons. The U.S. Department of Education has begun annual publication of average college admissions test scores on a state-by-state basis, and some states have taken steps to alter their own achievement tests to make their results comparable. Test scores have in fact come to be used as a national report card, influencing decisions from the level of individual students to that of national educational policy.

In the light of this heightened reliance on achievement tests, a careful appraisal of recent trends in test scores has important ramifications for educational policy. This paper assesses test score trends among elementary and secondary school students; it also discusses the strengths and weaknesses of the information they provide. A forthcoming companion study, Educational Achievement: Explanations and Implications of Recent Trends, evaluates common explanations of the trends and explores implications for educational policy.

This document is available in its entirety in PDF.