Thank Goodness for Mississippi (and Louisiana)
States like New Jersey can copy their playbook for educational improvements
In the New Jersey governor’s race, Democrat Mikie Sherrill is facing off against Republican Jack Ciattarelli. In their debate last week, Ciattarelli apparently highlighted the “Southern Surge” states like Mississippi, Louisiana, Tennessee, and Alabama, which have seen some of the more impressive academic outcomes in the last 5-10 years.
Sherrill didn’t appreciate the comparison and said this:
He keeps citing places like Louisiana and Mississippi, I think some of the worst schools in the entire nation. If that’s where he wants to drive us to, I think voters should be aware of that.
Ironically, Sherrill went on to talk about the importance of high-quality tutoring as a learning loss strategy and using phonics to boost 3rd grade reading scores. I applaud Sherrill for highlighting those, but, as Karen Vaites commented wryly on Twitter, “who wants to tell her?” It’s funny/ not funny that Sherrill is highlighting some of the same strategies used to great effect by the states she started off by bashing.
But I want to double back on Sherrill’s casual slams on Mississippi and Louisiana. Do they have some of the “worst schools” in the nation, as Sherrill claimed? And by implication, is New Jersey doing better than these states? The answer to both of those questions is no.
Sherrill’s confusion may stem from the fact that New Jersey does have pretty high student achievement scores, but this could be largely because New Jersey is a relatively wealthy state that spends a lot of money on its schools. Does that mean its schools are good? What value are the schools adding?
For example, here are the raw, unadjusted 4th grade math scores for these three states:
New Jersey: 240
Mississippi: 239
Louisiana: 235
New Jersey gets the slight nod here. It may not be as much of an advantage as old historical prejudices would lead you to believe, but it is still beating these Southern states. Go New Jersey!
But wait. Let’s start to break those down a bit. What are the 4th grade math scores for non-poor kids?
Mississippi: 256
Louisiana: 254
New Jersey: 254
Huh. That’s weird. New Jersey’s non-poor students are slightly underperforming those in Mississippi and Louisiana. What about low-income kids?
Mississippi: 234
Louisiana: 228
New Jersey: 222
Wow. In 2024, New Jersey’s poor kids scored 6 points lower in math than poor kids did in Louisiana and 12 points lower than in Mississippi. That should tell you something about which of these states has better schools.
I started with just one subject, one grade, and one student category (income), but the Urban Institute has taken this one step further. They factored in all the measurable forms of advantage and disadvantage to try to calculate “adjusted” scores by state. As you might anticipate by now, New Jersey looks much better on its raw scores than it does after you control for its advantages. Across 4th and 8th grade math and reading, New Jersey’s raw scores are higher than those in Mississippi and Louisiana, but once you dig in, those advantages start to disappear.
Remember the raw 4th grade math scores? They looked like this:
New Jersey: 240
Mississippi: 239
Louisiana: 235
But once adjust them for the state’s demographics, here’s what they look like:
Mississippi: 249
Louisiana: 245
New Jersey: 235
A slight advantage turns into a big disadvantage once you look under the hood. In fact, this same pattern appears in all the tested grades and subjects. New Jersey looks good on the unadjusted scores. Here are the raw 8th grade reading scores:
New Jersey: 266
Louisiana: 257
Mississippi: 254
And here’s where things stand after the demographic adjustment:
Louisiana: 265
Mississippi: 263
New Jersey: 259
Oh, and how much money does each state spend to get their results? According to the NEA, New Jersey spent $24,831 per student in 2023-24 while Louisiana spent $17,541 and Mississippi spent just $12,490.
In other words, I think Mississippi and Louisiana have a strong case to be made that their schools are performing considerably better than New Jersey’s are at a much lower cost. Organizations like WakeUpCallNJ are trying to help more people in the Garden State understand these dynamics.
Back in the old days some state leaders used to privately say, “thank goodness for Mississippi” because it could always be counted on to be worse. It was a punching bag. But that’s no longer the case, and Northern politicians like Sherrill need to update their talking points. Now we should be saying, “thank goodness for Mississippi (and Louisiana)” because they point the way to better outcomes for kids.
Reading List
The remarkable educational attainment gains of the reform era by
A popular charter faces closure to make room for an (under-enrolled, low-performing) LAUSD school (L.A. Times)
In Arkansas, teacher retention rates have improved but still remain below pre-pandemic levels
Future job projections have not been much better than extrapolating from recent trends
Massachusetts districts are screening for success in early literacy
Bravo!! Thank you for this breakdown! It's the same story, if not worse, in Wisconsin.
The variation in costs is another unbelievable metric. What do we "get" for our investments?
I think it is wrong to judge the effectiveness of a state's school system on a single metric. Indeed, Mississippi did have a surge in reading and math when the state did what all nations that have high achievement do. They created high expectations and created highly trained teachers in the science of reading (not comprehensively highly trained teachers). Mississippi's surge in achievement levels out after 8th grade. Other nations with high achievement devote adequate resources and hold teachers in high esteem. The US has not learned that lesson yet.