Low Test Scores? According To Research, Blame The Heat
There are many excuses you are bound to hear as a teacher. “Oh I forgot” is a common one. “The dog ate my homework” is a favorite. But in areas…
The higher the mercury goes, the lower the test scores go according to research.
lamyai via iStock/Getty Images PlusThere are many excuses you are bound to hear as a teacher. "Oh I forgot" is a common one. "The dog ate my homework" is a favorite. But in areas that aren't acclimated to high temperatures, "a heat wave affected my intelligence" could be plausable.
According to research, hot temperatures - especially in areas not acclimated to them - can affect student test scores and overall learning. The study was done by researchers from Stanford, UCLA and Boston University. It studied standardized testing from over 140 million high school aged students across 58 countries. They then linked that data up with weather information and the school calendar.
The study found the higher the number of hot school days, the larger the decrease in the rate of learning. Hey, maybe we have an alibi for Nevada's low ratings in education!
This isn't an outlier. Former research showed a similar link between high temps and low test scores in the United States. That study also found that if you're in a low-income area with a school that doesn't have air conditioning, you're in a particularly bad situation.
Avoid the heat for better test scores? We moving to Canada?
The overarching worry is that lower test scores will result in slower economic growth as a country. The study's advice is "improving physical learning environments." In other words, make sure the schools, and the student's home, is well air conditioned.
Moving north is typically an option, but with temperatures rising above 100 in Portland, Oregon this year, it seems like there is little escape from brutal temperatures.
According to the most recent Grade 8 data from NationsReportCard.gov, northern states tend to fare better in both reading, math and writing. Whether that has to do with weather or funding is not certain... but what is certain is the temperatures are rising. July marked the hottest global temperature since records were taken in 1880.
Governor Lombardo Wants To Increase Nevada Education Budget
Any parent in Nevada knows the state seems not to make the grade. Year after year, Nevada ranks at or near the bottom when it comes to education. Also near the bottom of the list is how much Nevada spends per student. Governor Lombardo said in Monday's State Of The State that he wants to increase Nevada education spending.
The proposed number he has thrown out is two billion dollars to prop up the amount spent per student from the current $10,290 to $12,406 - which would make Nevada go from near the bottom to towards the national average.
That money could mean paying teachers a better wage, which would help school systems like the Clark County School District help retain great talent. It could mean more resources and technology available to kids to help them make the grade. While the budget is proposed, it's up to Carson City to pass it starting next month when the next legislative session gets underway.
Does more money mean Nevada education will improve?
Depending on who you ask, more money means better results in the classroom - or doesn't make a lick of difference. The National Education Association says plainly more money means better results. An OpEd in The Hill says it doesn't always mean better results. The Brookings Institute says "it's not nothing," putting the emphasis on long-term funding, as short term infusions of cash don't see results.
Whatever the case is, Governor Lombardo makes it clear while he wants to increase investment, if it doesn't move the needle the next step is a change in the education structure in the state.
Is money the answer? Or is something else at play?
We painstakingly went through the ratings and have come up with a list of the states and their funding, from least funded to most. We've also found the education ranking in each state. Now you can decide if there is a correlation or not.
There are some outlier states like Utah and Colorado that are dead last in spending but significantly better in education rating. Meanwhile other states that spend through the roof, like Wyoming and Alaska, severely underperform against their spending. The average difference between ranking and spending is 11.3 positions. 17 states were within 5 positions of spending and ranking.
A closer correlation can be made when it comes to the state's poverty rate compared to it's education ranking. The average difference between the state's education ranking and poverty rate is only 9.12 spots... with again 17 states being within 5 positions comparing poverty rate and education ranking. The higher the poverty rate, the higher the likelihood of less parental oversight and less access to resources. That can obviously lead to worse results. Utah has the lowest spending per student, but the 2nd best poverty rate. They find themselves at number 21 in school rating. Meanwhile Louisiana has the 22nd highest spending, but is 2nd from the bottom in poverty rate. They rate 46th in education. So while funding the schools is good, having a well funded populace seems to be better.
Whatever the case, we aren't complaining. With as much money that comes into this state, Las Vegas especially, there's no excuse for being at the bottom of the funding list.
50) Utah (significantly outperforms spending)
Funding Per Pupil: $7,954
US News & World Report Ranking: 21st (That outperforms spending by 29 spots - an impressive feat.)
Poverty Rate: 8.28% (2nd)
49) Idaho (significantly outperforms spending)
Funding Per Pupil: $8,141
US News & World Report Ranking: 23rd (outperforms spending by 26 spots - impressive!)
Poverty Rate: 10.71% (22nd)
48) Tennessee (significantly outperforms spending)
Funding Per Pupil: $8,324
US News & World Report Ranking: 31st
Poverty Rate: 13.63% (41st)
47) Arizona (on pace with spending)
Funding Per Pupil: $8,882
US News & World Report Ranking: 47th
Poverty Rate: 13.42% (40th)
46) Mississippi (on pace with spending)
Funding Per Pupil: $8,919
US News & World Report Ranking: 43rd
Poverty Rate: 19.07% (50th)
45) Oklahoma (on pace with spending)
Funding Per Pupil: $9,353
US News & World Report Ranking: 44th
Poverty Rate: 14.56% (43rd)
44) Alabama (on pace with spending)
Funding Per Pupil: $9,636
US News & World Report Ranking: 45th
Poverty Rate: 14.96% (44th)
43) South Dakota (outperforms spending)
Funding Per Pupil: $9,913
US News & World Report Ranking: 29th
Poverty Rate: 11.98% (29th)
42) Arkansas (on pace with spending)
Funding Per Pupil: $9,976
US News & World Report Ranking: 38th
Poverty Rate: 15.47% (45th)
41) Kentucky (outperforms spending)
Funding Per Pupil: $10,010
US News & World Report Ranking: 33rd
Poverty Rate: 15.76% (46th)
40) Florida (significantly outperforms spending)
Funding Per Pupil: $10,098
US News & World Report Ranking: 16th
Poverty Rate: 12.40% (32nd)
39) Colorado (significantly outperforms spending)
Funding Per Pupil: $10,171
US News & World Report Ranking: 7th
Poverty Rate: 9.07% (7th)
38) Nevada (underperforms spending)
Funding Per Pupil: $10,305
US News & World Report Ranking: 48th
Poverty Rate: 11.83% (27th)
37) Texas (on pace with spending)
Funding Per Pupil: $10,314
US News & World Report Ranking: 35th
Poverty Rate: 13.13% (36th)
36) Missouri (outperforms spending)
Funding Per Pupil: $10,457
US News & World Report Ranking: 26th
Poverty Rate: 12.46% (33rd)
35) North Carolina (significantly outperforms spending)
Funding Per Pupil: $10,613
US News & World Report Ranking: 15th
Poverty Rate: 13.18% (37th)
34) South Carolina (underperforms spending)
Funding Per Pupil: $10,719
US News & World Report Ranking: 42nd
Poverty Rate: 13.79% (42nd)
33) Oregon (on pace with spending)
Funding Per Pupil: $10,862
US News & World Report Ranking: 37th
Poverty Rate: 11.62% (25th)
32) Georgia (on pace with spending)
Funding Per Pupil: $10,893
US News & World Report Ranking: 30th
Poverty Rate: 13.26% (39th)
31) West Virginia (underperforms spending)
Funding Per Pupil: $10,984
US News & World Report Ranking: 41st
Poverty Rate: 16.90% (47th)
30) Montana (underperforms spending)
Funding Per Pupil: $11,266
US News & World Report Ranking: 36th
Poverty Rate: 11.91% (28th)
29) New Mexico (significantly underperforms spending
Funding Per Pupil: $11,266
US News & World Report Ranking: 50th
Poverty Rate: 17.85% (48th)
28) Iowa (on pace with spending)
Funding Per Pupil: $11,266
US News & World Report Ranking: 24th
Poverty Rate: 10.49% (17th)
27) Washington (significantly outperforms spending)
Funding Per Pupil: $11,510
US News & World Report Ranking: 11th
Poverty Rate: 9.39% (11th)
26) California (underperforms spending)
Funding Per Pupil: $11,588
US News & World Report Ranking: 40th
Poverty Rate: 12.07% (30th)
25) North Dakota (underperforms spending)
Funding Per Pupil: $11,664
US News & World Report Ranking: 34th
Poverty Rate: 9.55% (10th)
24) Nebraska (outperforms spending)
Funding Per Pupil: $11,796
US News & World Report Ranking: 13th
Poverty Rate: 9.68% (13th)
23) Kansas (on pace with spending)
Funding Per Pupil: $11,939
US News & World Report Ranking: 27th
Poverty Rate: 10.92% (23th)
22) Louisiana (significantly underperforms spending)
Funding Per Pupil: $11,967
US News & World Report Ranking: 46th
Poverty Rate: 18.00% (49th)
21) Michigan (underperforms spending)
Funding Per Pupil: $11,987
US News & World Report Ranking: 32nd
Poverty Rate: 13.19% (38th)
20) Virginia (outperforms spending)
Funding Per Pupil: $11,967
US News & World Report Ranking: 10th
Poverty Rate: 9.37% (9th)
19) Indiana (outperforms spending)
Funding Per Pupil: $12,360
US News & World Report Ranking: 9th
Poverty Rate: 12.19% (31st)
18) Wisconsin (outperforms spending)
Funding Per Pupil: $12,435
US News & World Report Ranking: 8th
Poverty Rate: 10.43% (16th)
17) Illinois (outperforms spending)
Funding Per Pupil: $12,457
US News & World Rep0rt Ranking: 6th
Poverty Rate: 11.62% (26th)
16) Minnesota (on pace with spending)
Funding Per Pupil: $12,664
US News & World Report Ranking: 18th
Poverty Rate: 8.77% (5th)
15) Ohio (underperforming spending)
Funding Per Pupil: $12,811
US News & World Report Ranking: 20th
Poverty Rate: 13.02% (35th)
14) Maine (on pace with spending)
Funding Per Pupil: $13,666
US News & World Report Ranking: 12th
Poverty Rate: 10.52% (19th)
13) New Hampshire (outperforms spending)
Funding Per Pupil: $13,725
US News & World Report Ranking: 4th
Poverty Rate: 6.98% (1st)
12) Delaware (underperforms spending)
Funding Per Pupil: $14,335
US News & World Report Ranking: 22nd
Poverty Rate: 10.58% (20th)
11) Hawaii (significantly underperforms spending)
Funding Per Pupil: $14,987
US News & World Report Ranking: 28th
Poverty Rate: 8.62% (4th)
10) Pennsylvania (underperforms spending)
Funding Per Pupil: $15,023
US News & World Report Ranking: 17th
Poverty Rate: 11.31% (24th)
9) Rhode Island (significantly underperforms spending)
Funding Per Pupil: $15,023
US News & World Report Ranking: 17th
Poverty Rate: 10.60% (21st)
8) Maryland (underperforms spending)
Funding Per Pupil: $15,574
US News & World Report Ranking: 14th
Poverty Rate: 8.44% (3rd)
7) Massachusetts (outperforms spending)
Funding Per Pupil: $16,270
US News & World Report Ranking: 2nd
Poverty Rate: 9.11% (9th)
6) Alaska (SIGNIFICANTLY underperforms spending)
Funding Per Pupil: $16,576
US News & World Report Ranking: 49th
Poverty Rate: 10.05% (15th)
5) Vermont (on pace with spending)
Funding Per Pupil: $17,108
US News & World Report Ranking: 5th
Poverty Rate: 9.98% (14th)
4) Connecticut (on pace with spending)
Funding Per Pupil: $17,373
US News & World Report Ranking: 3rd
Poverty Rate: 9.38% (10th)
3) New Jersey (on pace with spending)
Funding Per Pupil: $18,874
US News & World Report Ranking: 1st
Poverty Rate: 8.93% (6th)
2) Wyoming (SIGNIFICANTLY underperforms spending)
Funding Per Pupil: $19,238
US News & World Report Ranking: 39th
Poverty Rate: 10.50% (18th)
1) New York (significantly underperforms spending)
Funding Per Pupil: $20,645
US News & World Report Ranking: 19th
Poverty Rate: 12.62% (34th)
