[Vision2020] SAT Scores
Thomas Hansen
tomh@uidaho.edu
Wed, 27 Aug 2003 13:35:36 -0700
This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand
this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.
------_=_NextPart_001_01C36CDA.C561B0D0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Mr. Courtney -
Could you pleaseenlighten us as to how current SATs have been "dumbed-down",
especially considering that more advanced math classes (Calculus, advanced
trig, etc.) have been introduced into the high school level over the past
several years?
Tom Hansen
Moscow, Idaho
-----Original Message-----
From: Dale Courtney [mailto:dale@courtneys.us]
Sent: Wednesday, August 27, 2003 1:02 PM
To: vision2020@moscow.com
Cc: abacharach@dnews.com
Subject: [Vision2020] SAT Scores
Importance: High
Visionaries,
Yesterday's Daily News carried a story that the national SAT
scores rose 6 points this year over 2002, with results on the verbal portion
of the exam showing the most significant gains in eight years. This article
is also available online at the Washington
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A47512-2003Aug26?language=printer>
Post.
But there are two other issues to this otherwise cheerful story.
First, the types of questions asked in the SAT today are not the same as
in the past. They have been "dumbed-down" and the results "recentered." For
instance, the current SAT has had the following recent modifications made to
it:
* The scores have been "recentered" to make the mean score the
midpoint at 500 rather than accepting student performance wherever it should
fall.
* This big "recentering" came in 1996 when about 75 points were added
to the verbal and 25 points to the math.
* They then went back and recomputed the previous years' numbers and
made them comparable.
* Additional time has been provided to complete the math portion, and
calculators are now permitted (which just might have something to do with
modest increases over the years!).
* They have removed the challenging antonym sections.
* They have removed or changed questions that were thought to be
challenging to some students.
This means that the SAT of today is not nearly as challenging as the SAT
of the past. So the news is making an apples-to-oranges comparison at best.
The second issue is the cost for these SAT results. If we compare the
actual SAT results (ignoring the dumbing-down effect, which only exacerbates
the problem) to the spending per student in the USA, we find the following:
<http://courtneys.us/MSD/images/SAT.jpg>
Note: DPI is the SAT points per dollar of real per pupil expenditure.
The dollar figures are inflation-adjusted expenditures per student on
government education in constant FY 01 dollars.
Whereas the real cost to educate children in the government schools is
225% of what it was in 1967, the DPI has decreased (i.e., the "bang for the
buck" continues to decrease).
These same results <http://www.nber.org/digest/aug02/w8873.html> were
found by Caroline Hoxby, but she used NAEP scores instead of SAT scores, and
made some further adjustments. In a nutshell:
Hoxby examines the effect of choice on school productivity by looking at
three recent reforms that have introduced choice into areas that previously
had little: vouchers in Milwaukee, charter schools in Michigan, and charter
schools in Arizona. She looks at the productivity of public schools that
faced increased competition as a result of these reforms, not just at the
productivity of the voucher or charter schools themselves. For instance, she
compares the productivity of Milwaukee's public schools before and after the
voucher program provided competition. As a control group for these schools,
she uses urban public schools in Wisconsin that are located outside
Milwaukee (and are thus immune from voucher competition) but that serve
students similar to those of Milwaukee. She finds that Milwaukee's public
schools raised their productivity quickly and dramatically in response to
competition and that the Milwaukee schools that faced the most competition
raised their productivity the most. Productivity rose because the schools
achieved more while spending the same amount (as opposed to holding
achievement steady while reducing spending). In fact, in the Milwaukee
schools facing substantial competition, achievement rose by as much as 4.7
national percentile points faster per year than in control schools. Such
gains are virtually unprecedented for an American school reform. [emphasis
mine]
If the Left is really interested in educational results, then they must
first acknowledge that all of their methods of the past (e.g., throwing more
money at the problem) have failed -- and it will continue to fail. Only
school choice and competition will achieve the results that they say they
want.
Best,
Dale
------_=_NextPart_001_01C36CDA.C561B0D0
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<TITLE>SAT Scores</TITLE>
<BASE
href=http://courtneys.us/MSD/SAT.htm>
<META http-equiv=Content-Language content=en-us>
<META content="MSHTML 5.50.4807.2300" name=GENERATOR>
<META content=FrontPage.Editor.Document name=ProgId><!--mstheme--><LINK
href="_themes/copy-of-shnarleys/copy1110.css" type=text/css rel=stylesheet>
<META content="copy-of-shnarleys 1110, default" name="Microsoft Theme">
<META content="tl, default" name="Microsoft Border"></HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV><SPAN class=320563220-27082003><FONT face=Arial color=#000000 size=2>Mr.
Courtney -</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=320563220-27082003><FONT face=Arial color=#000000
size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=320563220-27082003><FONT face=Arial color=#000000 size=2>Could
you pleaseenlighten us as to how current SATs have been "dumbed-down",
especially considering that more advanced math classes (Calculus, advanced trig,
etc.) have been introduced into the high school level over the past several
years?</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=320563220-27082003><FONT face=Arial color=#000000
size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=320563220-27082003><FONT face=Arial color=#000000 size=2>Tom
Hansen</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=320563220-27082003><FONT face=Arial color=#000000
size=2>Moscow, Idaho</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV class=OutlookMessageHeader dir=ltr align=left><FONT face=Tahoma
size=2>-----Original Message-----<BR><B>From:</B> Dale Courtney
[mailto:dale@courtneys.us]<BR><B>Sent:</B> Wednesday, August 27, 2003 1:02
PM<BR><B>To:</B> vision2020@moscow.com<BR><B>Cc:</B>
abacharach@dnews.com<BR><B>Subject:</B> [Vision2020] SAT
Scores<BR><B>Importance:</B> High<BR><BR></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2><SPAN
class=000205919-27082003>Visionaries,</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN
class=000205919-27082003></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<TABLE dir=ltr cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="100%" border=0>
<TBODY>
<TR>
<TD vAlign=top width="1%">
<P><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2></FONT></P></TD>
<TD vAlign=top width=24></TD><!--msnavigation-->
<TD vAlign=top>
<P> Yesterday's Daily News carried a story that the
national SAT scores rose 6 points this year over 2002, with results on
the verbal portion of the exam showing the most significant gains in
eight years. This article is also available online at the <A
href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A47512-2003Aug26?language=printer">Washington
Post</A>.</P>
<P> But there are two other issues to this otherwise
cheerful story.</P>
<P> First, the types of questions asked in the SAT
today are not the same as in the past. They have been "dumbed-down" and
the results "recentered." For instance, the current SAT has had
the following recent modifications made to it:</P>
<UL>
<LI>The scores have been "recentered" to make the mean score the
midpoint at 500 rather than accepting student performance wherever it
should fall.
<UL>
<LI>This big "recentering" came in 1996 when about 75 points were
added to the verbal and 25 points to the math.
<LI>They then went back and recomputed the previous years' numbers
and made them comparable. </LI></UL>
<LI>Additional time has been provided to complete the math portion,
and calculators are now permitted (which just might have something to
do with modest increases over the years!).
<LI>They have removed the challenging antonym sections.
<LI>They have removed or changed questions that were thought to be
challenging to some students. </LI></UL>
<P> This means that the SAT of today is not nearly as
challenging as the SAT of the past. So the news is making an
apples-to-oranges comparison at best.</P>
<P> The second issue is the <U>cost</U> for these SAT
results. If we compare the <U>actual</U> SAT results (ignoring the
dumbing-down effect, which only exacerbates the problem) to the spending
per student in the USA, we find the following:</P>
<P><IMG height=471 src="images/SAT.jpg" width=751 border=0
NOSEND="1"></P>
<P> Note: DPI is the <B>SAT points per dollar of real
per pupil expenditure</B>. The dollar figures are inflation-adjusted
expenditures per student on government education<B> </B>in constant FY
01 dollars.</P>
<P> Whereas the <U>real</U> cost to educate children
in the government schools is 225% of what it was in 1967, the DPI has
<U>decreased</U> (i.e., the "bang for the buck" continues to decrease).
</P>
<P> These <A
href="http://www.nber.org/digest/aug02/w8873.html">same results</A> were
found by Caroline Hoxby, but she used NAEP scores instead of SAT scores,
and made some further adjustments. In a nutshell: </P>
<BLOCKQUOTE>
<P>Hoxby examines <FONT color=#0000ff>the effect of choice on school
productivity</FONT> by looking at three recent reforms that have
introduced <I>choice</I> into areas that previously had little:
vouchers in Milwaukee, charter schools in Michigan, and charter
schools in Arizona. She looks at the productivity of public schools
that faced increased <I>competition</I> as a result of these reforms,
not just at the productivity of the voucher or charter schools
themselves. For instance, she compares the productivity of Milwaukee's
public schools before and after the voucher program provided
<I>competition</I>. As a control group for these schools, she uses
urban public schools in Wisconsin that are located outside Milwaukee
(and are thus immune from voucher competition) but that serve students
similar to those of Milwaukee. She finds that <FONT
color=#0000ff>Milwaukee's public schools raised their productivity
quickly and dramatically in response to competition and that the
Milwaukee schools that faced the most <I>competition</I> raised their
productivity the most. Productivity rose because the schools achieved
more while spending the same amount </FONT>(as opposed to holding
achievement steady while reducing spending). In fact, in <FONT
color=#0000ff>the Milwaukee schools facing substantial
<I>competition</I>, achievement rose by as much as 4.7 national
percentile points faster per year than in control schools. Such gains
are virtually unprecedented for an American school reform.
</FONT>[emphasis mine]</P></BLOCKQUOTE>
<P> If the Left is <U>really</U> interested in
educational results, then they must first acknowledge that all of their
methods of the past (e.g., throwing more money at the problem) have
failed -- and it will continue to fail. Only school choice and
competition will achieve the results that they say they want. </P><!--msnavigation--></TD></TR><!--msnavigation--></TBODY></TABLE>
<DIV><SPAN class=000205919-27082003><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=000205919-27082003><FONT face=Arial
size=2>Best,</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=000205919-27082003><FONT face=Arial
size=2>Dale</FONT></SPAN></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>
------_=_NextPart_001_01C36CDA.C561B0D0--