Replies

For information on how the kids are doing according to the NAEP in each state: http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/states/

Now, courtesy of www.iowalive.net, we have the following information for your delectation. Note the discrepancies between NAEP results and the state controlled test results (down a bit in the cheating section - I wonder if someone knows how to fix the formatting?):

U. S. STATE RANKINGS STUDENT/TEACHER RATIO (CLASS SIZE)

School district revenues per student (02-03) State characteristics (03-04)
Student teacher ratio (Small Class Size RANK)
State Median$ 95th percentile$
Student teacher ratio--(class size) Total No. of teachers Total No. of students Total No. of schools
1 Vermont $15,470 $26,040.00 11.3 8,749 99,103 393
2 Maine 11,261 23,824.00 11.5 17,621 202,064 694
3 Alabama 6,942 8,589.00 12.6 58,070 731,220 1,526
4 New Jersey 13,458 22,705.00 12.7 109,077 1,380,753 2,467
5 North Dakota 8,919 17,882.00 12.7 8,037 102,233 556
6 Iowa-22 in 4th reading 8,764 13,251.00 13 34,791 481,228 1,495
7 Virginia-5th in 4th read. 8,315 11,748.00 13.2 90,573 1,192,092 2,074
8 Wyoming 12,463 22,442.00 13.3 6,567 87,462 380
9 Rhode Island 10,900 16,442.00 13.4 11,918 159,375 341
10 Connecticut 11,729 17,203.00 13.6 42,370 577,203 1,250
11 Massachusetts 11,253 18,613.00 13.6 72,062 980,459 1,867
12 South Dakota 7,944 14,318.00 13.6 9,245 125,537 741
13 New Hampshire 11,234 23,636.00 13.7 15,112 207,417 474
14 District of Columbia 16,499 t 13.8 5,676 78,057 207
15 Missouri 7,551 11,255.00 13.9 65,169 905,941 2,372
16 West Virginia 8,627 10,061.00 14 20,02 0 281,215 799
17 Kansas 9,102 12,388.00 14.4 32,589 470,490 1,413
18 Louisiana 7,49 9 9,987.00 14.4 50,495 727,709 1,551
19 Montana 8,869 19,985.00 14.4 10,301 148,356 860
20 Arkansas 6,826 9,416.00 14.7 30,876 454,523 1,150
21 New Mexico 10,602 23,687.00 15 21,569 323,066 824
22 Texas 8,581 16,636.00 15 289,481 4,331,751 8,110
23 Mississippi 6,659 8,813.00 15.1 32,591 493,540 1,051
24 Wisconsin 10,104 12,872.00 15.1 58,216 880,031 2,250
25 Delaware 10,302 13,742.00 15.2 7,749 117,668 205
26 Ohio 8,135 13,357.00 15.2 121,735 1,845,428 3,988
27 Pennsylvania 9,688 13,185.00 15.2 119,889 1,821,146 3,267’
28 South Carolina 8,399 10,685.00 15.3 45,830 699,198 1,162
29 Georgia 8,429 11,499.00 15.7 97,150 522,611 2,458
30 Tennessee 6,298 7,816.00 15.7 59,584 936,681 1,677
31 Maryland 9,436 11,066.00 15.8 55,140 869,113 1,408
32 Oklahoma 6,965 11,231.00 16 39,253 626,160 1,786
33 Kentucky 7,224 8,888.00 16.1 41,201 663,885 1,438
34 Minnesota-9th in 4th R. 9,350 12,993.00 16.3 51,611 642,854 2,552
35 Hawaii 11,309 t 16.5 11,129 183,609 284
36 Illinois 8,150 13,686.00 16.5 127,669 100,961 4,416
37 Colorado 8,890 15,521.00 16.9 44,904 757,693 1,672
38 Indiana 7,439 10,287.00 16.9 59,924 1,011,130 1,986
39 Alaska 16,333 34,753.00 17.2 7,808 133,933 521
40 Florida 7,515 10,268.00 17.9 144,955 2,587,628 3,529
41 Idaho 7,527 14,641.00 17.9 14,049 252,120 691
42 Michigan 8,708 11,996.00 18.1 97,014 1,757,604 4,008
43 Washington 8,657 19,000.00 19.3 52,824 1,021,349 2,251
44 Oregon 7,968 18,313.00 20.6 26,732 551,273 1,239
45 California 8,669 15,261.00 21.1 304,3I1 6,413,862 9,237
46 Arizona 7,647 17,272.00 21.3 47,507 951,778 2,031
47 Utah 6,845 12,129.00 22.4 22,147 495,981 887
48 New York 13,428 21,971.00 13,3 216,116 2,864,775 4,531
49 Nebraska 9,151 19,000.00 13,6 20,921 285,542 1,248
50 North Carolina 7,422 10,221.00 15,1 89,988 1,360,209 2,268
51 Nevada 8,592 20,122.00 19,0 20,234 385,401 558
United States 8,891 17,078.00 15.9
t Not applicable--The District of Columbia and Hawaii consist of one school district each.
SOURCE: EDUCATION REPORTER, MAY 06

STATE RANKING OF MEDIAN PER STUDENT REVENUE

Iowa ranks 24th.

Median $ Rank State
Median $
Median $ Rank
State
Median $

1 District of Columbia 16,499 27 Washington 8,657
2 Alaska 16,333 28 West Virginia 8,627
3 Vermont 15,470 29 Nevada 8,592
4 New Jersey 13,458 30 Texas 8,581
5 New York 13,428 31 Georgia 8,429
6 Wyoming 12,463 32 South Carolina 8,399
7 Connecticut 11,729 33 Virginia 8,315
8 Hawaii 11,309 34 Illinois 8,150
9 Maine 11,261 35 Ohio 8,135
10 Massachusetts 11,253 36 Oregon 7,968
11 New Hampshire 11,234 37 South Dakota 7,944
12 Rhode Island 10,900 38 Arizona 7,647
13 New Mexico 10,602 39 Missouri 7,551
14 Delaware 10,302 40 Idaho 7,527
15 Wisconsin 10,104 41 Florida 7,515
16 Pennsylvania 9,688 42 Louisiana 7,499
17 Maryland 9,436 43 Indiana 7,439
18 Minnesota 9,350 44 North Carolina 7,422
19 Nebraska 9,151 45 Kentucky 7,224
20 Kansas 9,102 46 Oklahoma 6,965
21 North Dakota 8,919 47 Alabama 6,942
22 Colorado 8,890 48 Utah 6,845
23 Montana 8,869 49 Arkansas 6,826
24 Iowa 8,764 50 Mississippi 6,659
25 Michigan 8,708 51 Tennessee 6,298
26 California 8,669 United States 8,891
SOURCE: EDUCATION REPORTER, MAY 06

WHY, HOW TEACHERS AND SCHOOLS CHEAT AND GET CAUGHT

What you are about to read is likely the most comprehensive discussion and presentation of a chart and table related to public school cheating ever assembled. Iowalive net workers were among the first to recognize and report poor public school performance and cheating--and were attacked and discredited by some for doing so. Iowalive persevered and now national media are daily complaining and reporting evidence of school cheating. Enter 'school cheating' into Google and you will find: Results 1 - 10 of about 12,900,000 for school cheating. That is nearly 13 million references, more than double what it was a year ago.

The New York Times best selling book, "Freakonomics" by Steven D. Levitt and Stephen J. Dubner sheds considerable light on school cheating--that follows and supports what Iowalive has been reporting for quite some time. A professor at the University of Chicago, Mr. Levitt uses statistics to examine school cheating. He was instrumental in ferreting out the teachers caught cheating in Chicago. Iowalive uses similar, and even more sophisticated methods to catch cheaters.

Why do teachers cheat? Because it pays and they think they can get away with it! Why is this? Because it helps them APPEAR to 'meet' NCLB requirements, to get Teacher of the Year and other awards, to get bonuses, because few people suspect it or look for it, it is rarely detected and is seldom if ever punished. But times are changing fast. Cheating teachers were found and punished in both Chicago and Dallas school districts--as have some in Iowa. Iowalive has investigated, listed and ranked the cheating level of schools in Iowa on website: http://www.iowalive.net/ranking8.htm for all to see. Iowalive previously ranked cheating schools in the Cedar Rapids school district--the district Iowalive found to be the worst cheating district in Iowa.

How do teachers cheat? In many ways, some of which are: Writing test answers on the board, correcting answers on tests, telling the answers, allowing improper use of computers, teaching to the test or the test itself, telling students how to guess and fill in the answer sheets, filling in the blanks in the answer sheet, and by allowing extra time to take the test.

How do cheaters get caught? They are most easily caught by using statistics and algorithms to examine test results. With these methods, irregularities and patterns are easily detected and analyzed to the extent the person doing the cheating can be easily identified. Freakonomics describes in detail how teacher corrected test answers were easily found--and shows the actual answers in tables comparing a cheating teacher with a non-cheating teacher. The book also describes how to catch teachers who cheat in other ways. Iowalive knows how to do it. All the data needed to catch teacher and school cheaters is available from the schools and the Iowa Testing Program--who fight to prevent its release.

How does cheating hurt honest teachers? In many ways, some of which are: students in an honest class following a cheating teacher appear to be losing ground in the honest teacher's class, cheaters get undeserved pay raises and recognition--which makes an honest teacher's performance look worse, cheaters can exert more influence on education matters than can honest teachers, and since there is no protection, encouragement or reward for whistle blowers, an honest teacher can be attacked and discredited for reporting a teacher or administrator for cheating.

How do school administrators cheat? In many ways, some of which are: discarding answer sheets of low scoring students, deleting low scores, inflating test scores, giving teachers copies of tests in advance, simply reporting falsely inflated scores.

How does the Iowa Department of Education Cheat? It cheats by selecting a fraudulent Proficiency standard (40th National Percentile Rank--NPR) that claims students are Proficient when they are actually scoring one or more grades below enrolled grade level. The following chart illustrates the false/fraudulent claims.

How did schools get caught cheating? Nation wide National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) test score data, as shown in the following table, caught the states using low Proficiency standards to claim students were performing at grade level when they were not. Iowa was among the worst of the states using fraudulent Proficiency standards--as shown by its 19th state cheating rank.

As many of you recall, Register editors accused Texas of cheating profusely--got into a snit and wrote the ill advised 5-26-2003 editorial telling Iowa school officials to CHEAT by keeping two sets of books and doing anything legal to make Iowa schools look better than they are.

Only Iowalive protested the editorial and has continuously asked Register editors to retract it. NOT THE GOVERNOR, ONE SUPERINTENDENT--SCHOOL BOARD MEMBER, STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION MEMBER, IOWA ASSOCIATION OF SCHOOL BOARD MEMBER, STATE BOARD OF EDUCATIONAL EXAMINERS BOARD MEMBER, ISEA MEMBER, TEACHER, SCHOOL ADMINISTRATOR, BOARD OF REGENTS MEMBER OR DOE OFFICIAL PROTESTED THE AWFUL EDITORIAL. NOT ONE!!

There can be no dispute--the Iowa public education system is corrupt and condones cheating from the Governor down.

The table below shows Mississippi is the worst cheating state and Missouri is the most honest state--and is ranked 45th in cheating because five states do not even test students. Missouri student achievement is low, the same as Iowa at 33% actually reading at or above the 4th grade level, and everyone in Missouri honestly knows it--and is working to improve it. This is not the case in Iowa, where school officials are making excuses and trying to hide it. Should Missouri have minted a school house on its quarter the same as Iowa? Scroll down to find a ranking table showing Iowa, Missouri and Wisconsin tied for 22nd in the U. S. in 4th grade NAEP reading.

STATE CHEATING RANKING FOR 04-05 SCHOOL YEAR

Source: NAEP NATIONAL 4th GRADE TEST RESULTS

IOWA & BORDERING STATES ARE IN YELLOW
% OF STUDENTS STATES CLAIMED PROFICIENT AT 4TH GRADE READING LEVEL
% OF STUDENTS NAEP FOUND ACTUALLY READING AT 4TH GRADE LEVEL
% OF STUDENTS STATES FALSELY CLAIMED PROFICIENT AT 4TH GRADE READING LEVEL
RANK ORDER OF STATE CHEATING, # 1 IS WORST

States
2005

Mississippi
89
18
71
1

Alabama
83
22
61
2

Georgia
87
26
61
3

Oklahoma
83
25
58
4

West Virginia
81
26
55
5

Idaho
87
33
54
6

North Carolina
83
29
54
7

South Dakota
87
33
54
8

Oregon
81
29
52
9

Alaska
78
27
51
10

Delaware
85
34
51
11

Michigan
82
32
50
12

Texas
79
29
50
13

Colorado
86
37
49
14

Wisconsin
82
33
49
15

Virginia
85
37
48
16

Kansas
78
32
46
17

Indiana
75
30
45
18

Iowa
78
33
45
19

Nebraska
79
34
45
20

New Jersey
82
37
45
21

Arizona
68
24
44
22

Louisiana
64
20
44
23

Washington
80
36
44
24

Minnesota
81
38
43
25

Ohio
77
34
43
26

Maryland
74
32
42
27

Florida
71
30
41
28

Montana
75
36
39
29

Kentucky
68
31
37
30

New York
70
33
37
31

Rhode Island
67
30
37
32

Hawaii
56
23
33
33

New Mexico
52
20
32
34

Illinois
60
29
31
35

Connecticut
67
38
29
36

Pennsylvania
64
36
28
37

California
47
21
26
38

Arkansas
52
30
22
39

Nevada
43
21
22
40

Maine
53
35
18
41

Wyoming
47
34
13
42

South Carolina
36
26
10
43

Massachusetts
50
44
6
44

Missouri
35
33
2
45

STATES NOT TESTING STUDENTS

New Hampshire

North Dakota

Tennessee

Utah

Vermont