Five Reasons Not To Worry About U.S. Schools

Is the rest of the world making our schools look bad? That is what we are going to be hearing from many American politicians as the 2008 campaign accelerates. But a refreshingly clear and balanced report just published by The Center for Public Education indicates this is a simple-minded argument that is unworthy of us and our democracy.

The report, "More Than a Horse Race," was written by Jim Hull, policy analyst at the center, which is affiliated with the National School Boards Association. I sent a copy to a top U.S. expert on international educational comparisons, author and columnist Gerald W. Bracey. There were parts of the report Bracey did not like.

But I have found several points on which Hull and Bracey seem to agree. The Hull report at www.centerforpubliceducation.org, released on Jan. 17, should be read in its entirety because it is the best summary yet of the four major studies that compare our achievement rates to those abroad. (You can also get Bracey's response if you e-mail him at gbracey1@verizon.net.)

1. In reading and science, we often do better than other countries.

Hull said, according to the studies he examined, "American kids are good readers in comparison to many of their peers across the globe. Only three countries significantly outscored the United States at the elementary and high school levels. . . . The reading performance of U.S. fourth-graders was particularly strong. They scored significantly above the international average . . . while our 15-year-olds scored slightly above the average." In science, fourth- and eighth-graders were above the international average, and only three countries did significantly better than the United States at the elementary school level.

2. The achievement gap between our affluent and poor students needs fixing, but is no worse than that of European countries that brag about their social welfare systems.

Hull said when comparing students' performance by parental educational level, parental occupation, and number of books at home, the achievement gap between students from high-income and low-income families in the United States "was not measurably different from the international average."

3. Although the data on international educational comparisons has improved, it still has many flaws, so even Hull's analysis has to be viewed with caution.

Politicians who say with certainty that we are losing to our international competitors do not realize how weak the numbers are. Said Hull: "Because each assessment measures different subjects, different groups of students, and different types of knowledge (plus different countries participate), it is difficult to say definitively where the United States stands in comparison to other countries." Bracey noted that each of the four major studies have rules to level the playing field so the different systems can be prepared. But not all countries follow those rules in every instance. In one much-cited report, the 1995 Trends in Math and Science Study, 16 of the 41 countries failed to meet the participation and sampling criteria, Bracey said. This was noted in a chart, but the statistics were reported anyway and journalists like me never mentioned the glitch.

4.Close analysis of the data raises doubt about the old charge that the older the American child, the worse he looks in international comparisons.

Some international comparisons show U.S. fourth-graders doing relatively well, eighth-graders about average and high schoolers below average. But Hull noted that when the American Institutes of Research made a more careful, apples-to-apples comparison of countries that had participated in the same studies, "the position of the United States did not decline as students moved up in grade levels."

5. Those who say our economy is doomed unless our schools get better appear to be ignoring recent history.

Hull introduced this topic in his report by noting that none of the international comparative studies include data from China or India. "Given the rapidly rising position these nations are taking in the global economy," he said, he hoped they would be included in the future. Bracey interpreted this as a reflection of "the common, but perhaps erroneous assumption that how well 13-year-olds bubble in answer sheets has something to do with the economic health of a nation."

I think Bracey made too much of Hull's simple plea for more data, but I agree that we overemphasize the connection between achievement rates of our children and the living standards of our country. We want our kids to do better in school so they can have more choices in their lives. How well our economy performs depends less on their individual academic successes than on weather and war, the business cycle and the ability of corporations and government agencies to react quickly and intelligently to change.

Bracey pointed to Japan, which "stagnated economically for almost 15 years even as its kids continued to ace tests." Hull's data and the latest National Assessment of Educational Progress results show the opposite situation here: U.S. achievement rates have been stagnating, particularly in the high school years, while our economy is the strongest in the world.

Bracey said: "The U.S. was ranked first in the world in global competitiveness until 2006 and fell only because of concerns by the World Economic Forum over national debt, trade deficits, our ability to maintain our infrastructure in the wake of Katrina and the simultaneous waging of war and cutting of taxes." Notice they did not express any concern about our math scores.

If you live in one of the early primary and caucus states, and find yourself stalked by those presidential candidates eager for your vote, ask them about that.