Update | Be sure to read this post on the truth behind the numbers — how teachers’ unions do improve student performance, and why. Seriously. Read it. If you don’t, you’re only getting half the story.
Also, if you’d like to follow me on Twitter or Facebook, feel free.
There’s a tweet circulating widely that says that Wisconsin ranks second in the nation in its students’ SAT/ACT scores, while five states that bar teachers from participating in collective bargaining all rank near the bottom of the pile. Here are a few examples:
@WisDems Only 5 states don’t have collective bargaining for educators. Their ACT/SAT rankings: SC-50th/NC-49th/GA-48th/TX-47th/VA-44th.
@PTraeder: 5 states have no collective bargaining & deemed it illegal. States & Their ranking on ACT/SAT scores: VA-44 TX-47 GA-48 NC-49 SC-50 #wiunion
@trek: 5 states forbid collective bargaining for educators: SC, NC, GA, TX, & VA. Their national rank in ACT scores: 50th, 49th, 48th, 47th, 44th.
The information presented here on which states bar collective bargaining in education is correct (although it only reflects the five states where teachers’ unions are illegal, leaving out the other five states where they’re legal but essentially don’t exist). What it doesn’t include, however, is any supporting documentation on the SAT and ACT rankings themselves.
So I’ve taken a look at the data.
State scores on the SAT and ACT are hard to compare directly, because there’s so much variation in how many students take the tests. In addition, I haven’t yet found a source that combines SAT and ACT scores into a composite ranking like the one in the tweet. Looking at charts for SAT and ACT results separately, however, here’s what I found:
Wisconsin ranks 3rd in the nation in SAT scores, but with a participation rate of just 4%. On the ACT, with a much more representative partcipation rate of 69%, it was tied for 17th. In comparison…
- Virginia was 34th on the SAT with 67% participation, 13th on the ACT with 22% participation.
- Texas was 45th on the SAT with 53% participation, 33rd on the ACT with 33% participation.
- Georgia was 48th on the SAT with 74% participation, 34th on the ACT with 44% participation.
- North Carolina was 38th on the SAT with 63% participation, 20th on the ACT with 16% participation.
- South Carolina was 49th on the SAT with 66% participation, 44th on the ACT with 52% participation.
Wisconsin is clearly above the other five states in both SAT and ACT scores, but the gap isn’t anywhere near as big as the pro-union tweets suggest. Among high ACT participation states, Wisconsin ranks something like 4th in the nation. But among high SAT participation states, Virginia ranks about 5th in the nation — almost all the states with better SAT scores than Virginia have far smaller participation rates, drawing on a far more elite test-taking group.
I’m open to seeing new data on this, but for now I’m going to mark this claim down as highly exaggerated.
Update | Several readers have posted links to the original source for the tweeted claim, which can be found here. Thanks!
Now, about that source. First, it’s from an analysis conducted in 1999, apparently by a University of Missouri law professor named Douglas O. Linder. Linder doesn’t say specifically what year the SAT/ACT numbers come from, but they’re obviously more than a decade old.
Second, the ranking methodology is really weird, and completely unreliable. What the author did was take each state’s ranking on the SAT, add it to each state’s ranking on the ACT, add those two numbers together, and then put them in order. In other words, Wisconsin scored 5th in the country on the SATs and 4th in the country on the ACTs, giving it a total of 9, and only Iowa had a lower total, so Wisconsin was 2nd in the country overall.
This is just silly. As I noted above, almost nobody in Wisconsin takes the SATs — the state has only a 4% participation rate on that test, with the only students taking it being those who are applying to competitive out-of-state colleges that don’t accept the ACTs. When you compare Wisconsin’s SAT average to Georgia’s, you’re comparing the performance of a tiny elite in one state with that of 74% of the graduating class of the other. And on top of that, this chart gives Wisconsin’s SAT score equal weight with its ACT score in determining which state is “better.”
It’s nonsense. It’s meaningless.
Second Update | The scores don’t seem to match the data, either. Linder gives Wisconsin’s average combined Math and Verbal SAT score as 1073, but Wisconsin’s average SAT scores in the late 1990s ranged from 1169 in 1996-97 to 1181 in 1999-2000. Something’s screwy with Linder’s numbers.
Third Update | As I said at the top of the post, I’ve put up a new essay this morning discussing exactly how teachers’ unions do improve student performance, and why. If you’ve read this far, you really should keep reading.
49 comments
Comments feed for this article
February 20, 2011 at 12:04 pm
Scott
I have also tried to verify this information and found a table on the U of MO School of Law web site that supports the claim. The date of the data is not indicated.
http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/states/USCHARTsat.html
February 20, 2011 at 12:13 pm
pamela anderson
http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/states/USCHARTsat.html
February 20, 2011 at 12:23 pm
John Richards
Click “MAIN PAGE” on the bottom of http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/states/USCHARTsat.html and you’ll see that those numbers are from 1999!
February 20, 2011 at 1:34 pm
Taggert Brooks
Its a difficult thing to determine from simple stats. States with low participation in a particular test are likely to suffer from a selection bias. In WI you take the SAT if you are going out of state. You go out of State if you are smarter, richer, etc. Which is why our SAT scores are high. You need to combine ACT, and SAT (convert) then adjust the states data for race, income, education, and percent going to college, along with union penetration. that will give you a better handle on the union’s effect. Unions definitely have very bad aspects too them, but I would think their ability to get higher pay for union members, etc greater stability, makes for on average better teachers. Thats not to say you couldn’t create the same environment without unions. When I grad from Madison I knew teachers who went to TX, because of the lower standards and the easy of getting in. The good ones eventually moved back to WI, the bad ones left teaching.
This paper looks like it might do a better job of identifying these issues.
http://eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/search/detailmini.jsp?_nfpb=true&_&ERICExtSearch_SearchValue_0=EJ617440&ERICExtSearch_SearchType_0=no&accno=EJ617440
Title: Do Teacher Unions Hinder Educational Performance? Lessons Learned from State SAT and ACT Scores.
Authors: Steelman, Lala Carr; Powell, Brian; Carini, Robert M.
February 20, 2011 at 1:35 pm
Taggert Brooks
sorry for the grammatical issues…hit the comment button too quickly!
February 20, 2011 at 1:38 pm
Angus Johnston
Thanks to everyone who posted the original numbers. I’ve updated the post to link to them and to discuss the study they were drawn from.
Short version: The tweeted rankings are meaningless. They drawn from old, unreliable figures ranked by a highly questionable method.
February 20, 2011 at 1:46 pm
Miriam
What about this more recent (2009) study on state SAT rankings? It seems much in keeping with the original tweet (WI is at number 2; Georgia, NC and SC at the bottom, along with DC which has notoriously troubled public schools).
http://blog.bestandworststates.com/2009/08/25/state-sat-scores-2009.aspx
February 20, 2011 at 1:49 pm
Miriam
PS “ranked by a highly questionable method”
Didn’t Malcolm Gladwell just establish (rather laboriously, I thought) in the latest issue of the New Yorker that all ranking systems are “highly questionable”?
http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2011/02/14/110214fa_fact_gladwell
February 20, 2011 at 1:49 pm
Middento
Taggert/Angus: Can you get your hands on this Harvard Educational Review article? Alas, I can’t get access to that particular article, but I’m curious about it. Even though the material would be 10 years old, the conclusions would still seem relevant.
February 20, 2011 at 1:53 pm
Angus Johnston
Miriam — that chart uses pretty much the same data as I used in my post. As I noted, though, and as the chart you linked to shows, very few students in Wisconsin take the SATs at all. As you can see, no state with higher than 50% participation in SAT testing ranks higher than 24th on the list, and the top scorers — including Wisconsin — are all in the single digits. It’s just not a meaningful measure of a state’s academic achievement.
February 20, 2011 at 1:54 pm
Angus Johnston
Middento — I’ve downloaded the article, and I’ll be taking a look at it soon. It doesn’t give state-by-state rankings, but its conclusions look interesting.
February 20, 2011 at 1:56 pm
Angus Johnston
Oh, and on Miriam’s PS: I’m a big fan of that Gladwell article (surprising as that may be to long-time readers of this site), but what he’s talking about is something a little different. There he’s saying that what you measure determines how your rankings will come out. What I’m saying is that Professor Linder’s rankings are statistically incoherent. They’re literally meaningless, because they don’t measure anything worth measuring in any sort of valuable way.
February 20, 2011 at 2:16 pm
Ann Moore
Valerie Strauss form the Washington Post had an article “The real effect of teachers union contracts” back in October of last year.
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/answer-sheet/guest-bloggers/how-states-with-no-teacher-uni.html
There are some 10 states in which there are virtually no legally binding K-12 teacher contracts at all (there are none in AL, AZ, GA, MS, NC, SC, TX, and VA; there is only one district with a contract in LA, and two in AR).
Average 2009 NAEP Score By State Teacher Contract Laws:
States with binding teacher contracts
4th grade: Math 240.0 Reading 220.7
8th grade: Math 282.1 Reading 263.7
States without binding teacher contracts
4th grade: Math 237.7 Reading 217.5
8th grade: Math 281.2 Reading 259.5
Average Rank Across 4 NAEP Tests (Next to each state is its average rank):
Virginia……. 16.6
Texas……… 27.3
N. Carolina.. 27.5
Georgia…….36.8
Arkansas…..38.9
S. Carolina…38.9
Arizona……..43.3
Alabama……45.5
Louisiana…..47.8
Mississippi…48.6
Out of these 10 states, only one (Virginia) has an average rank above the median, while four are in the bottom 10, and seven are in the bottom 15. Nine of the 10 states with the highest average ranks are high coverage states, including Massachusetts, which has the highest average score on all four tests. She points out that unions alone aren’t the only contributing factors to low test scores in non union states, but it does make a good argument against those who say unions are to blame for falling schools.
February 20, 2011 at 3:15 pm
Angus Johnston
Thanks for that info, Ann. I’m working on a follow-up post that will reflect this data.
February 20, 2011 at 4:54 pm
North Park Street — Twitter, Collective Bargaining for Teachers and ACT Scores
[…] an extensive post about how wrong, misleading and just false the information is when I came across this post that does basically exactly what I was about to do, so I’m just going to encourage you to […]
February 20, 2011 at 5:05 pm
Sharon
Since we are talking about collective bargaining for state workers is it possible to break out the test scores of students attending private school in Virginia and other states as relevant? Thanks.
February 20, 2011 at 6:18 pm
Jon
It can’t all be total nonsense. Only 4% of Wisconsin students take the SAT, but that does not make them an elite group as this article indicates. It just means that 4% of students want to attend school outside of Wisconsin and the SATs are required. It’s unfair to assume they are an elite group and thus are going to have higher scores than students from, say, Georgia. The point is that they are students just like the students from other non-collective-bargaining states. Attending out of state is not reserved for the richer or smarter. Taking the SAT is not reserved for those same groups either. There must be some correlation between the scores and the fact that those states don’t have a collective bargaining agreement. Has anyone looked at graduation rates in these same states and made a correlation that way?
February 20, 2011 at 7:10 pm
Jim
This blog post is nonsense on so many levels. Wisconsin’s educational ranking was high long before collective bargaining was introduced.
Secondly, many students don’t even take the SAT or ACE because the colleges they seek to enroll at do not accept them. Heck, some schools take neither test score now.
Is the original author trying to prove causation here?
February 20, 2011 at 7:27 pm
John
As a public school teacher, I find it particularly disappointing how many of my colleagues are spreading this tweet without looking into it. They are guilty of doing the very thing they criticize students for: accepting what you read on the internet as fact. Pathetic.
Thank you for your efforts to uncover the truth. Obviously, it’s hard to compare based on sample size, etc, but anyone with some sense should find the original tweet hard to accept at face value.
February 20, 2011 at 7:56 pm
Nathan
This post was nothing more than propaganda, it is not filled with FACT, instead, it is lies. Check out the official ACT website, to verify the inaccurate information. Remember, just because someone makes a post on the web, doesn’t mean it is FACT.
http://www.act.org/news/data/10/states.html?utm_campaign=cccr10&utm_source=data&utm_medium=web
February 20, 2011 at 9:05 pm
Tim
Thank-you for correcting the information on the tweet. There was certainly an overstated case in it. However . . .
You seem to have picked up some incorrect ACT information from the link you provided. Sorting on average composit score, I see:
WI -13
VA-22
NC-26
TX-35
GA-40
SC-46
Without checking back, I think Wisconsin scored as low as 16th and as high as 8 in the various subjects, but none of them as low as 17th and certainly not composit.
February 20, 2011 at 9:09 pm
Tim
I see the problem. The link in the post just before mine had the 2010 ACT numbers which agree with your write-up. Just change your link.
February 20, 2011 at 9:13 pm
Drew
Tim, Wisconsin is tied for 17th in the composite average.
February 20, 2011 at 11:58 pm
Margie
there are seven or eight states that do not allow collective bargaining.
http://mb2.ecs.org/reports/Report.aspx?id=173
February 21, 2011 at 9:51 am
Angus Johnston
Thanks to everyone for ongoing comments. I’ve addressed a lot of these issues in my followup post.
February 21, 2011 at 12:48 pm
Rob Runkle
Good job catcthing the phony data. Some of the results that I’ve seen quoted are actually from 1997. That is “hand picking of data” at its finest.
As for the SAT data it is invalid. Because, as you also caught on, the participation rates are all over the map; with the highest scores being clearly grouped with lowest participation rating states. If one was to do a regression the conclusion might be that state should reduce their participation rates in order to get better scores. Also, a bad conclusion.
There is a reason why Mark Twain was quoted saying, “There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies and statistics.”
February 21, 2011 at 5:06 pm
Tracy
The fact that Mississippi ranks 12th in SAT scores and 50th in ACT should’ve been enough of a sign that this isn’t a very good metric.
February 21, 2011 at 5:48 pm
Mike
http://blog.bestandworststates.com/2009/08/25/state-sat-scores-2009.aspx
There seems to be a definite relationship between the number of participants, and the ranking of SAT scores. Much more than if a state has a union or not. How can you extrapolate a reasonable figure for a state that has a 4% participation ratelike Wisconsin to Maine with a 90% rate. No offense, but it seems a little “voodooish” to me.
February 21, 2011 at 10:17 pm
chardt
I came to the same general conclusion when looking at this myself. I would also add in that you need to look at the minority population and income level in a state. Case in point, Georgia has a minority population of ~35%, while Wisconsin is closer to ~6%. Minority groups have long complained about the SAT/ACT and biased quesitons. The NYtimes has also reported on income levels Vs test results.
February 22, 2011 at 10:12 am
Tim
State SAT rankings are worse than meaningless, say Ball State experts
http://www.bsu.edu/news/article/0,1370,-1019-3500,00.html
February 22, 2011 at 2:26 pm
Education and Collective Bargaining « Life Without a Net
[…] After further research, these statistics seem a little suspect. Here’s a blog post that reflects a little more accurate (and consistent) reporting of SAT scores between states. The […]
February 22, 2011 at 10:10 pm
Shanker Blog » Revisiting The Effect Of Teachers' Unions On Student Test Scores
[…] arguments made the rounds over the past week. They were addressed thoughtfully on one blog, which examined the validity of the data, and pointed out (correctly) that it remained unclear whether differences were attributable to […]
February 22, 2011 at 10:30 pm
Unions, union busting, and the economy, a summary of some of the events in Wisconsin and across America | The Gilded Cage
[…] works Indiana, Florida, and Ohio, all by Republican leaders. When you factor in that union teachers do significantly better work than non-union ones on average (yes, there are 3 separate links there), and that when properly […]
February 22, 2011 at 11:32 pm
Ben
Angus, I’ve read the first two of your posts and about to read the third. Good work – I can appreciate your writing, even though I ultimately disagree with your conclusions.
Anyway, I wanted to nitpick a little – unions in Texas aren’t illegal. It’s just that without collective bargaining, there isn’t much incentive for teachers to join the union.
February 23, 2011 at 3:21 pm
Chuck
OMG! A quick look the map available at http://www.censusscope.org/us/map_nhwhite.html
is revealing Please take time to do this.
Any portrail of teachers in non-collective bargaining states as inferior is a smear showing how low some go to protect an unfair system that fleeces taxpayers. Taxpayers who, nevertheless, truly want to pay teachers fairly. The states in question have overwhelmingly larger African American and Hispanic populations. Children in these classrooms are many times more likley to come from non-english speaking or extemely disadvanted backgrounds. Just look at the map and compare the states being so unfairly disparaged with the state of Wisconsin. It does not take a MIT degree to get the point. Using these unfortunate disparities to bestow pre-eminence on teachers who collectively bargain is shameful. Keep this in mind the next time you considering the logical inference of Angus Johnston. If this is the level reasoning (or the level of trust) we can expect from our educators as they persue their fincanial goals, I fear for the general public’s faith in our schools as we go forward. I am certain that there will be more self serving studies showing how, compensating of multilplicy of factors, teachers collective bargaining makes a significant difference in the education of our children. You can count on it.
February 24, 2011 at 2:39 pm
GGG
“It just means that 4% of students want to attend school outside of Wisconsin and the SATs are required. ”
Tim, the SAT consistently draws higher achieving students. Elite colleges are more likely to ask students to take it and there is a definite correlation between the selectiveness of a school and the quality of those who apply. Anyone can apply to MIT but the truth is that by and large only very good students do.
February 24, 2011 at 2:42 pm
GGG
“Minority groups have long complained about the SAT/ACT and biased quesitons. ”
And their complaints have no merit. However, they do score lower for reasons having more to do with themselves than anything else. Taking it into consideration is perfectly reasonable.
February 25, 2011 at 10:22 am
Public-Sector Unionization and College Admission Test Scores « The Banker and His Abacus
[…] same level of accuracy as Obama-is-a-Manchurian-Muslim emails. Josh Moser at Ashbrook Center and Angus Johnson at Student Activism critique the original rankings from the right and left wings, respectively. In short, the data are […]
February 25, 2011 at 11:41 pm
Blog of Bodnar » Debate Guide: Wisconsin Union Bill
[…] Census Bureau StudentActivism.net NAEP: The Nation’s Report Card: Reading 2009 NAEP: The Nation’s Report Card: Math […]
February 26, 2011 at 9:17 pm
Damon
Well, this was somewhat confusing. First you state that Wisconsin’s ACT ranking was 17th, with 69% participation.Later you state that Wisconsin was 4th, combined with 5th on SAT, for a total of 9, which put it in 2nd place overall. Which is accurate: 17th or 4th? That’s a big difference, and I’d like to use the correct number here in Wisconsin.
February 28, 2011 at 3:06 am
Madness in Madison – Do unions equal effective education? | Political Progressives
[…] Angus Johnston of StudentActivism.net makes a great case as to why this is so. First of all, when corrected for participation, the data still supports the fact that Wisconsin consistently outranks states that don’t […]
March 1, 2011 at 12:20 am
kc1964kc
collective bargaining and unions fleece taxpayers-must be one of those HB gary sock puppets writing there.
But arent teachers and union members taxPAYERS, os are they fleecing themselves too? Or is it really fascist elite ruling class allowing corporations to dodge taxes and create loopholes for them to fit there very large bank accounts to be hidden. I think the original numbers were posted more as a “kick” than anything else. The author and the sockpuppets then were meant to make it into something else. As much as some of you all would like the protest to go away and the rest of the middle class as well (everyone KNOWS teachers are UNDER PAID-well except for college level DIV I COACHES). Really the point is the income and tax disparity…not so much SAT/ACT scores. nice deflection but no deal.
March 3, 2011 at 6:46 pm
Longhorns 17, Badgers 1 - CycloneFanatic
[…] […]
March 3, 2011 at 8:32 pm
Jane
Here are the ACT scores from 2010. Oh my! Look! Virginia’s 14th and Wisconsin’s 18th!
http://www.act.org/news/data/10/states.html
The lowest scorers were Michigan, Tennessee, Florida, Kentucky, and Mississippi.
March 4, 2011 at 10:06 am
LB
As a retired institutional researcher, I can tell you that some districts (forget about states for a minute) openly recruit “better” performers for SAT – even to the point of providing “scholarships” to pay for testing fees – while they discourage poorer performers from considering sitting for the SAT. Some facilitate these poorer performers to take the ACT, knowing that in their state only the SAT scores are considered as a prestigious indicator of district success. The author is correct in noting that when the overall proportion for students taking the SAT is **so** disparate that direct comparisons of resulting performance are impossible – without further disaggregation. If someone could access the HS transcripts for SAT takers, common demographics including grade level and age at testing, and **all** SAT scores for each student tested, then a more realistic comparison is possible. [I mention “all” SAT scores because it is not uncommon for a student to take the SAT more than once in an attempt to improve their scores. In fact, research has shown that it is not uncommon for younger students to improve overall point count by 200-300 points by the second testing. Also, it is up to each district to decide **which** of these multiple SAT scores to report for each student – the 1st one? The best one? The most recent one? The best for each subtest regardless of date taken?] Also, some districts (and States, for that matter) embrace the goal to include as many students as possible in SAT testing – a tactic opposite to testing only the “elite”. Are these States and districts to be penalized by being considered as “instructionally impotent” because they open the door to college admissions to a larger proportion of youth? Obviously the average SAT score for a larger and more representative sample of the population would be lower than that for the top quartile or decile. It all boils down to smoke and mirrors with numbers. All accountability and “one number tells the whole story” systems with which I am familiar dilute and distill accurate and factual information for the sake of throwing one index per State up on a bar chart. That, my friends, is no information at all – and only the ingenuous, the uninformed, and the manipulative attach meaning to it and promote it in discussions of action.
March 10, 2011 at 10:43 am
Janice
Certainly the participation percentage matters – if only 4% of your students take the SAT, as in Wisconsin, then you are only getting a small and probably elite subset of all students. If 50 or 60% of students take a test, then you are getting closer to average ability. It would be very helpful if all states required all students to take either or both of these tests – but then, they do not really want people to be able to compare education results, do they? Perhaps someone should survey universities and colleges on how they use these scores – I am sure they have figured out what these scores really mean, as they use them to determine which students to pursue. My two homeschooled sons both scored over 28 on the ACT in Wisconsin, which is about the average score for all of the homeschooled students I know. Makes you wonder how much the homeschool scores are bolstering the public school scores. Why are these factors not tracked?
May 7, 2011 at 8:35 pm
frenky
bNRhSe http://gdjI3b7VaWpU1m0dGpvjRrcu9Fk.com
July 9, 2011 at 12:16 am
Atlanta Education System caught in Massive Cheating Scandal
[…] […]
May 6, 2013 at 12:08 am
ver champions league online
Good post. I learn something new and challenging
on websites I stumbleupon every day. It’s always interesting to read articles from other authors and use something from other sites.