8th Grade Math Proficiency

• 8th grade math proficiency varies by region. On average, 8th graders in the Northeast and the Midwest perform better on NAEP math tests than 8th graders in the South and the West. In the Northeastern states, approximately 34% of 8th graders are reading at the proficient level, while in the Western states, only 25% are reading at the proficient level. The 13 lowest-performing states in the country are located in the South or the West, while 12 of the 15 highest-performing states are located in the Northeast or Midwest. [1]
  
  Minnesota ranks first in the country with 43% of its 8th graders testing as proficient in math. Compare this to low-performing, similar-sized (and also much poorer) Alabama, where only 15% of 8th graders are proficient in math. This means that Minnesota has approximately 250,000 more 8th graders proficient in math than Alabama—around 30% of each state’s student population.
  
  

• 8th grade math proficiency is roughly correlated with student poverty and statewide per-pupil expenditure levels. In general, states that perform better in 8th grade math 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 11 in 8th grade math proficiency, 19% are living in poverty, in comparison to the states that rank in the top 12, where 11% of students are living in poverty.
  
  The four lowest-performing states in 8th grade math proficiency—Mississippi, New Mexico, Alabama, and Louisiana—rank 50th, 48th, 47th, and 49th in student poverty respectively. The correlation on the high-performing end is not quite as strong, but still predictive: the top four states—Massachusetts, Minnesota, Vermont, and South Dakota—rank 17th, 4th, 2nd, and 29th in student poverty respectively.
  
  In addition, there is a relationship between 8th grade math proficiency and statewide per-pupil expenditure. While this correlation is not as strong as the correlation with student poverty, states that have more math-proficient 8th 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 11 in 8th grade math proficiency spend, on average, $7,082 per-pupil, while the states that rank in the top 12 spend $9,146 per-pupil.

• 8th grade math proficiency levels are a strong predictor of 4th grade math proficiency levels. In all states, math proficiency in 8th grade is lower than math proficiency in 4th grade, by six to seven percentage points on average. 8th grade reading and math proficiency are also strongly linked, with 8th graders more often performing worse on math than reading, although only slightly (by one percentage point on average).
  

  

   

• 8th grade math proficiency has been on the rise over the past decade but leveled off in recent years. Between 1992 and 2005, 8th grade math proficiency on NAEP tests increased nine percentage points, from 21% to 30%. Between 2003 and 2005, however, improvement in 8th grade math proficiency was limited to only one percentage point, in contrast to a significant increase in 4th grade math proficiency. In 27 states, 8th grade math proficiency increased between 2003 and 2005, but proficiency rates actually declined in 14 states and remained level in 9 states.

• The achievement gap among 8th graders in math has been closing since 1992, but remains significant. Math proficiency has increased by seven percentage points, or 350%, for 8th grade black students (2% to 9% proficient). Hispanic students are also performing much better on 8th grade math tests—their proficiency increased six percentage points, or more than 100% (7% to 13% proficient). White students’ proficiency increased as well (26% to 39% proficient) but at a slower rate of 50%, 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 testing 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