Wisconsin Scoreboard As a state, there’s lots of things we can point to by way of answering this simple question of how we are doing.

1. How Are We Doing?
Wisconsin2.org

2. As a state, there’s lots of things we can point to by way of answering
this simple question of how we are doing.
Generally speaking, any number by itself doesn’t
mean much, unless there is something we can
compare it with. Some of the numbers above may
mean something to us personally, but as a measure
of how Wisconsin is doing, we need to make the
comparison with other states.
Median Age 38.5
Median Household Income $52,627
Individuals Below Poverty Level 12.5%
No. of Farmers' Markets 295
Domestic water use 57 Gallons per person per day
Average Reading Score 268 Grade 8, NAEP 2013
How Are We Doing?

3. For example, if we look at median
household income, Wisconsin
appears to be performing
“adequately”, ranking 18th in the
country, more than $2,000 above
the U.S. average.
But well behind neighboring
Minnesota, at 8th.
Source: Census Bureau, Two-Year Average Household Income, 2011-12;
https://www.census.gov/hhes/www/income/data/statemedian/
1 MD 71,075 25 TX 50,999
2 NH 67,538 26 MI 49,957
3 CT 65,515 27 ME 49,944
4 NJ 65,166 28 NY 49,687
5 VA 64,278 29 OK 48,937
6 MA 64,146 30 SD 48,812
7 AK 61,139 31 KS 48,557
8 MN 60,411 32 AZ 48,340
9 WA 60,112 33 MO 48,247
10 CO 58,555 34 ID 48,186
11 HI 58,272 35 NV 47,679
12 UT 57,497 36 GA 47,527
13 ND 56,652 37 FL 46,059
14 WY 56,580 38 IN 45,766
15 CA 55,751 39 OH 44,978
16 NE 54,487 40 NC 43,852
17 VT 54,264 41 AL 43,472
18 WI 53,112 42 NM 43,142
19 RI 53,061 43 WV 43,124
20 DE 52,387 44 MT 43,104
21 IA 52,355 45 MT 43,104
22 OR 52,189 46 SC 42,661
23 IL 51,716 47 KY 40,887
24 PA 51,428 48 AR 40,591
Avg US 51,058 49 LA 40,296
50 MS 39,295
How Are We Doing?

4. Another perspective on household income is to look at it over time.
Wisconsin’s median household income ranking has held fairly steady
over the years, with a ranking generally in the 15th – 20th range.
Source: Census Bureau, Median Household Income by State, 1984-2012;
http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/income/data/statemedian/index.html
How Are We Doing?

5. Key to the future of this state, of this country, is how well our kids are
being educated. The NAEP (National Assessment of Educational
Progress) is an exam given every two years, across the country, that
provides a look at how students are performing.
In 2013, the scores and ranking of Wisconsin 8th graders were:
WI Score US Average WI Rank in US
Reading 268 266 24
Math 289 284 13
http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/statecomparisons/acrossyear.aspx?usrSelections=1,MAT,2,1,across,0,2
How Are We Doing?

6. Wisconsin did better than Texas in Math. Right?
Wisconsin Texas
Math 289 288
How Are We Doing?

7. Wisconsin did better than Texas overall. Yet each race scored less than
Texas. How can that be?
Wisconsin Texas
Overall 289 288
White 296 300
Black 252 273
Hispanic 273 281
Asian 290 319
How Are We Doing?

8. The reason Wisconsin does better than Texas overall is because it has a
very different demographic distribution. Wisconsin has far more whites
than Texas, while Texas has far more Hispanics – and since whites have
higher scores than Hispanics, Wisconsin is at a relative advantage.
8th Grade Reading
Wisconsin Texas
White 296 300
Black 252 273
Hispanic 273 281
Asian 290 319
Overall 289 288
% Distribution by Race
74%
10%
10%
4%
31%
13%
51%
4%
WI
TX
How Are We Doing?

9. The Wisconsin vs Texas score comparison is a classic example of the
fundamental challenge working with any data: to make an apples-to-
apples comparison.
vs.
How Are We Doing?

10. To obtain an apples-to-apples comparison between Wisconsin and
Texas, let’s set both of them with the same demographic distribution.
And let’s have that distribution be the same as the country as a whole.
White
Black
Hispanic
Asian
% Distribution by Race
74%
10%
10%
4%
31%
13%
51%
4%
52%
16%
24%
5%
WI
TX
US
How Are We Doing?
Note: The demographic distribution is for 2011. Demographic data was only available for 2001 and 2011.

11. When we adjust both states, by assuming both have the same
demographic distribution as the US overall, Wisconsin’s score drops by 6
points while Texas’s increases by 4.
8th Grade Math
Wisconsin Texas % Dist
White 296 300 52%
Black 252 273 16%
Hispanic 273 281 24%
Asian 290 319 5%
Original
Overall
289 288
Adjusted
Overall
283 292
How Are We Doing?

12. How Are We Doing?
Similarly, 8th grade reading scores drop by 5 points for Wisconsin, and
increase by 5 points for Texas when each is assumed to have the same
demographic distribution as the US.
8th Grade Reading
Wisconsin Texas % Dist
White 273 279 52%
Black 237 253 16%
Hispanic 258 255 24%
Asian 272 285 5%
Original
Overall
268 264
Adjusted
Overall
263 269

13. How Are We Doing?
Original state rankings for 8th Grade Reading; WI ranks 24th.
Rank All by State
40 to 50
30 to 39
20 to 29
10 to 19
0 to 9
Reading

14. How Are We Doing?
State rankings for 8th Grade Reading, adjusted for demographics; WI
ranks 43rd. Ohio is the only Midwestern state in the top 20.
Rank All by State
40 to 50
30 to 39
20 to 29
10 to 19
0 to 9
In a recent paper examining trends in student performance, the authors found “students in Wisconsin, Michigan, Minnesota, and
Indiana were among those making the smallest average gains between 1992 and 2011. … Unlike in the South, the reform movement
has made little headway within midwestern states, at least until very recently. Many of the midwestern states had proud education
histories symbolized by internationally acclaimed land-grant universities, which have become the pride of East Lansing, Michigan;
Madison, Wisconsin; St. Paul, Minnesota; and Lafayette, Indiana. Satisfaction with past accomplishments may have dampened
interest in the school reform agenda sweeping through southern, border, and some western states. “ (Achievement Growth, p. 14)
Reading

15. How Are We Doing?
Initially, Wisconsin ranks 13th in Math…
Math
Rank All by State
40 to 50
30 to 39
20 to 29
10 to 19
0 to 9

16. How Are We Doing?
…but falls to 29th when the results are adjusted for demography.
Math
Rank All by State
40 to 50
30 to 39
20 to 29
10 to 19
0 to 9

17. How Are We Doing?
Compared with a decade ago, Wisconsin’s ranking in the US has fallen
from 17th to 24th in Reading, and from 10th to 13th in Math. Rankings are
much lower when adjusted for demographic distribution.
Reading & Math
2013 vs 2003
US Score WI Score
WI Rank in
US
Adjusted
WI Score
Adjusted
WI Rank
Reading
2013 266 268 24 263 43
2003 263 266 17 259 39
Math
2013 284 289 13 283 29
2003 278 284 10 276 29
Note: The 2011 demographic distribution was used to adjust the 2013 NAEP results, while the 2001 demographic data was used for the 2003 NAEP.

18. How Are We Doing?
Wisconsin is slipping behind. Our economy could be doing better. Job
growth is slow. We need to re-energize this state.
Key to the state’s future is the education of its children. The “true”
results on how our state is faring suggests here again we are falling
behind much of the rest of the nation.
Let’s look forward. Let’s set some stretch targets for the state to inspire
and guide the decisions we make to prepare this state for the future.
By 2030, let’s see Wisconsin achieve:
• Be ranked in the top 10 states for GDP per person.
• Be ranked in the top 10 states for the NAEP reading, math, and
science scores.

19. How Are We Doing?
So far we have only looked at Wisconsin versus the rest of the nation.
But we live today in a global economy, and we need to examine how we
compare with the rest of the world as well.
Every three years, PISA (Program for International Student Assessment)
tests 15-year olds on in reading, math, and science. The focus of these
tests is on 34 OECD countries, with others nations participating as well.
To keep it simple, we will focus here on how the US compares with the
rest of the PISA test-taking countries, and then attempt to see how
Wisconsin fits in.
Participating Countries
PISA – International Ranking
Note: Chile, Estonia & Slovenia were added in 2006; their scores for 2000 & 2003 are estimated here based on 2006-12 results.
Europe Non-Europe
Austria Italy Australia
Belgium Luxembourg Canada
Czech Rep Netherlands Chile
Denmark Norway Israel
Estonia Poland Japan
Finland Portugal Korea
France Slovak Rep Mexico
Germany Slovenia New Zealand
Greece Spain Turkey
Hungary Sweden US
Iceland Switzerland
Ireland UK

20. How Are We Doing?
On every occasion, the US has ranked below the OECD average in Math,
and has hovered around the average in Reading.
PISA – International Ranking
Any other countries you want to add here???
In 2012, 3 US states took the PISA. Their scores:
Reading Math
MA: 527 514
CT: 521 506
FL: 492 467
WI (Est.) 503 508
Wisconsin estimate based on performance relative to MA, CT, FL, and US, on NAEP 2011-13 average.
460
480
500
520
540
560
580
2000 2003 2006 2009 2012
PISA: Reading
US
Canada
Singapore
OECD Avg
460
480
500
520
540
560
580
2000 2003 2006 2009 2012
PISA: Math

21. How Are We Doing?
Of the 34 OECD nations participating, the US is consistently in the
bottom third in Math, and around the middle in ranking in Reading.
The US ranked 17th and 27th in Reading and Math in 2012.
Based on Wisconsin NAEP results, it would have ranked 13th in both subjects in 2012.
PISA – International Ranking

22. How Are We Doing?
A study by Hanushek et al*
examined by US state the
percentage of students scoring
at a proficient level or above
on the NAEP. They then
compared the states with other
countries, using PISA.
The table shows how US states
compare with other countries
in Math, based on the 2009
PISA and 2011 NAEP.
* Source:
PISA – International Ranking, Math
Table 1 from: http://w w w .hks.harvard.edu/pepg/PDF/Papers/PEPG11-03_GloballyChallenged.pdf
Percentages of students in the class of 2011 at the profieicient level in math per state.
Foreign jurisdictions with similar and higher percentages at the proficient level in math in overall student population.
State
%
Proficient
Significantly
Outperformed by
1 Massachusetts 50.7 6 Canada • Japan • Netherlands • New Zealand • Sw itzerland
2 Minnesota 43.1 11 Australia • Belgium • France • Germany • Netherlands
3 Vermont 41.4 14 Australia • Denmark • Estonia • France • Germany
4 North Dakota 41.0 16 Denmark • Estonia • France • Iceland
5 New Jersey 40.4 14 Australia • Austria • Denmark • France • Germany
6 Kansas 40.2 16 Austria • Denmark • Estonia • France • Slovenia
7 South Dakota 39.1 16 Austria • Denmark • France • Hungary • Sw eden
8 Pennsylvania 38.3 16 Austria • Denmark • France • Hungary • Sw eden
9 New Hampshire 37.9 18 Austria • Denmark • France • Hungary • Sw eden
10 Montana 37.6 18 Austria • France • Hungary • Poland • Sw eden
11 Virginia 37.5 17 Czech Rep • France • Hungary • Poland • Sw eden
12 Colorado 37.4 18 Austria • France • Hungary • Poland • Sw eden
13 Wisconsin 37.0 18 Czech Rep • France • Hungary • Poland • Sw eden
14 Maryland 36.5 18 Czech Rep • France • Hungary • Poland • U.K.
15 Wyoming 36.0 18 Czech Rep • France • Poland • Portugal • U.K.
16 Washington 35.9 19 Czech Rep • France • Hungary • Poland • U.K.
17 Ohio 35.4 18 Czech Rep • France • Poland • Portugal • U.K.
18 Iow a 35.2 19 Czech Rep • France • Poland • Portugal • U.K.
19 Indiana 35.1 19 Czech Rep • France • Poland • Portugal • U.K.
20 Oregon 34.8 20 Czech Rep • Hungary • Poland • Portugal • U.K.
21 Connecticut 34.7 19 France • Poland • Portugal • Spain • U.K.
22 Texas 34.7 21 Czech Rep • Hungary • Poland • Portugal • U.K.
23 Nebraska 34.6 20 Czech Rep • Hungary • Poland • Portugal • U.K.
24 North Carolina 34.5 21 Czech Rep • Hungary • Poland • Portugal • U.K.
25 Maine 34.1 22 Czech Rep • Hungary • Poland • Portugal • U.K.
26 Idaho 34.1 22 Czech Rep • Hungary • Poland • Portugal • U.K.
27 Utah 32.4 26 Italy • Poland • Portugal • Spain • U.K.
28 Alaska 32.2 26 Italy • Poland • Portugal • Spain • U.K.
US 32.2 22 Italy • Latvia • Poland • Spain • U.K.
29 South Carolina 31.9 26 Italy • Poland • Portugal • Spain • U.K.
30 Delaw are 31.3 28 Hungary • Italy • Portugal • Spain • U.K.
31 Illinois 30.8 27 Czech Rep • Italy • Portugal • Spain • U.K.
32 New York 30.2 28 Hungary • Italy • Portugal • Spain • U.K.
33 Missouri 29.9 28 Hungary • Italy • Portugal • Spain • U.K.
34 Michigan 28.9 30 Ireland • Italy • Lithuania • Portugal • Spain
35 Rhode Island 27.7 34 Latvia • Lithuania
36 Florida 27.4 34 Greece • Latvia • Lithuania
37 Kentucky 27.3 34 Latvia • Lithuania
38 Arizona 26.3 34 Greece • Latvia • Lithuania
39 Georgia 24.7 35 Greece • Latvia • Russia
40 Arkansas 24.4 35 Croatia • Greece • Israel • Latvia • Russia
41 California 23.9 36 Greece • Russia
42 Tennessee 23.1 36 Croatia • Greece • Israel • Russia • Turkey
43 Nevada 23.0 36 Croatia • Greece • Israel • Russia
44 Oklahoma 21.3 36 Croatia • Greece • Israel • Russia • Turkey
45 Haw aii 21.2 38 Croatia • Israel • Russia • Turkey
46 Louisiana 19.0 39 Bulgaria • Croatia • Israel • Serbia • Turkey
47 West Virginia 18.5 41 Bulgaria • Turkey
48 Alabama 18.2 39 Bulgaria • Croatia • Israel • Serbia • Turkey
49 New Mexico 17.4 41 Bulgaria • Serbia • Turkey
50 Mississippi 13.6 43 Bulgaria • Trin & Tobago • Uruguay
51 Dist of Columbia 8.0 48 Kazakhstan • Mexico • Thailand
US Asians 49.6
US Whites 41.8
US Blacks 11.0
US Hispanics 15.4
Countries w ith similar percentages of proficient students
http://w w w .hks.harvard.edu/pepg/PDF/Papers/PEPG11-
03_GloballyChallenged.pdf

23. How Are We Doing?
The table shows how US
states compare with other
countries in Reading, based
on the 2009 PISA and 2011
NAEP.
Wisconsin ranks 19th in the
country.
PISA – International Ranking, Reading
Table 2 http://w w w .hks.harvard.edu/pepg/PDF/Papers/PEPG11-03_GloballyChallenged.pdf
Percentages of students in the class of 2011 at the proficient level in reading per state.
Foreign jurisdictions with similar and higher percentages at the proficeint level in reading in overall student populaiton.
State
%
Proficient
Significantly
Outperformed by
1 Massachusetts 43.0 1 Canada • Finland • Japan • Korea • Singapore
2 Vermont 42.1 3 Canada • Japan • Korea • New Zealand • Singapore
3 New Jersey 39.0 5 Australia • Belgium • Canada • Japan • Netherlands
4 Montana 38.9 5 Australia • Belgium • Canada • Japan • Netherlands
5 New Hampshire 37.2 8 Australia • Belgium • Liechtenstein • Netherlands
6 Connecticut 37.1 7 Australia • Belgium • France • Japan • Netherlands
7 Maine 36.9 8 Australia • Belgium • Liechtenstein • Netherlands
8 South Dakota 36.8 5 Australia • Canada • France • Japan • Netherlands
9 Minnesota 36.6 8 Australia • Belgium • Liechtenstein • Netherlands
10 Pennsylvania 36.4 8 Australia • Belgium • France • Liechtenstein • Netherlands
11 Ohio 35.9 8 Australia • Belgium • France • Liechtenstein • Netherlands
12 Iow a 35.7 8 Australia • Belgium • France • Liechtenstein • Netherlands
13 Kansas 35.2 9 Belgium • France • Liechtenstein • Netherlands
14 Nebraska 35.0 9 Belgium • France • Liechtenstein • Netherlands
15 Colorado 34.6 8 Australia • Belgium • France • Germany • Netherlands
16 Washington 34.1 10 France • Germany • Netherlands • Norw ay • Sw itzerland
17 Oregon 34.0 8 Australia • France • Germany • Poland • Sw itzerland
18 Virginia 33.7 9 Belgium • France • Germany • Netherlands • Poland
19 Wisconsin 33.2 10 France • Germany • Hungary • Netherlands • Poland
20 Wyoming 33.2 10 France • Germany • Netherlands • Norw ay • Sw itzerland
21 Maryland 33.2 10 France • Germany • Netherlands • Poland • Sw eden
22 New York 32.2 10 France • Germany • Hungary • Netherlands • Poland
23 North Dakota 32.2 10 France • Germany • Hungary • Netherlands • Poland
24 Idaho 31.6 10 France • Germany • Netherlands • Poland • U.K.
US 31.2 10 France • Germany • Netherlands • Poland • U.K.
25 Indiana 31.1 10 France • Germany • Netherlands • Poland • U.K.
26 Missouri 31.0 10 France • Germany • Netherlands • Poland • U.K.
27 Delaw are 30.5 10 France • Germany • Netherlands • Poland • U.K.
28 Utah 30.1 10 France • Germany • Netherlands • Poland • U.K.
29 Illinois 29.8 10 France • Germany • Poland • Taiw an • U.K.
30 Michigan 28.2 14 Germany • Italy • Poland • Taiw an • U.K.
31 Florida 28.0 15 Italy • Netherlands • Poland • Taiw an • U.K.
32 North Carolina 28.0 15 Israel • Italy • Netherlands • Poland • U.K.
33 Kentucky 27.7 15 Greece • Italy • Netherlands • Poland • U.K.
34 Texas 27.5 16 Greece • Italy • Netherlands • Portugal • U.K.
35 Rhode Island 27.2 19 Greece • Hungary • Italy • Portugal • U.K.
36 Alaska 27.1 19 Greece • Hungary • Italy • Portugal • U.K.
37 Oklahoma 26.1 20 Greece • Hungary • Italy • Portugal • Slovenia
38 Georgia 25.6 20 Greece • Hungary • Israel • Italy • Portugal
39 Tennessee 25.6 20 Greece • Hungary • Israel • Italy • Portugal
40 Arkansas 25.4 21 Greece • Hungary • Israel • Italy • Portugal
41 South Carolina 24.6 21 Greece • Hungary • Israel • Italy • Portugal
42 Arizona 24.3 23 Denmark • Greece • Israel • Portugal • Spain
43 West Virginia 22.9 28 Croatia • Czech Rep • Greece • Portugal • Spain
44 Nevada 21.5 31 Austria • Croatia • Czech Rep • Slovakia • Spain
45 California 21.5 31 Austria • Croatia • Czech Rep • Slovakia • Spain
46 Alabama 21.2 31 Austria • Croatia • Czech Rep • Slovakia • Spain
47 Haw aii 20.3 34 Croatia • Latvia • Slovakia
48 Louisiana 19.4 35 Croatia • Latvia • Lithuania
49 Mississippi 17.4 37 Bulgaria • Croatia • Lithuania • Russia • Turkey
50 New Mexico 17.3 39 Bulgaria • Lithuania • Turkey
51 Dist of Columbia 12.1 41 Bulgaria • Chile • Trinidad • Turkey
Countries w ith similar percentages of proficient students

24. How Are We Doing?
Unfortunately, we do not have the detailed data to make an accurate
estimate of how Wisconsin would have performed on the PISA if it had a
demographic distribution comparable to the US overall.
The NAEP results showed US Asians and Whites performed far better
than US Blacks and Hispanics. Adjusting the WI results for that
demography would likely place the state in the middle of the pack
internationally in Reading, and in the bottom third for Math.
PISA – International Ranking