Paul L. Thomas writes op-ed about NAEP and ‘overblown’ reading statistics

In The Washington Post, Furman University’s Paul L. Thomas writes an opinion piece about U.S. reading scores and the flurry of reports over the last 30 years claiming that U.S. reading is in “crisis.”

Thomas, a professor of education and former high school educator, challenges the benchmarks set forth by “the nation’s report card,” or the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP). He says the issue lies in NAEP’s definition of “proficient,” the second of the assessment’s other two metrics, “basic” and “advanced.” NAEP’s “proficient” reading level is more closely aligned with advanced students according to a 2004 report by the American Federation of Teachers, and in 2022, the majority of states set their reading proficiency standard in NAEP’s “basic” range.

Thomas says the NAEP has set unrealistic goals for student achievement, a reality that has fueled discourse about a U.S. reading crisis. At the same time, the focus on NAEP proficiency standards masks the real issues surrounding reading scores, Thomas says. “The common misreading of NAEP data has allowed the country to ignore what is urgent: Addressing the opportunity gap that negatively impacts Black and brown students, impoverished students, multilingual learners and students with disabilities,” he writes.

Thomas argues for adopting a unified set of achievement terms among the NAEP and state-level testing, and he advocates for achievement thresholds being based on age rather than grade. Thomas also makes a case against third-grade retention policies, which he says are punitive and show little evidence of lasting efficacy.

Among many other books, chapters and essays, Thomas is author of “How to End the Reading War and Serve the Literacy Needs of All Students” (2020, Information Age Publishing).

A subscription may be required to view the op-ed in The Washington Post. Furman ID holders may gain access to the content though databases at Furman University Libraries.