4th Grade Reading Proficiency
This map compares states by 4th grade math proficiency; click on the map to view the data and rank for each state. For an in-depth analysis of this map and the data behind it, please see below.
|
|
|
4th grade reading proficiency varies by region. On average, 4th graders in the Northeast and the Midwest perform better on NAEP reading tests than 4th graders in the South and the West. In the Northeastern states, approximately 36% of 4th graders are reading at the proficient level, while in the Western states, only 25% are reading at the proficient level. Of the states that rank in the bottom half of the country, all but four are located in the South or the West. [1]
In Mississippi, only 18% of 4th graders are reading-proficient, the lowest percentage in the country. Compare this to top-ranking, similar-sized (and also much wealthier) Connecticut, where 38% of 4th graders are reading-proficient. This means that Connecticut has approximately 130,000 more 4th graders reading at the proficient level than Mississippi—around 25% of each state’s student population.
4th grade reading proficiency is roughly correlated with student poverty and state per-pupil expenditure. In general, states that perform better in 4th grade reading proficiency have lower student poverty rates. Research by the RAND Corporation has found that NAEP performance is linked to student background and family characteristics. [2] In the states that rank in the bottom 12 in 4th grade reading proficiency, 19% of students are living in poverty, in comparison to the states that rank in the top 12, where 12% of students are living in poverty.
Mississippi, Louisiana, and New Mexico rank in the bottom five states in both 4th grade reading proficiency and student poverty. In contrast, New Hampshire, Vermont, and Minnesota all rank in the top five states in both categories.
In addition, there is a relationship between 4th grade reading proficiency and statewide per-pupil expenditure. While this correlation is not as strong as the correlation with student poverty, states that have more reading-proficient 4th graders generally spend more on education. This relationship could also be a reflection of student demographics and relative state poverty. The states that rank in the bottom 12 in 4th grade reading proficiency spend, on average, $7,135 per-pupil, while the states that rank in the top 12 spend $9,263 per-pupil.- 4th grade reading proficiency levels are a strong predictor of 8th grade reading proficiency levels. In most states, reading proficiency for 4th and 8th graders is at comparable levels. 4th grade reading and math proficiency are also strongly linked, with math performance in 4th grade remaining higher than reading performance in most states by an average of four to five percentage points.
- 4th grade reading proficiency has improved little over the past decade and remained stagnant in recent years. In 2005, only two percentage points more of 4th grade students nationwide (31%) performed at the proficient level in reading than in 1992 (29%). In addition, reading proficiency has remained at 31% nationwide since the 2003 NAEP test. On the 2005 NAEP test, only 20 states improved in 4th grade reading proficiency from 2003—13 remained at the same proficiency level, and in 17 states proficiency rates actually declined.
The achievement gap among 4th graders in reading has been closing since 1992, but remains significant. Reading proficiency has increased by five percentage points, or more than 50%, for 4th grade black students (8% to 13% proficient). Hispanic students are also performing much better on 4th grade reading tests—their proficiency increased four percentage points, or 33% (12% to 16% proficient). White students’ proficiency increased as well (35% to 41% proficient) but at a slower rate of less than 20%, and the scale score gap between white and minority students is in decline.
Overall achievement has remained level while all of the sub-groups have improved because of demographic changes in the student population. This phenomenon, known as Simpson’ paradox, is the result of the lower-performing sub-groups—black and Hispanic students—becoming a larger proportion of the tested population.
[1] Based on Census Bureau-designated regions. Northeast: Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New Hampshire, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont. Midwest: Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, Ohio, South Dakota, Wisconsin. South: Alabama, Arkansas, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, Mississippi, North Carolina, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia, West Virginia. West: Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Hawaii, Idaho, Montana, New Mexico, Nevada, Oregon, Utah, Washington, Wyoming
[2] David W. Grissmer, Ann Flanagan, Jennifer H. Kawata, & Stephanie Williamson, RAND Corporation, Improving Student Achievement: What State NAEP Test Scores Tell Us
Per-Pupil Expenditure. Statewide per-pupil expenditure equals the total amount of revenue paid out by school systems in the state divided by total school enrollment. It includes funds from federal, state, and local sources and funds spent on day to day operating expenses, such as teacher salaries, and capital expenses, such as school construction.
School Finance Inequity. School finance equity figures presented reflect a definition contained in Title I of the No Child Left Behind Act. That definition examines the differences in per-pupil spending among school districts across a given state. The per-pupil expenditure for every school district is compared to the average per-pupil expenditure for the state and weighted according to size and poverty level.
Indirect Aid. Indirect aid is support provided for school districts through the federal tax code. For example, a community can use local property taxes to finance local schools, and it costs taxpayers less because local property taxes are deductible on federal income tax returns.
Direct Aid. Direct aid is education funding that comes from the federal government and is distributed directly to states and then given to individual school districts. The two largest direct aid funding streams are the federal Title I program for disadvantaged students and the IDEA special education program for children with disabilities.
Title I. Title I of the No Child Left Behind Act authorizes direct aid from the federal government to states and school districts to support the additional education needs of children from low-income families.
IDEA. The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) authorizes direct aid from the federal government to states and school districts to support the additional education needs of children with disabilities.
Student Poverty Rate. The student poverty rate reflects the number of children in a state ages 5 to 17 living beneath the Census Bureau's poverty line. In 2004, the poverty income threshold for a family of four was $19,157.
Achievement. State-defined proficiency standards of what students should know and be able to do in each grade are developed separately by each state. States use these standards to test and assess whether students are performing adequately, as required under the No Child Left Behind Act.
Nationally-defined proficiency standards of what students should know and be able to do are developed by the National Assessment Governing Board. The Board administers a national test to a representative sample of students-the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP)-that measures whether students are performing at grade level.
Percentage figures presented reflect the proportion of students learning at grade level according to state NCLB and national NAEP standards, respectively.
Post new comment