{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.024088093599449415, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.161016949152542, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
International Achievement Differences: An Assessment of a New Perspective

In recent years, a new perspective has challenged the conventional wisdom that U.S. students do poorly in international assessments. It holds that sampling biases and a different curricular arrangement have made U.S. achievement appear low and that a focus on rankings has masked what are really small achievement differences among countries. To assess this perspective, I review evidence from the major international assessments of the past two decades, including the recent Third International Math and Science Study (TIMSS). I argue for a middle ground. U.S. performance has not been consistently poor, but varies by subject and grade. Ranks sometimes have exaggerated differences, but even developed countries often differ greatly in achievement. Contrary to a common misconception, the assessments have not unfairly compared the mass of U.S. students to small academic elites in other countries. Our poor math performance is not a simple matter of selection bias or course sequencing, but also reflects real deficiencies in curricular focus and teaching. These have been linked to our assembly-line cultural conception of knowledge and schooling. To ground the international findings, I summarize evidence on domestic indicators. Although trends have been generally stable, U.S. student achievement has been weak for several decades. Fundamental school reform is warranted.