Maybe a partial explanation, from one of the links, comparing red and blue states between 2020 and 2024: “The differential extent of school closures during the pandemic is the most likely explanation for the differential achievement trends across states.”
And what did you find? I read the whole piece and nowhere is there any detail at all on what Mississippi did besides a vague reference to "core academic instruction".
One of the links did a better job of explaining some of the changes, and I think they are enlightening (especially how one of their actions forced parents to face the reality of their struggling students), but it only discusses the efforts made to improve literacy, with no mention.
I'm happy for Mississippi and the other southern states and hope that these improvements are the result of creative decisions and increased effort by the system. Any time a strategy seems to work we can learn from it. But, at least as of yet, it is very hard for me to divorce any improvements in education scoring from the still lingering effects of the disastrous COVID lockdowns – especially when so much of the essay is about the difference between red states and blue states.
Excellent question and one of the things I expected to see discussed in the article. From what I could find elsewhere, it seems there was a switch from a "complete litteracy" methodology and curriculum to a "science of reading" with a phonics-based emphasis one, and the addition of a test at the end of 3rd grade that holds back students who fail.
I did a project to help enable the return to phonics as a proven method for learning how to read. The more I learned about the historical trend towards whole language learning versus traditional phonics, and the mindless adoption by progressive school districts of whole language learning methods, the more amazed I became at the absolute lack of evidence and proof that whole language works, and in fact evidence suggests that phonics is what works. I really struggle with the absolute lack of evidence-based thinking in the public school system.
I read an article a long time ago about phonics. The gist of it was the whole language works OK except for kids with dyslexia, and that black children, especially black boys, are more likely to have dyslexia.
"As just one example, Mississippi’s eighth grade reading results are not as impressive as its fourth grade outcomes."
That's not "just one example".
That's the ball game. Mississippi has been doing this for over a decade, and there's not much bump in 8th grade. Just like NAEP score increases in 4th grade never led to 12th grade improvements, it's pretty clear that getting all worked up about 4th grade phonics doesn't matter much to building 8th grade vocabularies.
At the end of the day, it's cognitive ability, not instruction method, that wins the day in the long term.
You talk about "biases" while never mentioning race. Reformers are always using black and Hispanic scores to beat up public schools. The "case to be made" against Oregon and Vermont is that their white kids aren't doing well, but that would draw attention to the fact that their white kids are still far ahead of Mississippi's supposedly awesome improvements among black kids. That's why Oregon and Vermont get passes. Because once you acknowledge that white kids doing poorly still do much better than black kids doing well, the whole notion of "improving schools" becomes obviously a matter of who's got the best demographics.
But then, the public already knows this. All the reformer yap about improving schools never makes much dent in the public because they know better.
In reading scores, since 2015, Mississippi has reduced a 12 point gap to a 4 point gap (vs the national average). Seems like good progress, and it makes sense that progress in 8th grade would trail 4th grade.
Not really. You've had a host of eighth graders coming through since those original fourth graders. And again, when you look at it by race, there's not much happy news.
Inherently, no. On average, as Skateman says, whites have higher IQs. I don't like the word "smarter".
And no, there's no argument for either cultural or economic differences. What the hell do you think people have been doing for 60 years if not trying to establish other reasons for the difference? There's tons of research.
I'm simply pointing out that most reformers, who like to pride themselves on "real talk", know full well that despite the bold promises of 30 years ago, every attempt to "improve outcomes" has only seen marginal improvements in lower grades and only within race.
Average IQ tests say yes over and over and over. In the same way that Asian and Ashkenazi average IQs (and outcomes) are consistently higher than whites. Different peoples - due to the environments their ancestors evolved in - have different strengths and weaknesses.
That’s an argument for cultural and socioeconomic differences. The idea that the pigmentation of someone’s skin makes them inherently superior or inferior is both dumb and racist. Black Americans outperform Southern and Eastern Europeans on international assessments. Mixed race American who by your logic should be dumber than white people outperform Western Europe. White Americans outperform Korea and Hong Kong.
I'm sorry but you're incorrect. Asian students at poverty levels get much higher SAT scores (and have higher IQs) than black students whose parents got masters degrees. And you're comparing apples and oranges with higher SES American blacks testing against the poorest Europeans. Education levels differ by nation and this can greatly affect PISA tests. But IQ tests are less prone to such bias and here you see much greater consistency. There is no more replicable study in the social sciences than IQ by race. This is not "racist" but rather an acknowledgement of reality. Races are different and that's OK. We evolved for thousands of years under different environments that selected for different traits. I'm sorry you think that intelligence (an attribute no different than running speed or propensity to sunburn) makes someone more or less human than someone else. I assure you it does not.
Over the years, state after state after state has reported miraculous improvements in their educational results based on standardized tests. Time after time, the results have proven to be because the states created conditions supporting one form or another of cheating on the tests. Bob Somerby has been beating this drum for literally 20 years.
How sure are we that this isn't what's happening in Missisippi?
You can’t draw conclusions from these particular numbers without further reading I think. A couple points that I would want to know more about:
1. Looking at the Urban Institute NAEP data (which I think is mostly what you’re writing about), the demographic adjustment to the scores is what makes Mississippi look good. Their raw scores are much lower, relatively (e.g. no longer better than WI). I would want to understand the model they use to make that adjustment.
2. Performance on one test or set of tests at one or two time points isn’t an important outcome in itself. I would want to know if there are improvements in important outcomes that should be attributed to the changes in educational policy.
Probably not the only questions — my point is this is a complicated system and the single summary statistic is not enough to motivate broad policy recommendations.
I'm open to being wrong and re-evaluating my assumptions. When I learn things are better than I thought, I love that. Improvement and cost-effectiveness should be celebrated and learned from, and it looks like Mississippi should be learned from.
But you're pointing out trajectory, not where states actually are, and using a narrow lens. I just looked at the U.S. News education rankings overall (maybe an imperfect measure, but not useless), and of the bottom 25 states, 19--76%--are red. If you flip it and look at the top 10, it's closer, and #1 and #2 are New Jersey and Florida (surprised me!) respectively, but blue still comes out on top: 60% of those states voted Democratic in 2024.
Maybe this will change if trends continue, but it's hardly the case that red states have bested blue in quality of education.
most of what is know to work is pushed aside by egotistical narcissists who want fame and glory for introducing their own pet project. so much evidence is out there that proves what work yet is seeming ignored for fashionable trends and marketing
OK if I read an article about policy ideas and the writer right off the bat comes out vituperating against propaganda, or misleading unscientific disinformation, to me it's a sign the writer might not be a level-headed participant in a scholarly debate trying dispassionately to sort the best strategies to teach kids how to read, maybe something of an ideologue on hearing a criticism of his pet theory.
Still, there is at least one objection that seems valid to me. Why isn't there as much (or even any?) improvement for 8th graders as for 4th grader (I have not seen neat graphical data about this)? Has anyone one on the pro-MS side of the debate proposed an explanation?
Look into the retention rate for k-2. They are holding more students back so their first year scores are higher than everyone else. I think in 2023 it was almost 12% of first graders in the state were held back. It’s working though even at the risk of the students.
I like the article, but can you explain *what* Mississippi is doing different?
Great question.
Maybe a partial explanation, from one of the links, comparing red and blue states between 2020 and 2024: “The differential extent of school closures during the pandemic is the most likely explanation for the differential achievement trends across states.”
This is why I read the whole piece.
And what did you find? I read the whole piece and nowhere is there any detail at all on what Mississippi did besides a vague reference to "core academic instruction".
One of the links did a better job of explaining some of the changes, and I think they are enlightening (especially how one of their actions forced parents to face the reality of their struggling students), but it only discusses the efforts made to improve literacy, with no mention.
I'm happy for Mississippi and the other southern states and hope that these improvements are the result of creative decisions and increased effort by the system. Any time a strategy seems to work we can learn from it. But, at least as of yet, it is very hard for me to divorce any improvements in education scoring from the still lingering effects of the disastrous COVID lockdowns – especially when so much of the essay is about the difference between red states and blue states.
Science of reading.
Excellent question and one of the things I expected to see discussed in the article. From what I could find elsewhere, it seems there was a switch from a "complete litteracy" methodology and curriculum to a "science of reading" with a phonics-based emphasis one, and the addition of a test at the end of 3rd grade that holds back students who fail.
Phonics is a big part of it
I did a project to help enable the return to phonics as a proven method for learning how to read. The more I learned about the historical trend towards whole language learning versus traditional phonics, and the mindless adoption by progressive school districts of whole language learning methods, the more amazed I became at the absolute lack of evidence and proof that whole language works, and in fact evidence suggests that phonics is what works. I really struggle with the absolute lack of evidence-based thinking in the public school system.
This report opened my eyes. https://open.spotify.com/show/0tcUMXBFMGMe8w79MM5QCI?si=jTJIld87QBWjsaVNVcELow
I’m pretty left wing.
I learned to read by phonics by the time I was four. It works.
I added a link above to a podcast that's worth the time.
I learned a lot about this during my campaign for state rep. They called it Big Textbook and it was jaw dropping
💯
Phonetic reading instruction works better for _all_ children.
I read an article a long time ago about phonics. The gist of it was the whole language works OK except for kids with dyslexia, and that black children, especially black boys, are more likely to have dyslexia.
This is it exactly. I'm all in favor of phonics because kids of low cognitive ability (of any race) and dyslexia are far more likely to need phonics.
But it's not a miracle cure, and most of our kids read just fine no matter how they learn.
I disagree. Too many adult professionals read poorly. Too many people write as if English is not their first language.
"As just one example, Mississippi’s eighth grade reading results are not as impressive as its fourth grade outcomes."
That's not "just one example".
That's the ball game. Mississippi has been doing this for over a decade, and there's not much bump in 8th grade. Just like NAEP score increases in 4th grade never led to 12th grade improvements, it's pretty clear that getting all worked up about 4th grade phonics doesn't matter much to building 8th grade vocabularies.
At the end of the day, it's cognitive ability, not instruction method, that wins the day in the long term.
You talk about "biases" while never mentioning race. Reformers are always using black and Hispanic scores to beat up public schools. The "case to be made" against Oregon and Vermont is that their white kids aren't doing well, but that would draw attention to the fact that their white kids are still far ahead of Mississippi's supposedly awesome improvements among black kids. That's why Oregon and Vermont get passes. Because once you acknowledge that white kids doing poorly still do much better than black kids doing well, the whole notion of "improving schools" becomes obviously a matter of who's got the best demographics.
But then, the public already knows this. All the reformer yap about improving schools never makes much dent in the public because they know better.
In reading scores, since 2015, Mississippi has reduced a 12 point gap to a 4 point gap (vs the national average). Seems like good progress, and it makes sense that progress in 8th grade would trail 4th grade.
Not really. You've had a host of eighth graders coming through since those original fourth graders. And again, when you look at it by race, there's not much happy news.
Are you saying white people are just inherently smarter than black people?
Inherently, no. On average, as Skateman says, whites have higher IQs. I don't like the word "smarter".
And no, there's no argument for either cultural or economic differences. What the hell do you think people have been doing for 60 years if not trying to establish other reasons for the difference? There's tons of research.
I'm simply pointing out that most reformers, who like to pride themselves on "real talk", know full well that despite the bold promises of 30 years ago, every attempt to "improve outcomes" has only seen marginal improvements in lower grades and only within race.
Average IQ tests say yes over and over and over. In the same way that Asian and Ashkenazi average IQs (and outcomes) are consistently higher than whites. Different peoples - due to the environments their ancestors evolved in - have different strengths and weaknesses.
That’s an argument for cultural and socioeconomic differences. The idea that the pigmentation of someone’s skin makes them inherently superior or inferior is both dumb and racist. Black Americans outperform Southern and Eastern Europeans on international assessments. Mixed race American who by your logic should be dumber than white people outperform Western Europe. White Americans outperform Korea and Hong Kong.
I'm sorry but you're incorrect. Asian students at poverty levels get much higher SAT scores (and have higher IQs) than black students whose parents got masters degrees. And you're comparing apples and oranges with higher SES American blacks testing against the poorest Europeans. Education levels differ by nation and this can greatly affect PISA tests. But IQ tests are less prone to such bias and here you see much greater consistency. There is no more replicable study in the social sciences than IQ by race. This is not "racist" but rather an acknowledgement of reality. Races are different and that's OK. We evolved for thousands of years under different environments that selected for different traits. I'm sorry you think that intelligence (an attribute no different than running speed or propensity to sunburn) makes someone more or less human than someone else. I assure you it does not.
Actually, white kids at poverty levels do much better on any metric than rich black kids. Asian kids, it depends.
Not a single reliable source for big statements such as “worst white students do better than the best black students”. Don’t feed this troll.
Over the years, state after state after state has reported miraculous improvements in their educational results based on standardized tests. Time after time, the results have proven to be because the states created conditions supporting one form or another of cheating on the tests. Bob Somerby has been beating this drum for literally 20 years.
How sure are we that this isn't what's happening in Missisippi?
You can’t draw conclusions from these particular numbers without further reading I think. A couple points that I would want to know more about:
1. Looking at the Urban Institute NAEP data (which I think is mostly what you’re writing about), the demographic adjustment to the scores is what makes Mississippi look good. Their raw scores are much lower, relatively (e.g. no longer better than WI). I would want to understand the model they use to make that adjustment.
2. Performance on one test or set of tests at one or two time points isn’t an important outcome in itself. I would want to know if there are improvements in important outcomes that should be attributed to the changes in educational policy.
Probably not the only questions — my point is this is a complicated system and the single summary statistic is not enough to motivate broad policy recommendations.
excellent points I hope the author addresses.
I'm open to being wrong and re-evaluating my assumptions. When I learn things are better than I thought, I love that. Improvement and cost-effectiveness should be celebrated and learned from, and it looks like Mississippi should be learned from.
But you're pointing out trajectory, not where states actually are, and using a narrow lens. I just looked at the U.S. News education rankings overall (maybe an imperfect measure, but not useless), and of the bottom 25 states, 19--76%--are red. If you flip it and look at the top 10, it's closer, and #1 and #2 are New Jersey and Florida (surprised me!) respectively, but blue still comes out on top: 60% of those states voted Democratic in 2024.
Maybe this will change if trends continue, but it's hardly the case that red states have bested blue in quality of education.
In that graph, what happened to Maine? If Maine hadn't dropped like a stone, Mississippi would still be below it despite its large gains.
The podcast Sold a Story has the explanation for reading gains covered.
Any state that eliminates unscientific reading instruction methods in favor of phonics will see similar gains.
Children don’t learn to read by having books in the area.
They learned to read by sounding out small words and learning little by little with some struggle every day .
most of what is know to work is pushed aside by egotistical narcissists who want fame and glory for introducing their own pet project. so much evidence is out there that proves what work yet is seeming ignored for fashionable trends and marketing
I have unexpectedly gotten involved in this education and litteracy debate, and the "Mississippi Miracle" generates a lot of heat. See this webpage for instance: https://radicalscholarship.com/2022/09/01/dont-buy-sor-propaganda-apmreports-is-selling/
OK if I read an article about policy ideas and the writer right off the bat comes out vituperating against propaganda, or misleading unscientific disinformation, to me it's a sign the writer might not be a level-headed participant in a scholarly debate trying dispassionately to sort the best strategies to teach kids how to read, maybe something of an ideologue on hearing a criticism of his pet theory.
Or this in the LA Times, trying to debunk the MS results: https://www.latimes.com/business/story/2023-07-03/how-mississippi-gamed-national-reading-test-to-produce-miracle-gains.
Still, there is at least one objection that seems valid to me. Why isn't there as much (or even any?) improvement for 8th graders as for 4th grader (I have not seen neat graphical data about this)? Has anyone one on the pro-MS side of the debate proposed an explanation?
How? Why? How?
Look into the retention rate for k-2. They are holding more students back so their first year scores are higher than everyone else. I think in 2023 it was almost 12% of first graders in the state were held back. It’s working though even at the risk of the students.
Look into the retention rate for k-2 they are purposely holding students back to raise their first year scores.
Is there any connection between poor performance and the strength of teachers’ unions?
excellent points I hope the author can address.
Need to qualify. There's some private ‘good’ ones. Maybe a couple of good public ones but Idoubt it. No info on home school