TwoThirds of Wisconsin Public-School 8th Graders Can’t Read Proficient

[bonnie]

Two-Thirds of Wisconsin Public-School 8th Graders Can’t Read Proficiently—Despite Highest Per Pupil Spending in Midwest

Tuesday, February 22, 2011

By Terence P. Jeffrey

Students from Appleton West High School protest a proposal by Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker that would make teachers pay a fraction of their own pension and health-insurance costs. (AP Photo/Sharon Cekada)

(CNSNews.com) - Two-thirds of the eighth graders in Wisconsin public schools cannot read proficiently according to the U.S. Department of Education, despite the fact that Wisconsin spends more per pupil in its public schools than any other state in the Midwest.

In the National Assessment of Educational Progress tests administered by the U.S. Department of Education in 2009—the latest year available—only 32 percent of Wisconsin public-school eighth graders earned a “proficient” rating while another 2 percent earned an “advanced” rating. The other 66 percent of Wisconsin public-school eighth graders earned ratings below “proficient,” including 44 percent who earned a rating of “basic” and 22 percent who earned a rating of “below basic.”

The test also showed that the reading abilities of Wisconsin public-school eighth graders had not improved at all between 1998 and 2009 despite a significant inflation-adjusted increase in the amount of money Wisconsin public schools spent per pupil each year.

In 1998, according to the U.S. Department of Education, Wisconsin public school eighth graders scored an average of 266 out of 500 on the NAEP reading test. In 2009, Wisconsin public school eighth graders once again scored an average of 266 out of 500 on the NAEP reading test. Meanwhile, Wisconsin public schools increased their per pupil expenditures from $4,956 per pupil in 1998 to 10,791 per pupil in 2008. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics inflation calculator the $4,956 Wisconsin spent per pupil in 1998 dollars equaled $6,546 in 2008 dollars. That means that from 1998 to 2008, Wisconsin public schools increased their per pupil spending by $4,245 in real terms yet did not add a single point to the reading scores of their eighth graders and still could lift only one-third of their eighth graders to at least a “proficient” level in reading.

The $10,791 that Wisconsin spent per pupil in its public elementary and secondary schools in fiscal year 2008 was more than any other state in the Midwest.

Neighboring Illinois spent $10,353 per student in 2008, Minnesota spent $10,048 per student; Iowa spent $9,520 per student. Among Midwest states, Nebraska was second to Wisconsin in per pupil spending in its public schools, spending $10,565 per student.

Of these nearby states, only Minnesota did slightly better teaching reading to its public school students. In 2009, 39 percent of eighth graders in Minnesota public schools earned a rating of “proficient” or better in reading, and the average eighth grade reading score in the state was 270 out of 500.

In Illinois, only 32 percent of eighth graders earned a rating of “proficient” or better in reading, and the average eighth grade reading score was 265 out of 500. In Iowa, only 32 percent of eighth graders earned a rating of “proficient” or better in reading, and the average reading score was 265 out of 500. In Nebraska, only 35 percent of eighth graders earned a rating of “proficient” or better in their public schools, and the average reading score was 267 out of 500.

Nationwide, only 30 percent of public school eighth graders earned a rating of “proficient” or better in reading, and the average reading score on the NAEP test was 262 out of 500.

The National Assessment of Educational Progress explains its student rating system as follows: “Basic denotes partial mastery of prerequisite knowledge and skills that are fundamental for proficient work at each grade. Proficient represents solid academic performance. Students reaching this level have demonstrated competency over challenging subject matter. Advanced represents superior performance.”

In other words, despite the $10,791 that taxpayers were paying to educate students in Wisconsin public schools, two-thirds of eighth graders in those schools showed at best only a “partial mastery of prerequisite knowledge and skills that are fundamental for proficient work” at that grade level.

In fiscal 2008, the federal government provided $669.6 million in subsidies to the public schools in Wisconsin.

[Woody]

Wow. And the teachers think they deserve more pay than other teachers? It must be greed. I think they should be fired and then recuit other teachers from around the nation. There has to be good teachers out there who are unemployed.

[CoAspen]

Wow. And the teachers think they deserve more pay than other teachers? It must be greed. I think they should be fired and then recuit other teachers from around the nation. There has to be good teachers out there who are unemployed.

Hmmmmm, Don't see anything in this article that would remotely have anything to do with 'greed'. If fact, after reading, not sure what the author is trying to say.

Wisconsin-$10791 proficiency rate=32%

Illinois $10353 " " 32%

Minnesota $10048 " " 39%

Nebraska $10565 " " 35%

National Average=30"

These number say what? The dollars spent are not all that different, the rates are similar, slightly above the national rate. So what is the point? Is it trying to suggest a direct relationship between money spent and results to show the teachers are being greedy in their demands? If so, it gets an F! Why, the subject is complex and such an article never attempts to address any real reasons.

[bonnie]

[quote name='CoAspen

Hmmmmm' date=' Don't see anything in this article that would remotely have anything to do with 'greed'. If fact, after reading, not sure what the author is trying to say.

Wisconsin-$10791 proficiency rate=32%

Illinois $10353 " " 32%

Minnesota $10048 " " 39%

Nebraska $10565 " " 35%

National Average=30"

These number say what? The dollars spent are not all that different, the rates are similar, slightly above the national rate. So what is the point? Is it trying to suggest a direct relationship between money spent and results to show the teachers are being greedy in their demands? If so, it gets an F! Why, the subject is complex and such an article never attempts to address any real reasons.

[/quote']

When you demand the taxpayer,the parents of the children that teachers are failing,Yeh it is greed.

More and more for education,after all it is for the children.Pure hogwash.The stimulus money Wis go for "the children" to hire more teachers,yada,yada.Check and see where the money went

Mn has such a great educational system,must be all the money we have taken "for the children",the children no longer have to learn math to graduate.

What they need to do is fail the math exam three times and then it is decided it must have been to hard.Let's pass them,it was really unfair to expect them to learn math

In the private sector,education or otherwise,such lousy performance would not be job security and a hefty pension.

It would be a boot in the backside and out the door

[Dr. Shane]

The problem isn't the teachers, it is the parents. That is why children at private schools tend to do better. It isn't that private school teachers are better so much is that the type of parents that will pay for their kids to have a private education tend to be better parents and thus their kids tend to do better in school. It has more to do with the parents than the teachers. We had our kids in public school for kindergarten and moved them to church school for first grade and beyond. I liked the teacher-parent relationship better in the public school but think the religious education is worth it so we are keeping them in church school.

That said, I don't like public workers being unionized. I think they should be able to organize in some type of association and be able to negotiate with their overseeing administration through arbitration but do not believe they should have the right to go on strike. That said, I do think unions have done a lot to improve working conditions in the private sector.

[hch]

Today Wisconsin. Tomorrow what?

The wants of the cause will continually increase as we near the close of time. Means is needed to give young men a short course of study in our schools, to prepare them for efficient work in the ministry and in different branches of the cause. We are not coming up to our privilege in this matter. All schools among us will soon be closed up. How much more might have been done had men obeyed the requirements of Christ in Christian beneficence! What an influence would this readiness to give all for Christ have had upon the world! It would have been one of the most convincing arguments in favor of the truth we profess to believe -- an argument which the world could not misunderstand nor gainsay.... {RY 91.3}

[bonnie]

The problem isn't the teachers, it is the parents. That is why children at private schools tend to do better. It isn't that private school teachers are better so much is that the type of parents that will pay for their kids to have a private education tend to be better parents and thus their kids tend to do better in school. It has more to do with the parents than the teachers. We had our kids in public school for kindergarten and moved them to church school for first grade and beyond. I liked the teacher-parent relationship better in the public school but think the religious education is worth it so we are keeping them in church school.

[Dr. Shane]

Unions are still needed for the private sector. Let there be little doubt about that. There are still many companies that would rather pay out high dividends to the stock holders than pay living wages to workers. Some are so evil they don't even provide health coverage

When unions get too strong, they can become a problem and prevent companies from being competitive. When they are non-existent, corporate greed plows under workers' rights. So there needs to be a balance. Unfortunately, state laws tend to be all for unions or all against them. There doesn't seem to be much of a healthy middle out there.

As far as teachers being the bad guys... well I can't buy into that for one minute. That sounds like some Rush Limbaugh or Sean Hannity rhetoric.

[bonnie]

Unions are still needed for the private sector. Let there be little doubt about that. There are still many companies that would rather pay out high dividends to the stock holders than pay living wages to workers. Some are so evil they don't even provide health coverage

[Dr. Shane]

It is the threat of unions that causes companies not to take advantage of workers. As soon as the threat of unions disappears, the corporate fat-cats will have the working man living on beans and living in plywood shacks again. Unions have been a mixed blessing, no doubt. But at least the fat man doesn't get to dance and make the skinny man pay the band anymore.

[CoAspen]

Quote:

To bad they don't all refuse to provide insurance. Pay a sufficient wage so the employee can grow up and get their own insurance.

Thou speaketh without full knowledge of what you are talking about. A person couldn't afford to buy the kind of coverage provided by belonging to a large pool of beneficiaries. Why? Your insurance cost less because of all the negotiation between business, medical providers and insurance companies. Even if a company paid employees more so they could provide their own insurance, how likely is it that all of those employees would together agree on the plans and costs so they could negotiate a suitable rate, not likely! Even joining an insurance pool will not get you the same low rates available through a large business. Negotiating strength comes through numbers, the larger, the better. The employer could not pay you enough!!!

[bonnie]

Thou speaketh without full knowledge of what you are talking about. A person couldn't afford to buy the kind of coverage provided by belonging to a large pool of beneficiaries. Why? Your insurance cost less because of all the negotiation between business, medical providers and insurance companies. Even if a company paid employees more so they could provide their own insurance, how likely is it that all of those employees would together agree on the plans and costs so they could negotiate a suitable rate, not likely! Even joining an insurance pool will not get you the same low rates available through a large business. Negotiating strength comes through numbers, the larger, the better. The employer could not pay you enough!!!

Thou speaketh without full knowledge of what you are talking about,this is certainly true of yourself.

The last place I worked was a home improvement center.There were the full time as in the managers and office staff and a limited number of full time,Only the full time received insurance benefits that were paid in part by the company. They offered all the part time the opportunity to buy into the insurance package that were paid in full by the employee.

Cobra also kicked in if you quit or were laid off. From time to time the union reared it's head and they were almost run out by the employee's.We did not want to lose the many benefits we received from the evil owners of this company.

I paid less to cover my husband with a history of strokes and myself for less than we are currently paying thru our "inexpensive" government sponsered insurance as medicare.

I had a perforated ulcer,surgery and care in ICU at the time and paid a total of 500.00? in co-pays.

It is always interesting when this "no one can afford insurance" tripe gets waved.

With the exception of the later years when I worked at the home improvement center,guess who provided our insurance?

We paid our own.We were the ones that prepared for a downturn as with Carter.Those were some mighty tough years in the housing industry.

[bonnie]

It is the threat of unions that causes companies not to take advantage of workers. As soon as the threat of unions disappears, the corporate fat-cats will have the working man living on beans and living in plywood shacks again. Unions have been a mixed blessing, no doubt. But at least the fat man doesn't get to dance and make the skinny man pay the band anymore.

Your jealousy of the "corporate fatcats" is showing again.

Most employee's are employed by small business.

I do believe in times soon to come many may find themselves living in shacks and counting themselves lucky but it is not the "fat cats" that will place them there.

Because you have never had a business and been responsible for all things and many families you have this jealous, bitter attitude towards anyone that has acheived more than you.

I think the number is around 80% that work for small business.

To bad for you that those that lay it all on the line don't agree to work for less than their employee's.

[Dr. Shane]

Your jealousy of the "corporate fatcats" is showing again.

That's a good one. Almost sounds like Glen Beck.

[bonnie]

Originally Posted By: bonnie

Your jealousy of the "corporate fatcats" is showing again.

That's a good one. Almost sounds like Glen Beck.

Does it? You are the one that cannot speak without judging others that disagree with you.

Perhaps if you did not spend so much time listening to those you condemn you could form your own opinions.

Someone does not wish or are unable to run their business they way you dictate,they are called evil by you.

It is a good thing for you God has pronounced you the judge and jury of others.Otherwise I believe the bible speaks against those that are forever jealous of those that have more than you.

Sorry about your coffee.Maybe you should not be drinking it

[Dr. Shane]

Actually I think Glen Beck calls himself evil and a hate-monger. I take him at his word. I know he is working a program of honesty and respect him for that. I value all opinions, even those I disagree with. Glen and I might actually be neighbors when we get to heaven. We'll probably be baking apple pies for each other.

[bonnie]

Actually I think Glen Beck calls himself evil and a hate-monger. I take him at his word. I know he is working a program of honesty and respect him for that. I value all opinions, even those I disagree with. Glen and I might actually be neighbors when we get to heaven. We'll probably be baking apple pies for each other.

This is the first I knew unrepentent evil hate mongers would be even considered for heaven.

Might be a personality clash tho,I think Glenn is a little more honest than some that may wish to be his neighbor.

I have heard the "Glenn says he is a evil,hate monger"

A honest man would explain the context.

[doug yowell]

Actually I think Glen Beck calls himself evil and a hate-monger. I take him at his word. I know he is working a program of honesty and respect him for that. I value all opinions, even those I disagree with. Glen and I might actually be neighbors when we get to heaven. We'll probably be baking apple pies for each other.

I doubt it. If the two of you will share a heaven you'll be on separate planets,too busy raising the children and trying to keep your wives barefoot.

[Dr. Shane]

My Jesus forgives even the worst, evil, hate-mongers. If Glen is given a mansion next to mine, I certainly would not question Jesus' judgment. It doesn't matter to me if my neighbor is Glen Beck, Jeremiah Wright, Barak Hussien Obama, Rush Limbaugh or even Bonnie. I am sure I will be baking pies and whole grain cookies for whoever I am honored to live next to.

[doug yowell]

I had a perforated ulcer,surgery and care in ICU at the time and paid a total of 500.00? in co-pays.

If you had been able to document your undocumented status in the U.S. you might have been able to lower your co-pay considerably.

[doug yowell]

Those were some mighty tough years in the housing industry.

Were??

[Dr. Shane]

Sounds to me like some folks are just a tad jealous of the teachers in Wisconsin. Shame, shame, shame. Remember the Commandment. Thou Shalt Not Covet.

[CoAspen]

Reality check time......

There are always 'word of mouth' stories, I know someone who...my buddy did this...etc,etc. I have been in the Health Care field since '78, my wife since '80 and we are involved in money matters on a daily basis. I also have a son-n-law whose brother is an accuary for a large-large health care organization. My information comes from those long years of experience and association with the insurance people in the organization that I work for.

Want to try and sell your 'belief' to a cancer pt needing insurance to pay for chemo, therapy, imaging, lab, etc out of a personal plan? They can't afford it. Even group plans through their work can leave them with multiple thousands out of pocket.

"Just the facts, mame"

[Dr. Shane]

In today's society, providing an employee health care insurance is simply part of compensating him or her for an honest day's labor. Sadly, since it still isn't mandatory, not all companies do it which places those companies that do at a competitive disadvantage. That is why it is necessary for the government to require all employers to provide health care insurance just like they must provide worker's compensation insurance. That levels the playing field and is a much better solution than workers having to unionize to get health-care benefits.

[SivartM]

I wonder if two-thirds of Wisconsin 8th-graders can have civil discussions.