Oklahoma ranked 50th in education: Who creates rankings? Are they an accurate snapshot? – The Oklahoman

Analysis of Oklahoma’s Educational Standing in Relation to Sustainable Development Goal 4

Executive Summary

Recent analyses of state-level education systems have positioned Oklahoma among the lowest-performing in the United States. This report examines these rankings through the framework of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), with a primary focus on SDG 4 (Quality Education). The findings indicate significant challenges for the state in meeting key international benchmarks for inclusive, equitable, and quality education for all.

Assessment Based on WalletHub Quality Metrics

A report by the personal finance website WalletHub ranked Oklahoma 50th out of 51 (including Washington, D.C.) for education system quality. The methodology for this ranking incorporates several indicators that directly correlate with targets under SDG 4.

Core Metrics and Alignment with SDG 4 Targets

• Student Outcomes and Proficiency (SDG Target 4.1): Metrics such as math and reading test scores, dropout rates, and graduation rates are fundamental to assessing progress toward ensuring all children complete quality primary and secondary education.
• Teacher Quality (SDG Target 4.c): The analysis included pupil-to-teacher ratios and the percentage of licensed or certified teachers, which are direct measures of the supply of qualified educators.
• Equity and Access (SDG Target 4.5): The specific inclusion of the graduation rate among low-income students highlights disparities in educational outcomes, a key concern of SDG 4’s goal to eliminate inequality and ensure equal access for the vulnerable.
• School Performance: The percentage of schools listed in national rankings (U.S. News & World Report) and the number of National Blue Ribbon Schools per capita were also considered.

Subjectivity and Politicization in Educational Rankings

It is crucial to note that educational rankings can be subjective and reflect the priorities of the issuing organization. This variability impacts the ability to form a universally accepted baseline for progress, a challenge relevant to SDG 16 (Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions), which calls for effective and transparent institutions.

Contrasting Methodologies

1. Center for Education Reform: This advocacy group ranked Oklahoma 10th in its “Parent Power Index,” lauding the state’s school choice policies. This ranking prioritizes policy frameworks over direct student performance outcomes.
2. Annie E. Casey Foundation: The KIDS COUNT Data Book, which focuses on child well-being, ranked Oklahoma 48th in education. Its assessment is tied to broader indicators of well-being under SDG 10 (Reduced Inequalities), using four data points:
   • Reading and math proficiency
   • Percentage of young children not in school
   • Share of high school students not graduating on time

The National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP)

The Nation’s Report Card, issued by the NAEP, is considered the most reliable instrument for state-by-state comparisons of academic achievement. It directly measures progress toward SDG Target 4.1, which emphasizes proficiency in literacy and numeracy.

Key Findings from NAEP

• The 2024 report indicated that Oklahoma’s fourth and eighth-grade students continue to perform below the national average in both reading and mathematics.
• Academic performance has shown little improvement since 2022, suggesting stagnation in achieving foundational educational goals.
• While NAEP provides a standardized benchmark, its governing board sets its own proficiency levels and designs the assessment, a factor to consider in its interpretation.

Analysis of Sustainable Development Goals in the Article

1. Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?

The article primarily addresses issues related to the following Sustainable Development Goals:

• SDG 4: Quality Education
  
  This is the most central SDG to the article. The entire text revolves around the quality of Oklahoma’s education system, comparing it to other states using various metrics like test scores, graduation rates, and teacher qualifications. The article discusses rankings from WalletHub, the Annie E. Casey Foundation, and the Nation’s Report Card, all of which evaluate the effectiveness and quality of primary and secondary schooling.
• SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities
  
  This goal is connected through the specific mention of disparities in educational outcomes. The article highlights that one of the metrics used by WalletHub for its quality ranking is the “Graduation rate among low-income students.” This directly points to the issue of inequality within the education system, where outcomes differ based on socioeconomic status.

2. What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?

Based on the details provided in the article, the following specific SDG targets can be identified:

1. Target 4.1: By 2030, ensure that all girls and boys complete free, equitable and quality primary and secondary education leading to relevant and effective learning outcomes.
   
   This target is directly relevant as the article discusses various measures of educational outcomes, such as “Math and reading test scores,” “dropout rate,” “graduation rate,” and performance on “SAT and ACT scores.” The Nation’s Report Card, which measures proficiency in reading and math for fourth and eighth graders, is a key tool for assessing progress toward this target.
2. Target 4.2: By 2030, ensure that all girls and boys have access to quality early childhood development, care and pre-primary education so that they are ready for primary education.
   
   This target is implied by the mention of the Annie E. Casey Foundation’s KIDS COUNT Data Book, which uses “the percentage of young children not in school” as one of its four key data points for ranking education systems. This metric assesses access to early education.
3. Target 4.c: By 2030, substantially increase the supply of qualified teachers, including through international cooperation for teacher training in developing countries, especially least developed countries and small island developing States.
   
   The article explicitly mentions two metrics that relate to this target: the “Pupil-to-teacher ratio” and the “Share of licensed or certified teachers.” These indicators are used to evaluate the availability and quality of the teaching workforce, which is a cornerstone of providing quality education.
4. Target 10.2: By 2030, empower and promote the social, economic and political inclusion of all, irrespective of age, sex, disability, race, ethnicity, origin, religion or economic or other status.
   
   This target is addressed through the specific metric of “Graduation rate among low-income students.” Analyzing educational achievement based on economic status is a way to measure inclusion and equity within the system, as called for by this target.

3. Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?

Yes, the article explicitly lists several indicators used by different organizations to rank Oklahoma’s education system. These can be directly used to measure progress towards the identified targets.

• For Target 4.1 (Quality Primary and Secondary Education):
  • Math and reading test scores
  • Dropout rate
  • Projected high school graduation rate increase
  • Share of high school students who don’t graduate on time
  • Advanced placement exam scores
  • SAT and ACT scores
  • Share of graduates who completed SAT or ACT

  These indicators directly measure the “relevant and effective learning outcomes” mentioned in the target.

• For Target 4.2 (Access to Early Childhood Education):
  • The percentage of young children not in school

  This indicator, used by the Annie E. Casey Foundation, measures participation in early education.

• For Target 4.c (Supply of Qualified Teachers):
  • Pupil-to-teacher ratio
  • Share of licensed or certified teachers

  These metrics provide a quantitative measure of the teacher supply and their qualification levels.

• For Target 10.2 (Inclusion and Equity):
  • Graduation rate among low-income students

  This indicator measures educational disparities and tracks progress towards ensuring equitable outcomes for students from different economic backgrounds.

4. Summary Table of SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

Source: oklahoman.com