Thread by @plthomasEdD

A little NAEP thread:

In 2017 MS made overstated claims about their NAEP reading scores, hiding the fact that 4th grade bumps disappeared by 8th grade and that NAEP scores remain mostly correlated with poverty; see radicalscholarship.wordpress.com/2019/02/14/the…

2019 NAEP reading scores are likely to be a reboot of that for MS since 4th grade reading is an outlier among states in terms of *gains* but MS remains about average in 4th grade: nationsreportcard.gov/profiles/state…

But very low still in 8th: nationsreportcard.gov/profiles/state…

Only fair things to say about new round of NAEP reading scores:

• The US has never had a period over the last 100 years when we said "reading scores are where they should be."
• There is *always* a claim of "reading crisis."
• This is irrespective of how reading is taught +

• NAEP scores, like all standardized test scores, are mostly (60% +) correlated to out-of-school factors
• NAEP scores only marginally about student achievement/reading, teacher/teaching quality, reading program effectiveness
• NAEP scores are very pale *proxies* of reading

Recent rounds of NAEP reading scores, however, are revealing how really bad reading policies (grade retention, intensive systematic phonics for all) can in the short term raise scores while likely deeply harming reading and readers. 4th-grade reading score bumps are mirages

Equity gap between rich/poor reflected in NAEP reading scores amplifies the reality in the US that the rich get richer while the poor get poorer. Wealth = high achievement; poverty = low achievement. Student outcomes are a consequence of social negligence not student ability

@threadreaderapp unroll