Moscow Education (Idaho)

You may recall that I posted earlier about the girl suing her alma mater (Jobless Graduate Sues College) because she couldn’t find a job.

The Star-Telegram has a story about 13 students who are suing Everest College.

Saying they were cheated out of money and an education, 13 former students of Everest College have sued the for-profit school, accusing it of misrepresenting job placement rates, the quality of education and the ability to transfer credits to four-year nonprofit universities.

The suit, filed Tuesday in Dallas County district court, asks for unspecified damages against Everest; its parent company, Corinthian Colleges in Santa Ana, Calif.; and others.

The Everest students were enrolled in the criminal justice or the medical billing and coding programs. Everest College officials said those programs offered at its campuses in Arlington, Fort Worth and Dallas are specialized career offerings whose credits may not transfer. That information is disclosed to students repeatedly before they enroll, Dom Montalvo, regional vice president of operations, said in a statement.

He also said, "Everest provides extensive career placement assistance, but no school can guarantee employment."

Montalvo also said that Everest is accredited by an agency recognized by the U.S. Education Department and that its programs are approved and regulated by state agencies.

This makes me shake my head in amazement. These kids drop tens of thousands of dollars, and they think that they getting a degree is like buying something at Wal-Mart with a 30–day return policy?

Or this from the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette: Marjorie Dillon graduated from Robert Morris college with a degree in business administration and $120,000 in debt. Now she works in a bowling alley making $7.50 a hour “serving beer”.

You have to wonder what they are teaching in the Business Administration curriculum these days. When I was in grad school, that was considered a bad return on investment…

Remember that story about WSU screwing fellow submariner Joel Kennedy’s son, Robert, about his tuition?

Well KREM News in Spokane has picked up the story.

An Idaho college student is finally settling in at his second university in just two weeks.

Freshman Robert Kennedy was moving into the dorms last week at Washington State University when he learned his scholarship would not cover his entire tuition.

Kennedy won an $11,000 National Merit Scholarship his senior year in high school. He believed an additional two scholarships would cover the difference for the $18,000 out-of-state tuition to WSU. However, he found out he was $7,000 short from WSU's Financial Aid Office.

Robert's father, Joel, says WSU staff repeatedly told him the difference was covered by the other scholarships.

Robert couldn't afford tuition, so he had to pack up and head home. Kennedy is now a freshman at Boise State University.

WSU President Elson Floyd personally called Kennedy's family to apologize, and the Financial Aid Office issued this statement:

"We are sorry that Robert chose not to pursue his education at WSU. The university has already taken steps to improve the messaging that created confusion for Robert and his family with respect to his scholarships. We are working to insure that, in the future, WSU communicates better with National Merit winners both directly and through our website."

WSU also plans to reimburse the Kennedy family for their travel expenses, deposits, and application fees.

WSU was feeling the heat from quite a few sources, including Idaho’s #1 Most Influential Political Blog.

Joel: I’m glad it worked out for you. Sorry for all the hassles that you and your family had to go through, especially given everything else going on in your life right now.

From KREM News in Spokane:

The Washington State University Health and Wellness Services center has seen about 50 students with flu-like symptoms.

No swine flu cases have been confirmed but health officials assume at least 10 of those are likely swine flu.

Whitman County Health Officer Timothy Moody said so far the flu cases have been mild.

As reported in the Moscow-Pullman Daily News.

The woman who reported being sexually assaulted Aug. 19 on the Washington State University campus Monday evening recanted her story to police Thursday.

…

Hansen said the woman who lied to police could be charged with providing a false report, but stressed that for now, the focus is getting her help.

"We're trying to get her the support she needs to work through her issues," he said.

One of the Daily News readers provided added an interesting thought to the mix:

I think anyone woman or man who files a false report about being attacked on WSU campus for whatever reason should immediately be expelled from the University never allowed to return. Look at the costs involved. They should also be levied a big fine and have to pay for all the costs involved in investigating these scams.

From today's Idaho Statesman.

On Monday, freshmen began classes at the University of Idaho. If statistics are any predictor of the future, 79 percent of these freshmen will return for their sophomore year. But that means over one-fifth of these new students won’t be back. U of I officials are trying to do the right thing, by looking for ways to help new students adjust to college. But they’re going about it the wrong way, by requiring first-year students to live in dorms or Greek housing. … None of this is as controversial as the residential requirement, which goes into effect next fall. This is a pocketbook issue. It will force parents to shell out for campus room and board, which can cost more than off-campus housing.

And many will choose to go elsewhere because of the cost.

In fact, here’s a great question: will more or fewer students come to UI because they are forced to live on campus their freshman year?

According to Inside Higher Education, Pell Grant funding will cost $27 billion more over ten years than predicted just three months ago.

From Cato-at Liberty:

Felix Salmon kicks things off by hoping the government tightens the definition of a “charitable” organization and begins taxing private schools who don’t “do a bit more to earn it.” Matt Yglesias agrees that private schools are mooching deadbeats and ups the ante, calling them actively harmful as well. Finally, Conor Clarke at The Atlantic agrees, but makes the other two look like panty-waists by proposing the government radically narrow what is considered a charity in the first place.

Yglesias even has the temerity to indict private schools for the failure of NYC public schools:

And as best one can tell, their main impact on the common weal is negative, drawing parents with resources and social capital out of the public school system and contributing to its neglect. You’d have to believe that New York City’s public schools would be both better funded and free of this kind of nonsense if a larger portion of the city’s elite were sending their kids to them. 

See what happens when you don’t educate your kids in the government schools? Human sacrifice, dogs and cats living together... mass hysteria! 

Mark Bauerlein warns Americans “Don’t Think Too Highly of Yourself.”

Contrary to what the educrats tell us, “higher confidence does not go with better math scores.” 

The Brown Center’s How Well Are American Students Learning? uses TIMSS data to compare eighth-grade students in different countries.

“Countries with more confident students who enjoy the subject matter–and with teachers who strive to make mathematics relevant to students’ daily lives–do not do as well as countries that rank lower on indices of confidence, enjoyment, and relevance.”
…
U.S. students rated themselves much more highly than did students in Korea, Japan, Hong Kong, Singapore, the Netherlands, and Chinese Taipei, but they scored well behind that insecure group. While 93 percent of U.S. eighth-graders failed to achieve an advanced score on the test, only 5 percent of them “disagreed a lot” with the statement that they “do well in math.”

And from the Wall Street Journal book review:

And what do they show? That high self-esteem doesn’t improve grades, reduce ­anti-social behavior, deter alcohol drinking or do much of anything good for kids. In fact, telling kids how smart they are can be ­counterproductive. Many children who are convinced that they are little geniuses tend not to put much effort into their work. Others are troubled by the latent anxiety of adults who feel it necessary to praise them constantly.

Perhaps if American students had a right understanding of where they stood compared to the rest of the world, they would be motivated to do better. As it is, they are coddled and told that they are the smartest in the world. Somehow, the educrats have missed the fact that repeating a lie doesn’t make it so.

This study hits really close to home as #1 son can take college classes online outside of the UI much cheaper than he can take “live” classes at UI.

From the New York Times:

A recent 93-page report on online education, conducted by SRI International for the Department of Education, has a starchy academic title, but a most intriguing conclusion: “On average, students in online learning conditions performed better than those receiving face-to-face instruction.”

The report examined the comparative research on online versus traditional classroom teaching from 1996 to 2008. Some of it was in K-12 settings, but most of the comparative studies were done in colleges and adult continuing-education programs of various kinds, from medical training to the military.

Over the 12-year span, the report found 99 studies in which there were quantitative comparisons of online and classroom performance for the same courses. The analysis for the Department of Education found that, on average, students doing some or all of the course online would rank in the 59th percentile in tested performance, compared with the average classroom student scoring in the 50th percentile. That is a modest but statistically meaningful difference.

“The study’s major significance lies in demonstrating that online learning today is not just better than nothing — it actually tends to be better than conventional instruction,” said Barbara Means, the study’s lead author and an educational psychologist at SRI International.

Why would you want to move away, live on campus, pay extra, and do poorer?

I think that the bricks-and-mortar colleges had better be looking real hard at what’s coming down the path. The only thing you really need the college for is labs.

One more thing. As I always say: correlation isn’t causation. #1 daughter and I just discussed reasons that this could be the case. First, many online students are older; many don’t have the money to move away to college; and many are paying for their education themselves. This means (IMO) that they are more motivated to do well. So even if the online delivery system were poorer, they would do better in that environment. That’s not to say that the online delivery method is indeed inferior; just that this study doesn’t demonstrate that it is superior (all things being equal).

The College Board has released its latest SAT results.

Of course it’s not good: overall scores are flat or down.

This follows on the heels of that ACT report that I blogged about showing that only 23% of high schoolers taking the ACT are ready for college-level work.

Add on top of that pile the fact that high school graduation rates are flat.

You’ll see that we have a real mess on our hands.

What to do, what to do.

Progressives’ answers: continue doing the same thing they’ve been doing and throw more cash into the money hole.

I’m really not sure when sanity will take over. All I can figure is that Americans are struck with a judicial blindness to the things going on around us. Why else would we continue to throw money into the same hole?

Bet you didn’t know that! 

Interestingly, all schools in the Netherlands—public and private alike—are equally funded by the government. Further, private providers are allowed to open schools that align with their religion or philosophy and have them funded by the government under the following conditions: They have a legally recognized competent authority (also referred to as the school board) to administer and manage the school; they adhere to all “state and non-state” laws about the condition of the buildings, teacher qualifications, and curriculum and secondary requirements; they do not charge mandatory tuition (though they can ask for contributions); they do not select students to attend (though they can reject students whose parents do not ascribe to the religious or philosophical orientation of the school); and the school can prove that it will attract students. Basically this means that virtually anyone can apply to open a school as long as they adhere to the national requirements and standards as well as take the national tests. Unlike in the United States, there appears to be little concern regarding using public money to fund parochial schools. In short, the Netherlands have broad parameters around what and who are considered legitimate providers of education.

—International Lessons about National Standards

 HT: Amber Winkler

From KREM News in Spokane:

Two out of three attacks recently reported on the Washington State University campus have now been determined false, and now officers say it was the same woman who reported both.

WSU Police announced Thursday that the original attack, reported August 19 by an incoming freshman, was recanted. The woman claimed she was walking near Bryan Hall at night and was approached by a man who grabbed her. She claimed she fought him off and ran away.

Now KREM 2 News has learned the third attack was reported by the same freshman. She told officers she was attacked by a suspect on Stadium Way the night of August 24.

However, officers say they are still investigating an attack reported in the early morning hours of August 24 near the Smith Building on Troy Lane.

In all cases, the same suspect was described to officers. He was described as a white male, about 5'9 with a stocky build, wearing a hooded sweatshirt.

Now here’s something that’s odd. If the first and third reports were fake, how come the second suspect matches the first fake one?

Something really fishy is going on.

From AACRAO:

New Budget Estimates Show Sharp Increases in Enrollment and Pell Costs

On Tuesday, the Office of Management and Budget released its annual reassessment of the federal budget. The budget report found that federal spending on the Pell Grant program will be $27 billion higher over the next decade than the administration estimated as recently as February – the cost of making Pell Grants an entitlement and having it increase automatically each year was budgeted at $117 billion over 10 years.

The report's authors noted that the increase is "driven almost entirely by technical revisions to reflect historic increases in the demand for Pell Grants as more individuals choose to go to college in a weakened labor market."

According to Inside Higher Ed, the increase estimated by the budget office may threaten President Obama's plan to end the bank-based, guaranteed student loan program and use the savings to increase Pell Grant spending and fund other education priorities. The new figures represent a rise of about 23 percent in the anticipated cost of the president's proposal. Others point out that, ironically, the budget estimates could increase pressure to produce savings, making a more compelling argument for loan reform.

Although the impact of the new budget estimates on upcoming legislative issues is unclear (the Congressional Budget Office does not alter its formal estimate of budgetary impact based on these figures), it could possibly alter the goals that the administration hopes to accomplish with the $87 billion that its student loan restructuring proposal would reportedly save.

Related Links:

• Office of Management and Budget's Mid-Session Review: http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/assets/fy2010_msr/10msr.pdf
• Inside Higher Ed: http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2009/08/26/pell

HT: Dr. A

Former Kenney aid, Michael Dannenberg, proposes making colleges pay for lenders that default. He argues that it will discourage colleges from building a bridge to nowhere (my words) in degree programs that they offer. As it stands now, there is no incentive to keep colleges from offering underwater basket-weaving if they can get students to take out a loan and major in it.

Here’s his argument in the Boston Globe:

If colleges are made responsible for a portion of student loan default costs, they’ll be more responsible in who they let in, how much they charge, and how well they prepare students for good-paying jobs that enable those students to pay off their debt. In the private student-loan market, banks are increasingly placing proprietary colleges on the hook for a portion of student loan default costs. The federal student loan market is five times as large. We need recourse there as well.

There’s a danger colleges will respond by pricing their exposure to defaults into even higher tuition. That’s why we also need to nudge demand away from high-cost, poor-value schools. 

Interesting thought.

Shame on parents and kids want to run up $50,000+ loans for an underwater basket-weaving degree in the first place. Shame on the taxpayers for subsidizing their stupidity.

Student-made promotional video for New Saint Andrews College in Moscow, ID.

From the Associated Press:

Four months ago, a committee that included farmers and lawmakers recommended the University of Idaho shutter three agricultural research centers to help eliminate a $3.2 million deficit.

University officials are now touring the state to gather more input after the proposed closure of the Parma Research Extension Center by the end of the year drew criticism from southwest Idaho fruit growers and the governor.

The Sandpoint and Tetonia research and extension centers were also recommended for closure, but those proposals were not as developed as the plan to shutdown the Parma facility, university officials said.

The school's College of Agricultural and Life Sciences is facing an 11.5 percent loss for its 12 agriculture and extension centers during the current fiscal year because of cuts in state spending.

"We can't spend money we don't have," said college spokesman Bill Loftus.

Loftus should run for Congress or President.

From the University of Idaho’s Argonaut

According to the University Housing website, a room in the Theophilus Tower will cost a student $3,902 for the academic year, or about $487 a month, and that’s sharing 184 square feet. Plus dorm residents are required to buy a meal plan, which start at $150 a month. Meanwhile, at Hill Rental Properties — one of Moscow’s many rental agencies — a two-bedroom apartment with a living room and kitchen costs each tenant $294 a month, and they get to use it over Christmas break and into the summer.
Not to put down the dorms. The benefits of dorm life may outweigh advantages of off-campus living for many people, but the administration shouldn’t be surprised when students opt for apartments that are cheaper and nicer than the dorms. There is something wrong with University Housing if they cannot offer better amenities than private apartments while charging more.

While it is likely beneficial to most students to live on-campus their first year, those who choose not to should not be forced to live in cramped, old dorms just to help subsidize the school when there are better apartments out there. 

Typical government policies — they run things more poorly than the private sector; and when they cannot compete, they change the laws and force their clients to use the sub-standard accommodations for a higher price.

Can’t let the kids get in the way of those teachers’ contracts…

Via Newsmax:

The National Education Association pointedly criticized the Obama administration, saying the president is relying too heavily on charter schools and standardized tests in his attempt to overhaul the nation's schools.

"We urge the administration to step outside of this narrow agenda," the nation's largest teachers union said in a public statement filed Friday with the Education Department.

The comments reflect that Obama has taken positions on school reform that conflict with teachers unions, an influential segment of his Democratic base.

NEA official Kay Brilliant said the administration already knows about its concerns. "This won't come as a surprise," Brilliant said. "We've done our best to also praise them for the things they've done well."

At issue is a competition for $5 billion in competitive grants for states to pursue innovations sought by President Barack Obama. Obama's "Race to the Top" competition, funded through the federal stimulus law, prioritizes charter schools and performance pay for teachers based on their students' academic performance.

Rules for the competition say that states cannot have restrictions on the use of student test scores in the teacher evaluation process; California, Wisconsin and Nevada currently have such restrictions. Education Secretary Arne Duncan also has warned that restrictions on charter schools could hurt a state's chances.

I’m quick to criticize the President and his economic socialism. Let me also be quick to praise him for his willingness to take on his constituency (not that they’d go anywhere else).

Update: Pullman Police report that the third assault report was false.

The following is from the online edition of the Lewiston Tribune.

A woman reported being sexually assaulted about 8 p.m. Monday on the Washington State University campus in Pullman.

Police say the man fondled her before she was able to fight him off and escape.

It's the third such report in a week. Women also reported assaults early Monday and last Wednesday evening.

The assailant in the past two cases is described as a white man, about 5-foot-9 with a stocky build.

WSU police have sent e-mail reminders to students to be aware of their surroundings, not walk alone and stay in well-lit areas. 

My fellow submariner, Joel in Boise, took his son to WSU to start classes this Monday.

Bottom line: the WSU Scholarship and Financial Aid Offices mislead them, lied to them, and royally screwed them over.

You can read the details of what WSU did to them over at his blogsite:

http://bubbleheads.blogspot.com/2009/08/washington-state-university-national.html

May I suggest that you do exceptional due-diligence if you are going to deal with WSU. Get it in writing.

Joel: I’m sorry you had to go through this; hopefully this is a lesson-learned for those of us with younger kids.

Instead of grades, SAT/ACT scores, essays, colleges are now using “personality scores” to decide who gets admitted. This new “evaluation system” claim to “quantify so-called noncognitive traits such as leadership, resilience and creativity,”

From Robert Tomsho over at the WSJ:

Colleges say such assessments are boosting the admissions chances for some students who might not have qualified based solely on grades and traditional test scores. The noncognitive assessments also are being used to screen out students believed to be at a higher risk of dropping out, and to identify newly admitted students who might need extra tutoring.

Just another way to enroll students who are not prepared for college; who will run up tens of thousands of dollars of college debt; and who will not end up with a degree.

Priceless.

Welcome to the educational-industrial complex.

Update: The Vandal Venues article says what the exceptions are to the mandatory residency requirements. This makes me feel a little better.

The policy allows first-year students to select housing from among 23 residence halls, nine sororities or 17 fraternities. Some students will be exempted from the requirement, including those who live at home with parents; who married and/or have children of their own; who are 21 years of age or older; who have at least 30 college credit hours; or who have an extremely unique circumstance, which will be considered on a case by case basis.

The following article by Murf Raquet appeared in today's edition of the Moscow-Pullman Daily News. This is the consensus of the Daily News editorial board.

However, we're not ready to wholeheartedly endorse the idea.

First, it's a bit Draconian to force a student to live on campus. Sure, some students need that transition from home to independent living, but many don't. In fact, there are probably students who would not do well in on-campus social settings.

One size fits all.

The move also will generate some $700,000 in additional revenue for university housing and dining services. We hope that was not a prime motivation for the policy.

There’s no doubt in my mind that this is the reason. What else could there be?

As usual, the decision was made when most students weren't on campus. They were busy enjoying what remained of the summer recess and didn't have an opportunity to participate in proper vetting of the policy.

It's more than a little disingenuous to make a policy that affects thousands of future students without first getting input from current students.

We are all for improving students' success. If living on campus achieves that goal then make it as attractive as possible before making it mandatory. The decision of where first-year students will live should be up to the students and their parents.

There is always resentment from some when they feel forced to do something. Making someone live where they don't want to creates some hostility.

The UI and first-year students should not begin their relationship as adversaries.  

And what of Moscow residents who have children who want to attend UI but who want to live at home? That's a significant added expense for them to have to live on-campus when their home (in my case) is only 1/4 mile away.

Yea, there’s a great economic idea for you.

The American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research has published the six-year graduation rates that the U.S. Department of Education collects from colleges and universities. 

The report,  Diplomas and Dropouts: Which Colleges Actually Graduate Their Students (and Which Don't) has the data for all the universities.

UI’s data is on page 55: a six-year graduation rate of 53%

That means that nearly half of all UI students will not graduate six-years after arriving in Moscow.

If that’s not pathetic, I don’t know what is.

But WSU isn’t much better (data is on page 69): a six-year graduate rate of 63%

When compared to the worst of the worse, UI doesn’t look so bad. Texas Southern University has a six-year graduation rate of 12%

But what caught my eye in the study was that the private institutions had the highest graduation rates. Out here in the West, American Jewish University, Whitworth University, American Indian College of the AG, and Lewis & Clark College all had graduation rates above 70%

I’ve said it before: if you look at the cost of a private school verses a public school, and you see that the vast majority of students finish a bachelors degree in 4 years at a private school but the majority do not finish a degree in 6 years at a public one, where is your better investment?

HT: Dave G

EdExNext has their take on the abysmal ACT results:

The Iowa–based ACT testing agency reported yesterday that only 23% of the 2009 high school graduating class had sufficient knowledge and skills to attain a C in college freshmen courses as revealed by the ACT examination. This means that more than 1 million high school students graduated who were poorly prepared for college.

The following comment is right to the point:

The figure is undoubtedly considerably greater since students who take the ACT examination are more often bound for college and are motivated to do well on the examination.

These results are particularly disturbing given the exorbitant and rising costs of K-12 schooling and its many well-intentioned reforms of the last half-century.

We live in insane times: everything that the liberals have done to “fix” government schools has only caused them to get poorer results as exponentially increasing costs.

The figures call — not for improvement or further reforms — but for revolutionary thinking. Among the possibilities for consideration is the awarding of an elementary school certificate for those who could pass a reasonable examination at the end of six or eight years of schooling. Those that fail might be given a year or two in special schools to better prepare themselves. Those that pass could go on to technical school for direct preparation for work or to an academic high school in preparation for college.

Some of those admitted to high school would be capable of accelerated progress as revealed by a rigorous graduation test. They could graduate by age 16 and finish college by 18.

I know a set of twin boys who were homeschooled in Washington and during their 11th and 12th grade years they attended college via Running Start. They came to the UI at age 17 and started their junior years of college. They had their Bachelors by the time they were 19 — when many of their peers were finishing their remedial math and English classes at UI.

As reported in the Moscow-Pullman Daily News.

The University of Idaho has adopted a policy requiring all freshmen students to live on campus, beginning in fall 2010.

That means the first-year students currently moving their clothes and books into apartments and dorm rooms are the final crop of freshman with the option of living off campus.

Dean of Students Bruce Pitman said the new policy is part of a yearlong effort to increase retention from students' freshman to sophomore years.

"Our motivation is very simple. We're working on a number of strategies to improve students' success for first-year students," he said. "We felt that this is one strategy, not the only one, but one strategy that we wanted to employ to improve students' success among our first-year students."

The new policy is expected to generate nearly $700,000 annually in extra revenues for university housing and dining services.

Follow the money. There’s the real reason.

It will be interesting to see how this shakes out. I know many families that are principally against their kids living in dorms.

Student/Teacher Ratio

Per Pupil Spending and NAEP Test Scores

I should be in sports.

But it just goes to show you that the universities are not really about education.

From The News Tribune:

Washington State University president Elson Floyd, who gave back most of a $125,000 pay raise last year, still appears to be the highest-paid worker on the state’s payroll – at least in terms of base pay.

But his University of Washington counterpart, president Mark Emmert, earns considerably more, even though Emmert’s base salary is $5,000 less than Floyd’s. And UW football coach Steve Sarkisian makes more than either of them – more than $1 million a year – even though his basic state check pays him only $300,000 a year.

The state Office of Financial Management published a compilation of state workers’ pay this week, something the governor’s budget office does every odd-numbered year.

The database shows the base salaries for about 150,000 workers at state agencies, colleges and universities as of the second pay period in January 2009.

It does not include other forms of compensation.

HT: Dave G.

Update: One of my readers informs me that BSU and UI are in different categories in the US News & World Report rankings. I don’t see that on the website, but that very well could be. For BSU to be #57 in the nation overall would be amazing.

The U.S. News & World Report annual college rankings are out.

The University of Idaho was ranked #153 in the nation (3^rd tier school).

As a point of comparison, Boise State University is ranked #57 : a 1^st tier school.

Regardless of what you think of the US News & World Report annual college rankings, I think it says a whole bunch that they ranked BSU #57 and UI #153.

Boise State University was ranked #57 in the masters universities.

I need to investigate how the top-ranked masters universities compare to the 3^rd and 4^th tier national universities.

Update: BSU is listed as #153, Tier 1 in the Universities-Master’s category. UI is listed as #153, Tier 3 in the National Universities category.

My question stands: how does the University of Texas – El Paso (National University, Tier 4, near the bottom of the pile) compare to Villanova (Masters University, #1 school, Tier 1)? I’d much rather have my kids attend a Master’s University that’s Tier 1 than a National University that’s Tier 4.

Here’s something scary for you. From Ed Week:

It’s becoming a familiar question: How can we ensure that American students have the knowledge and skills necessary to succeed in today’s global economy? A big part of the answer is contained in the goals we set for them in the form of proficiency standards—the level of literacy or numeracy a student must reach.

These standards exist, of course, in all 50 states and the District of Columbia. But they tend to be too low and too different from each other. Harvard University’s Paul E. Peterson and the American Enterprise Institute’s Frederick M. Hess, for example, recently found that only three states—Massachusetts, Missouri, and South Carolina—have proficiency standards equal to those of the most educationally demanding nations. At the other extreme, their analysis suggests, states such as Georgia and Tennessee declare “proficient” students who cannot be considered either literate or numerate.