New Delaware scores in the Nation's Report Card still show little pandemic rebound
The Nation's Report Card just dropped.
And its assessment has shown no nationwide rebound from the pandemic.
Across the United States, last year's reading scores declined by 2 points. That's compared with the previous results from the National Assessment of Educational Progress of fourth and eighth graders, back in 2022, and it only steepens a 3-point decline documented nationally between 2019 and 2022. No state saw reading gains.
Average scores in math offered different numbers. Nationwide, average math scores increased in fourth grade by 2 points compared with two years ago. Delaware came among 13 states, Washington, D.C., and Puerto Rico to show a lift in math scores – but no state made mathematic gains among eighth graders.
Nearly five years after the COVID-19 pandemic, the nation is below its 2019 scores in both grades and subjects. Just two states surpassed pre-pandemic scores in a single grade and subject, a spokesperson from the National Assessment Governing Board wrote in a release Wednesday morning. The board pointed to single-area gains for Louisiana and Alabama.
Delaware's Department of Education did not yet respond to requests for comment, as leaders eye the likely confirmation of Cynthia "Cindy" Marten as the next secretary of education Wednesday evening in Legislative Hall.
So how did Delaware fair?
New face in Delaware: Gov.-elect Meyer nominates new secretary of education, from US Department of Education
Delaware student scores remain below pre-pandemic levels, as well as that of their average counterparts nationwide from 2022 to 2024. But results varied in math and reading across fourth and eighth grades.
In math, Delaware's average fourth grade marks boosted by 7 points. That can be defined as growth in the report card, though it doesn't fully answer the sharp 13-point drop from 2019 to 2022.
With 35% of these young students at or above the assessment's definition of "proficient," the 2024 score comes about 4 points below the national average. But some 71% of these students came above "basic" benchmarks. Those who fall below this, per the board, would mean "they likely cannot identify odd numbers or solve a problem using unit conversions."
Eighth grade math showed no growth.
While Delaware's scores here trail behind the national average by 9 points, the state's own results dropped a point. That left just over half of eighth graders taking the test to be defined as reaching or exceeding basic levels for Nation's Report Card. The board said the other 49% below basic "likely cannot use similarity to find the length of a side of a triangle." About 19% were proficient.
Delaware state assessments 2024: Student assessment performance remains below pre-pandemic, with many still declining
Now, there's reading. This assessment area remained largely static for fourth graders.
Scores did bump 2 points – but this, too, did not near the gap left by a 10-point dive from 2019 to 2022. Delaware trails the national average by 5 points. Over half of these student meet or exceed basic benchmarks, per the board, but just 26% are at or above proficient. According to this test, fourth graders below basic level "likely cannot recognize a reason for a character's action implied in a story."
Looking up to eighth grade reveals another drop. In fact, Delaware's current score in reading at this grade level is the lowest its ever been in NAEP data reaching back to 1998.
Reading scores at this level dropped 4 points, thus leaving it 7 points behind the national average. This further follows the 7-point drop measured in 2022. About 59% of eighth-grade readers remain at or above basic parameters, while just 23% are deemed proficient or better in these results.
Delaware's own latest test results dropped last August. Results showed most students continuing to score lower than pre-pandemic levels, with some showing worsening performance from even the year prior.
Got a story? Contact Kelly Powers at kepowers@gannett.com or (231) 622-2191.
This article originally appeared on Delaware News Journal: New scores in the Nation's Report Card still show little COVID rebound
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
RFK Jr.'s new vaccine panel is packed with vaccine skeptics
During his Senate confirmation hearings for health secretary, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. went to great lengths to downplay his previous anti-vaccine positions to try to assure the public that he wasn't as extreme as his record indicated. But now that he has unveiled new members of an important vaccine advisory committee, his long-held extremism is not only coming back into full view, it's also being operationalized. On Monday, Kennedy removed all 17 members of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, or ACIP, which is made up of medical and public health experts and advises the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. As NBC News reports, this committee makes 'recommendations to the CDC about who should get certain vaccines, including the schedule for childhood vaccinations.' These recommendations are then adopted by medical professionals and insurers. Kennedy justified the move by alleging that the experts on the panel were all compromised by financial conflicts of interest. But the claim looked like a dubious pretext for clearing the way for a new panel. As NBC News reports, 'Members of ACIP, who undergo an extensive vetting process before they are appointed, are required to disclose conflicts of interest and recuse themselves from voting on vaccines for which conflicts exist.' Sean O'Leary, chair of the infectious disease committee for the American Academy of Pediatrics, who serves as a liaison to the committee from the pediatric academy, told The New York Times that the idea that the old committee's decisions were influenced by financial conflicts of interest was 'factually incorrect, and you can look at the record to see that.' He called Kennedy's firings 'manufactured chaos.' Kennedy's vision came into clearer view on Wednesday when he announced eight new people to serve on ACIP's board, including several experts with questionable or outright dangerous track records on vaccinations or public health recommendations. They include: Robert Malone, a physician-scientist and biochemist whom The New York Times has described as a 'misinformation star,' in part because of his record of misleadingly questioning the dangers of Covid and the safety of Covid vaccines. Vicky Pebsworth, the director of research and patient safety at the National Vaccine Information Center, which NBC News reports is 'considered a leading source of misinformation about vaccines.' Cody Meissner, a Dartmouth pediatrics professor who was a signer of the Great Barrington Declaration, the statement that opposed lockdowns during the Covid pandemic. Retsef Levi, a professor of operations management at the MIT Sloan School of Management. NBC News reports that he 'has called for an end to Covid vaccinations, claiming mRNA vaccines cause serious harm and death, especially among young people.' Martin Kulldorff, an epidemiologist and biostatistician who was one of the authors of the Great Barrington Declaration. Kennedy didn't pick random people off the internet; they have credentials, often at highly esteemed institutions, although some of these academic backgrounds apparently deviate from the kind one typically expects for this panel. But many public health experts and those who keep a close eye on vaccine skeptics and anti-vaxxers note that Kennedy appears to be putting together a slate of experts who skew ideologically against consensus and near-consensus views on vaccine safety and efficacy. 'Kennedy did not pick people with strong, current expertise in vaccines,' Dorit Reiss, a professor at UC Law San Francisco who studies vaccine policy, told NPR. 'It tells me that Kennedy is setting up a committee that would be skeptical of vaccines, and possibly willing to implement an anti-vaccine agenda.' David Mansdoerfer, who served as deputy assistant secretary for the Department of Health and Human Services in the first Trump administration, called Kennedy's announcement 'a huge win for the medical freedom movement.' It's not yet clear how the advisory board will rule on vaccine recommendations in the future. But the real-world effects of this could be significant. As The New York Times notes, the panel's recommendations, which don't have to be adopted by the CDC but typically are, can affect how strongly doctors recommend vaccinations. If the panel's recommendations skew away from recommending vaccines, then it could mean that physicians might be more hesitant to counsel patients to take vaccines that have long been proved to be safe. Furthermore, the panel's recommendations could affect how health insurance companies cover vaccines. 'Right now, insurance companies cover the four-dose polio series. But without an A.C.I.P. recommendation, the shots might cost you more than $300,' the Times reports. We still don't know how this newly formed panel will play out. But contrary to Kennedy's 'Make America Healthy Again' mantra, all indications so far are that Kennedy is laser-focused on advancing activist goals that will make our society less healthy. This article was originally published on
Yahoo
3 hours ago
- Yahoo
'It is essential': Riders and advocates plea for a lifeline for RIPTA
PROVIDENCE - Public transportation advocates are making a final push for state lawmakers to rescue the Rhode Island Public Transit Authority from a looming budget crisis that, if unaddressed, could slash bus service across the state. They came to the House Finance Committee in support of a slate of bills that would close or partly close a projected $33 million RIPTA budget deficit for the year starting July 1, protecting bus routes and transportation for the disabled. Jean Ann Giuliano of East Greenwich said RIPTA service had been a "game changer" for her 28-year-old autistic son, allowing him to live independently and ride it to his job at CVS. "RIPTA for him is a lifeline. It is not a convenience for James, it is a necessity. It is essential," Giuliano said at a May 21 House Finance Committee meeting. "Last year, the bus he takes was on the chopping block ... fortunately it was saved. This year it is probably going to be on the chopping block again and for us it is panic time." Amy Jo Glidden, co-chair of Rhode Island Transit Riders, said the cuts to bus service that would be required without money budgeted for transit would result in layoffs at RIPTA, routes cut or made less frequent, and lost jobs across the state by people who are no longer able to get to work. "This issue is personal for me. I do not own a car and rely on the bus to get around," Glidden said. "If RIPTA does not get the $32 million, catastrophe awaits." RIPTA's budget woes have reached this crisis point over the course of many years, but like most transit agencies in the United States, accelerated during the COVID pandemic. The pandemic cratered ridership and sent costs spiraling, but for four years federal aid plugged the revenue gap. Gov. Dan McKee has not suggested any new funding ideas for RIPTA. The "Save RIPTA" alliance has backed seven different public transit funding bills and it is not clear which have the best chance of passing. They include: Appropriating $32 million in the state budget Borrowing $100 million for transit Shifting more gas tax collections to RIPTA Dedicating taxes collected from ride-hailing companies such as Uber to transit Using every year of inflation to calculate the every-two-year gas tax increase (currently only the most recent year is counted.) Last year, the General Assembly provided $15 million − the other half of the deficit was plugged with the last remaining COVID funds − but made no move toward funding the agency long term. The one string attached to the $15 million was a requirement that RIPTA conduct an "efficiency study" by March that would search for ways to run the bus system at lower cost or in a way that generates more revenue. But last year was also a time of turmoil at RIPTA and, after the ouster of former CEO Scott Avedisian, the bus system's board of directors opted to give new CEO Chris Durand's team and consultants more time to search for efficiencies. On Thursday, May 22, Durand told the RIPTA board that the study was still being finished and he expected more documents from it to be available next week. RIPTA did send a "best practices review" of other similar-sized transit agencies from study consultant WSP to lawmakers May 16. It recommended, among other things, eliminating underperforming routes, increasing eligibility verification for paratransit service and shifting some service to "microtransit." On the revenue side, the report said agencies could look for more advertising opportunities. House Speaker K. Joseph Shekarchi said May 22 he has more requests for spending than the state has revenue and he expects RIPTA to find efficiencies. "They have to right the ship," he said about RIPTA. "The reality is they have to change. Public transit is important, for the economy and environment ... We gave them an extra $15 million and all I asked for is an efficiency study that's behind schedule." The only bill in the Save RIPTA package that McKee's administration has weighed in on is a proposal to shift some gas tax proceeds from highway projects to transit. Transportation Secretary Peter Alviti Jr., who is also the RIPTA board chairman, wrote to lawmakers that the Department of Transportation opposes the bill because it would "result in an annual loss of approximately $7 million, significantly impacting our capital program." Liza Burkin, board president of the Providence Streets Coalition, argued at the Finance Committee meeting that it is past time state leaders start making long-term decisions about RIPTA. "It is very sad we are still in the same place. We have studied this over and over and over and over," Burkin said. "The Save RIPTA campaign has chosen seven different ways of funding RIPTA. They are diverse, different ways. It is up to you all to decide. Just choose one or two." This article originally appeared on The Providence Journal: RIPTA is heading toward a crisis. Riders are begging for a lifeline.
New York Post
3 hours ago
- New York Post
Who won fiery final NYC mayoral debate? Post panelists rate the Dem candidates: ‘Finally landed some punches'
Ex-Gov. Andrew Cuomo took the harshest personal hits from rivals Zohran Mamdani and Brad Lander in the second and final mayoral primary debate — but likely not enough to topple his perch as the frontrunner for the Democratic nomination, a Post panel of political experts said. But Mamdani, who has emerged as a top threat to Cuomo, took some jabs as well. And the panel of seven analysts questioned whether criticisms about the charismatic 33-year-old Democratic socialist assemblyman's thin resume and experience will blunt his momentum. 'Cuomo, Mamdani and Lander were more vitriolic, throwing haymakers,' said Lee Miringoff, director of the Marist Institute for Public Opinion. Advertisement 5 Former NYC Gov. Andrew Cuomo speaks during the final NYC Democratic mayoral debate at John Jay College of Criminal Justice on June 12, 2025. AP 'But I don't think the debate changed the dynamics of the race.' Campaign strategist O'Brien 'OB' Murray said Cuomo, Lander and Council Speaker Adrienne Adams were the debate winners. Advertisement 'Democratic opponents finally landed some punches on Andrew Cuomo, but none of these punches will leave any bruises,' said Murray. Still, Murray said: 'Lander went right at Cuomo and was a different debater from the start.' Republican campaign strategist Bill O'Reilly agreed, saying, 'Cuomo likely did well enough to keep his polling lead, but Lander improved on his last performance and may siphon away some Cuomo votes.' One of the signature moments in the debate was when Lander, the city comptroller, recognized Peter Arbeeny, whom he invited as a guest to the debate hosted by NY1 and The City at John Jay College Thursday night. Advertisement 5 Assemblyman Zohran Mamdani stands on the debate stage at the Gerald W. Lynch Theater. via REUTERS Arbeeny's father, Norman, died from COVID-19 after a rehab stint in a nursing home. The stunt allowed Lander to personalize Cuomo's controversial COVID-19 policy that required nursing homes to admit recovering infected patients, which critics claimed accelerated the spread of contagion and deaths of vulnerable, elderly residents. Cuomo has long denied that was the case. Advertisement The panelists said Lander's super aggressive performance was perhaps his last attempt to try to shake up the race and supplant Mamdani as the anti-Cuomo alternative. 'Lander attempted to revive his campaign. It was a hail Mary night,' Murray said. Former Brooklyn Councilman Sal Albanese said, 'Lander was in Cuomo's face. Lander showed fire tonight. He had a pretty good performance.' The Post panelists said Mamdani showed he could go toe-to-toe with Cuomo, when he said of the sexual misconduct accusations that forced the veteran pol from the governorship, 'I have never had to resign in disgrace.' He also scolded Cuomo for mispronouncing his name. 'Mamdani's hammering Cuomo on the sexual harassment accusations and demanding that he pronounce his name correctly was as clean a blow as you'll ever see in a debate. It was a memorable moment,' said Andrew Kirtzman, managing director of the consulting firm Actum. 'Cuomo found it hard to get off the defensive at first, but got stronger and more commanding as the night went on – he projected more gravitas than any of his opponents.' 5 NYC Comptroller Brad Lander speaks during Thursday night's debate. via REUTERS Advertisement Political analyst Ken Frydman said the hit on Cuomo's sex harassment scandal landed — but it wasn't a knockout punch. 'If it was, no woman would've voted for Donald Trump,' he said. Frydman added: 'Cuomo, Mamdani and Adams came into the second debate one, two and three — and came out of it one, two and three.' One of the surprises of the debate, the panelists said, was when the council speaker deftly asked if Mamdani had the experience to be mayor, comparing her background and record to his. 'Adrianne Adams showed maturity and experience while others questioned the same for Mamdani. Her use of the assemblyman is something the others didn't catch onto,' said Murray. Advertisement Another candidate, former city Comptroller Stringer, also took a veiled shot at Mamdani, a foe of Israel who supports the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement against the Jewish state. 'The BDS movement is antisemitic,' Stringer said. 5 Democratic mayoral candidates Adrienne Adams, Andrew Cuomo, Brad Lander, Zohran Mamdani, Zellnor Myrie, Scott Stringer and Whitney Tilson participate in the debate on June 12, 2025. POOL/AFP via Getty Images Cuomo, Stringer and longshot candidate Whitney Tilson did a 'stellar job hammering home Mamdani's radical and anti-Israel stances,' said O'Reilly. Advertisement Democratic operative Yvette Buckner said there fewer voices than in the first debate but 'the attacks were bolder and more negative,' especially for Cuomo by Mamdani and Lander. She noted that questions were raised about Mamdani's experience as well. 'Mamdani effectively delivered soundbites on his opponents but did not dig deep into his policy positions, like other candidates such as Adrienne Adams did, which leaves unresolved questions with less than 36 hours until early voting,' Bucker said. 5 Democratic operative Yvette Buckner said there were fewer voices than in the first debate, but 'the attacks were bolder and more negative,' especially for Cuomo by Mamdani and Lander. AP Advertisement 'But it remains to be seen if that will slow down his momentum.' Albanese was the one panelists who really thought the debate hurt Cuomo. 'I think Cuomo's numbers are going to drop. He took a pounding. I thought he had a weak debate,' he said. Cuomo couldn't even remember if he'd ever visited a mosque while campaigning, Albanese noted. 'No Muslims are going to vote for him,' said Albanese. The primary election is June 24 with nine days of early voting beginning on Saturday.
