Texas' annual reading test adjusted its difficulty every year, masking whether students are improving
Texas children's performance on an annual reading test was basically flat from 2012 to 2021, even as the state spent billions of additional dollars on K-12 education.
I recently did a peer-reviewed deep dive into the test design documentation to figure out why the reported results weren't showing improvement. I found the flat scores were at least in part by design. According to policies buried in the documentation, the agency administering the tests adjusted their difficulty level every year. As a result, roughly the same share of students failed the test over that decade regardless of how objectively better they performed relative to previous years.
From 2008 to 2014, I was a bilingual teacher in Texas. Most of my students' families hailed from Mexico and Central America and were learning English as a new language. I loved seeing my students' progress.
Yet, no matter how much they learned, many failed the end-of-year tests in reading, writing and math. My hunch was that these tests were unfair, but I could not explain why. This, among other things, prompted me to pursue a Ph.D. in education to better understand large-scale educational assessment.
Ten years later, in 2024, I completed a detailed exploration of Texas's exam, currently known as the State of Texas Assessments of Academic Readiness, or STAAR. I found an unexpected trend: The share of students who correctly answered each test question was extraordinarily steady across years. Where we would expect to see fluctuation from year to year, performance instead appears artificially flat.
The STAAR's technical documents reveal that the test is designed much like a norm-referenced test – that is, assessing students relative to their peers, rather than if they meet a fixed standard. In other words, a norm-referenced test cannot tell us if students meet key, fixed criteria or grade-level standards set by the state.
In addition, norm-referenced tests are designed so that a certain share of students always fail, because success is gauged by one's position on the 'bell curve' in relation to other students. Following this logic, STAAR developers use practices like omitting easier questions and adjusting scores to cancel out gains due to better teaching.
Ultimately, the STAAR tests over this time frame – taken by students every year from grade 3 to grade 8 in language arts and math, and less frequently in science and social studies – were not designed to show improvement. Since the test is designed to keep scores flat, it's impossible to know for sure if a lack of expected learning gains following big increases in per-student spending was because the extra funds failed to improve teaching and learning, or simply because the test hid the improvements.
Ever since the federal education policy known as No Child Left Behind went into effect in 2002 and tied students' test performance to rewards and sanctions for schools, achievement testing has been a primary driver of public education in the United States.
Texas' educational accountability system has been in place since 1980, and it is well known in the state that the stakes and difficulty of Texas' academic readiness tests increase with each new version, which typically come out every five to 10 years. What the Texas public may not know is that the tests have been adjusted each and every year – at the expense of really knowing who should 'pass' or 'fail.'
The test's design affects not just students but also schools and communities. High-stakes test scores determine school resources, the state's takeover of school districts and accreditation of teacher education programs. Home values are even driven by local schools' performance on high-stakes tests.
Students who are marginalized by racism, poverty or language have historically tended to underperform on standardized tests. STAAR's design makes this problem worse.
I plan to investigate if other states or the federal government use similarly designed tests to evaluate students.
My deep dive into Texas' test focused on STAAR before its 2022 redevelopment. The latest iteration has changed the test format and question types, but there appears to be little change to the way the test is scored. Without substantive revisions to the scoring calculations 'under the hood' of the STAAR test, it is likely Texas will continue to see flat performance.
The Texas Education Agency, which administers the STAAR tests, didn't respond to a request for comment.
The Research Brief is a short take on interesting academic work.
This article is republished from The Conversation, a nonprofit, independent news organization bringing you facts and trustworthy analysis to help you make sense of our complex world. It was written by: Jeanne Sinclair, Memorial University of Newfoundland
Read more:
How going back to the SAT could set back college student diversity
Students' test scores tell us more about the community they live in than what they know
Is your child taking a test? When is the right time?
Jeanne Sinclair receives funding from the Social Science and Humanities Research Council (SSHRC) of Canada.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Boston Globe
29 minutes ago
- Boston Globe
Looking for an edge, Democrats? Just look around you.
Here's a simple, cost-effective, noncontroversial, and human response to the chaos: storytelling. Telling stories about the real-life human consequences of this administration's policies and directives could cut through the noise. Run 15-second spots about real people and their stories nationally across multiple platforms from now to the midterms and beyond. Get The Gavel A weekly SCOTUS explainer newsletter by columnist Kimberly Atkins Stohr. Enter Email Sign Up Hear from a mother returning food when the grocery bill is too high, a student dropping out of college because child care is unavailable or too expensive, a pizza shop owner without a dishwasher, or a contractor who cannot find painters. Watch a parent being arrested by Immigration and Customs Enforcement with their children watching. Show a grandfather waiting hours to talk to Social Security, or a woman taking her medication every other day because health care costs are too high. All in 15 seconds each. Advertisement By telling people about the results of policy decisions and executive actions in clear, simple ways, the Democratic Party can create a groundswell of informed, engaged citizens ready to advocate for change and hold their leaders accountable. It would be powerful. Advertisement Deborah Heller Boston Democrats shouldn't get lost in words A Washington Post report featured in the Globe ('Debate revives over left-wing buzzwords,' Political Notebook, May 27) suggests that terms like 'Food insecurity' sounds like an anxiety disorder. Children in the depths of poverty are not experiencing food insecurity. They are hungry or starving. The Trump regime is not an oligarchy; rather, it is a dictatorship with one ruler enabled by people like Marco Rubio and Mike Johnson, who are not fellow oligarchs but, rather, bootlickers or, to use the fancy Greek word, sycophants. In 'Politics and the English Language,' George Orwell demonstrates how politicians use vague, sugar-coated, euphemistic terms (like 'food insecurity') to justify behavior, policy, or circumstances that cannot be justified. Such words are lies in disguise. Donald Trump's supporters often say they like him because he speaks his mind. He's upfront. He doesn't talk euphemistically, like other politicians. No disguises. Right. He just lies and lies and lies. The mystery is why so many Trump supporters don't seem to care how often or how blatantly he does so. John R. Nelson Gloucester The writer is a professor emeritus of English at North Shore Community College. The poor get poorer while the Trump family gets richer An article on Page A6 of the May 26 Boston Globe was headlined Advertisement The Democrats certainly have to promote a better path forward, but highlighting Trump's abuses while putting forward a plan for the future would be a foundation on which to build. There's so much at stake for the economy, health, education, the environment, and the rule of law that Democrats can champion in contrast to the utter destruction we're seeing now. John Cotter Melrose If populism thrives on grievance, we need a new brand of populism As Larry Edelman and countless other commentators have pointed out, populism thrives on grievance ( We've seen increasing signs of the human tropism toward divisiveness and an 'us against them' mentality. A 'revenge is sweet' refrain now echoes around the world. It's considered not just sweet but justified. Not just justified but necessary. Populism will always thrive on carefully choosing its targets. And though hurting Harvard or immigrants or health research will improve the lives of no one, that doesn't matter. Revenge is rarely rational or well-reasoned. It's emotionally intoxicating. Therein lies the enduring lure of populism. Until the Democrats figure out how to build their own brand of populism, one that captures the hearts, souls, and imaginations of the populace, we will all be forced to endure life in an 'us against them' society. Advertisement Elaine Mintzer Keene, N.H.
Yahoo
5 hours ago
- Yahoo
🏆 Who's going up to La Liga? Elche, Oviedo and Mirandés in the mix today
🏆 Who's going up to La Liga? Elche, Oviedo and Mirandés in the mix today Fans don't call it the Hypertension League for nothing... Today, the Hypermotion League, the second division of Spanish football, puts the last direct promotion spot up for grabs. Starting at 18:30, there will be a unified matchday in what promises to be an electrifying round. Advertisement Elche is the clear favorite in this battle, but Real Oviedo and Mirandés also have their chances if the Franjiverdes slip up. Let's review the options for the three clubs hoping to reach the top division today: What does Elche need? If they win at Riazor against Deportivo La Coruña, they are promoted. If they draw, Sarabia's side must hope that Mirandés doesn't win, because the head-to-head favors the team from Anduva. A three-way tie on points also favors Elche. If they lose, Oviedo and Mirandés must also lose. What do Real Oviedo and Mirandés need? The Carbayón side only has one scenario: beat Cádiz at the Tartiere and hope Elche loses at Riazor. Advertisement Mirandés needs to win at Cartagonova and for both Elche and Oviedo to either draw or lose. The last two playoff spots up for grabs Three teams in contention, but only two spots available. One of those two spots will come from the Racing de Santander-Granada match. Granada must win, but Racing only needs a draw to qualify, and could even make it through with a loss as long as Almería doesn't beat Tenerife. Almería's situation is clear: a win against relegated Tenerife puts them in the promotion playoffs. This article was translated into English by Artificial Intelligence. You can read the original version in 🇪🇸 here. 📸 YOUSEF DOUBISI
Yahoo
8 hours ago
- Yahoo
Bill to scrap STAAR test dies in the Texas Legislature
A legislative effort to scrap the STAAR test to respond to concerns that the test puts unnecessary pressure on students died in the last days of the legislative session. House Bill 4, authored by state Rep. Brad Buckley, would have swapped the State of Texas Assessments of Academic Readiness test for three shorter tests given throughout the school year. The Senate and House failed to come out of closed-door negotiations with a compromise in time, missing a key legislative deadline this weekend. Legislators in the House and Senate agreed that Texas schools needed to do away with the STAAR test. But in the end, the two chambers could not close the gulf over what they wanted to see out of the new test and from the A-F ratings system, which uses standardized test results to grade schools' performance. Tensions had come to a head in recent years when a dispute over how ratings should be calculated led to two years of scores to be held up in court. The Senate wanted to solidify the Texas Education Agency commissioner's authority to set stricter standards for the ratings system. And to discourage schools from taking legal action again, the upper chamber's version of the bill gave the TEA commissioner authority to appoint a conservator to districts that initiate lawsuits. The House version, meanwhile, required the TEA to get approval from the Legislature before making major changes to the ratings system. And it left an avenue for districts to sue to challenge the TEA in the future, while setting up a fast-track court process so those lawsuits would not halt the release of the ratings. The two chambers also differed over whether to keep or do away with a mandatory social studies test, with the House in favor of less testing. The session started with nearly identical versions of the legislation in the House and Senate, but when senators slammed school districts in committee hearings and on the chamber floor for participating in the recent lawsuits, few superintendents came out to testify in front of the Senate Education Committee. Instead, the school leaders were in talks with House representatives about their lack of trust in the state's accountability and testing systems. The House's rewrite of the legislation to reflect school leaders' concerns eventually came late in the session, leaving little time for negotiations between the chambers to reach a compromise. To the Texas State Teachers Association, the current high-stakes STAAR test takes instructional time away from the classroom and is not an accurate measure of student success. But the group was holding their breath when the two chambers were in closed-door negotiations. 'We think we are better off that there is no bill at all than what the Senate wanted to do,' said Clay Robison, a spokesperson for the group. 'We thought the Senate gave far too much authority to the unelected state commissioner.' The Texas Tribune partners with Open Campus on higher education coverage. Disclosure: Texas State Teachers Association has been a financial supporter of The Texas Tribune, a nonprofit, nonpartisan news organization that is funded in part by donations from members, foundations and corporate sponsors. Financial supporters play no role in the Tribune's journalism. Find a complete list of them here. First round of TribFest speakers announced! Pulitzer Prize-winning columnist Maureen Dowd; U.S. Rep. Tony Gonzales, R-San Antonio; Fort Worth Mayor Mattie Parker; U.S. Sen. Adam Schiff, D-California; and U.S. Rep. Jasmine Crockett, D-Dallas are taking the stage Nov. 13–15 in Austin. Get your tickets today!