A r c h i v e d  I n f o r m a t i o n

Commissioner's Statement (Part 2 of 6)

What are high school students studying and how are they performing?

In the 12 years since A Nation At Risk advocated tougher course requirements for high school graduation, states and students have responded dramatically. High school graduates are taking more courses overall, particularly academic courses. [2] The proportion of students completing the recommended core courses in English, math, science, and social studies has increased (Indicator 25), and a greater percentage is taking Advanced Placement (AP) courses.

In addition, more students are taking algebra, geometry, trigonometry, and calculus as well as advanced science courses, including chemistry and physics (Indicator 26). Both college-bound and non-college-bound students are taking more foreign language courses than their counterparts did a decade before. Furthermore, as of 1990, 42 of the 50 states had raised course requirements for high school graduation since the publication of A Nation At Risk, and 47 states had mandated student testing standards. [3] Of course, these increases can only be considered good news if the content of these courses is at least as rigorous as it was when the National Commission on Excellence in Education made their recommendations. There is some evidence that it is, but we have no national data on the content of courses. [4]

It is also encouraging to see these improvements in high school course taking reflected in gains in mathematics and science achievement. Between 1982 and 1992, the mathematics and science proficiency scores of 17-year-olds on the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) increased (9 points on each assessment). One way to get a sense of how much improvement these gains represent is to compare them to variations in proficiencies between different-aged high school students. Using this comparison, we find that the improvement for 17-year-olds from 1982 to 1992 was roughly equivalent to an additional year or two of learning in high school (Indicators 15 and 16). These gains in NAEP proficiency scores are one indication that 17-year-olds in 1992 have made substantial progress in mathematics and science relative to their peers in 1982.

Although proficiency scores in reading and writing have not shown similar increases (Indicators 13 and 14), U.S. students compared favorably to those in other countries in an international assessment of basic reading literacy in 1991-92 (Indicator 17).

Low-performing students have also progressed academically since the publication of A Nation At Risk. For example, dropout rates have declined (Indicator 6); fewer high school students are taking remedial mathematics courses before graduating (Indicator 26); and the mathematics and science proficiencies of the lowest performing 17-year-olds have increased (tables 15-3 and 16-3). However, between 1984 and 1992, the reading and writing proficiencies of the lowest performing students remained relatively stable (tables 13-3 and 14-3).

Not only are more students are taking AP examinations, but the science proficiency scores of the highest performing 17-year-olds have increased (table 16-3). In addition, since the early 1980s, the reading and mathematics proficiency scores of the highest performing 17-year-olds have remained relatively stable (tables 13-3 and 15-3).

It is significant that even though the number of Scholastic Assessment Test (SAT) test-takers as a percentage of high school graduates has increased 8 percentage points since 1983, the average mathematics score has increased and the average verbal score has remained stable (Indicator 20). These findings are considered by many to be positive because increasing participation tends to push down scores.

When examining differences in averages across NAEP scores, we should keep in mind that the performance among students of the same age or in the same grade varies considerably. For example, in reading, mathematics, and science, many students score no higher at age 17 than many of their peers did at age 9, despite the fact that they differ by 8 years of schooling. [5] Schools must cope with this variation while trying to help each student learn as much as possible. It is not surprising, then, that there is also a large degree of variation across schools in the type of curriculum offered to students with different abilities and interests. [6]

As a nation, we put great value on mathematics and science. Recently, this is evident in Goal 5 of the National Education Goals: "U.S. students will be first in the world in science and mathematics achievement." Although, as noted above, the mathematics and science scores of U.S. students have increased since the early 1980s, they remain low compared to their counterparts in many other countries (Indicators 18 and 19). Moreover, considerable variation exists across states. On the one hand, 8th grade students in some states perform as well as 13-year-old students from the best performing nations in an international comparison of mathematics achievement. On the other hand, students in other states are performing at levels similar to students in developing countries. [7]

Another area of continuing concern is the academic achievement of minority students in elementary and secondary school. For example, in 1992, the average reading proficiency scores of black 17-year-olds were 36 points below white 17-year-olds and were similar to the average proficiency scores of white 13-year-olds. The white-Hispanic reading gap at age 17 was a little narrower. White-black and white-Hispanic proficiency score differences were of similar magnitudes in science, although they were smaller in mathematics (Indicators 13, 15, and 16).

It is also worrisome that despite a narrowing in the white-minority gap in achievement during the 1980s, particularly in mathematics, recent data raise the possibility that the gap is no longer closing. For instance, the most recent (1994) NAEP results in reading suggest that minority groups lost some of the earlier gains they had made relative to whites. [8]

In addition to a narrowing in the white-minority achievement gap, there are other positive developments with regard to the achievement and attainment of black and Hispanic students. The indicators in this volume contain far more information on different subpopulations than has been reviewed here. For example, an essay reviewing the educational progress of Hispanic students begins on page 6 and an essay reviewing the educational progress of black students is contained in the 1994 edition. A review of the considerable educational advances made by women over the past several decades can be found starting on page 13.

Social scientists attribute much of the white-minority differences in achievement to the higher incidence of poverty in the families of minority children and the lower average educational levels of their parents. It is difficult for schools to compensate for such disadvantages. However, there is evidence that extraordinary schools and teachers make a difference in how all students perform. For example, research on early intervention and on one-to-one tutoring demonstrates that at-risk students can achieve at far higher levels than they have in the past. [9] There is also some evidence, particularly in math and science, that taking more challenging courses is related to higher performance and achievement. [10]

-###-

[Are more young people finishing high school?]