State Education Rankings: The Best And Worst For Math And Science

In recently released rankings of how states' primary education systems are preparing students for careers in engineering, Massachusetts, Minnesota and New Jersey top the list. Mississippi trails as the worst in the country, following West Virginia and Louisiana.

The Science and Engineering Readiness Index (SERI) measures how high school students are performing in physics and calculus -- based on publicly available data, including Advanced Placement scores, National Assessment of Educational Progress reports, teacher certification requirements by state and physics class enrollment data.

The SERI was developed by Susan Wite from the Statistical Research Center at the American Institute of Physics and physicist Paul Cottle of Florida State University.

The SERI score given to each state is on a scale of 1 to 5 and reflects how well states perform and allow opportunities for success in physics and math education and teacher qualifications.

The numbers below reveal that few states are performing at high levels, and most are poorly preparing students for science, technology and engineering.

According to a statement last week, Cottle said that although the SERI scores do not compare states to schools' performances in other countries, even the American leader -- Massachusetts -- would struggle to compete with countries like China or Singapore.

For years, the U.S. has lagged behind other countries in math and science. A 2009 study showed that American students ranked 25th among 34 countries, behind nations like China, Singapore, South Korea, Hong Kong and Finland.

State Rankings for Math and Science Education

	Rank	State	SERI
Well Above Average	1	Massachusetts	4.82
	2	Minnesota	4.06
	3	New Jersey	4.04
	4	New Hampshire	4.01
	5	New York	3.94
Above Average	6	Virginia	3.73
	7	Maryland	3.57
	8	Connecticut	3.28
	9	Indiana	3.28
	10	Maine	3.24
Average	11	Florida	3.13
	12	Illinois	3.08
	13	South Dakota	3.08
	14	Wisconsin	3.06
	15	Colorado	3.04
	16	Kansas	3.00
	17	Kentucky	3.00
	18	Vermont	2.93
	19	Georgia	2.88
	20	Washington	2.86
	21	Utah	2.85
	22	Pennsylvania	2.80
	23	Tennessee	2.67
	24	Ohio	2.64
	25	Delaware	2.60
	26	Michigan	2.60
	27	Oregon	2.58
	28	Wyoming	2.58
	29	Montana	2.53
Below Average	30	Idaho	2.47
	31	Texas	2.45
	32	North Dakota	2.40
	33	Missouri	2.39
	34	California	2.38
	35	Rhode Island	2.38
	36	North Carolina	2.34
	37	Hawaii	2.29
	38	Iowa	2.25
	39	Alaska	2.20
	40	South Carolina	2.20
	41	Arkansas	2.14
Far Below Average	42	Oklahoma	2.01
	43	Nebraska	1.97
	44	Nevada	1.93
	45	Arizona	1.91
	46	New Mexico	1.72
	47	Alabama	1.60
	48	Louisiana	1.59
	49	West Virginia	1.58
	50	Mississippi	1.11
National Average	--	--	2.82

Loading Slideshow

• 10. Wayland High School, U.S. News Best High Schools National Rank: 478

  Wayland, Mass. <a href="http://whs.wayland.k12.ma.us/" target="_hplink">School website.</a>

• 9. Monta Vista High School, 97

  Cupertino, Calif. <a href="http://www.mvhs.fuhsd.org/" target="_hplink">School website.</a>

• 8. Stuyvesant High School, 58

  New York, N.Y. <a href="http://www.stuy.edu/" target="_hplink">School website.</a>

• 7. Acton-Boxborough Regional High School, 289

  Acton, Mass. <a href="http://ab.mec.edu/abrhs/" target="_hplink">School website.</a>

• 6. Lynbrook High School, 128

  San Jose, Calif. <a href="http://www.lhs.fuhsd.org/" target="_hplink">School website.</a>

• 5. The Charter School of Wilmington, 47

  Wilmington, Del. <a href="http://charterschool.org/" target="_hplink">School website.</a>

• 4. Henry M. Gunn High School, 112

  Palo Alto, Calif. <a href="http://gunn.pausd.org/" target="_hplink">School website.</a>

• 3. Troy High School, 375

  Fullerton, Calif. <a href="http://www.troyhigh.com/" target="_hplink">School website.</a>

• 2. Thomas Jefferson High School for Science and Technology, 2

  Alexandria, Va. <a href="http://www.tjhsst.edu/" target="_hplink">School website.</a>

• 1. High Technology High School, 10

  Lincroft, N.J. <a href="http://www.hths.mcvsd.org/" target="_hplink">School website.</a>

Comments

[ben kenobe]

12:11 AM on 09/08/2011

Examine this map, with the exception of West Virginia, the below average states are exclusively the most multicultural states in the USA. The fact that liberals refuse to live in multicultural states speaks volumes on the failures of the policy. USA has the highest paid teachers in the world, what differentiates us from the most educated countries in the world is that they haven't been completely demoralized by liberals. Liberalism is an epic failure

[rfmaneater]

04:19 PM on 08/03/2011

UNION TEACHER STATES VS. NON UNION TEACHER STATES

WELL ABOVE AVG. 5 ------------- 0

ABOVE AVERAGE 4 -------------- 1

AVERAGE 13 --------------- 7

BELOW AVERAGE 4 ------------- 7

WELL BELOW AVG 2 --------------- 7

[LesCap]

12:06 PM on 07/26/2011

Unlike the rest of the world....our, perpetually, conservative Government.....believes our nation will be better served if the children are forced to learn two versions of math if they care to explore anything other than the very simplest ideas of math and science.

“Three countries use non-metric measurement systems: Liberia, Myanmar, and the United States.” ..the rest of the world uses the metrics system. via Wikipedia

[jacobisrael]

12:53 PM on 07/24/2011

The most obvious disconnect between this study and reality is that this study puts Massachusetts at first place, while their ACTUAL performance on credible worldwide standardized tests like SAT math puts them at 36th place.

Many of these low scoring states like North Dakota, and Iowa, and MInnesota, actually score MORE than 100 points higher just in SAT math. They also score even higher in SAT verbal.

iow, the study was contrived to attempt to make a political point.

[S Andersen]

06:52 PM on 07/25/2011

Either you did not read the article carefully enough or your comment is contrived to make a political point.

Permit me to help you make the distinction between the SATs and the SERI. The SAT measures literacy and writing skills. The SERI measures, as the article states, physics and calculus. Comparing SAT results to SERI results is, pardon the cliche, apples and oranges.

[jacobisrael]

09:33 PM on 07/30/2011

SAT is not just literacy and writing. The most important part of SAT is the math part, and these are the scores which were posted for Massachusetts. But also there's a strong correlation between states with high SAT verbal skills and those with high SAT math skills, and most likely there is also with SERI.

What IS apples and oranges is to claim that Massachusetts ranks first in some kind of contrived study while it ranks 35th in both SAT math and SAT verbal.

[sociopathz101]

02:44 PM on 07/20/2011

My state has potential, but potential means nothing when there is no support from the state. We can teach only what we have and cannot get into subjects extensively. We have advanced math and science classes but with limited everything, I am not surprised by my states marks it's sad because we are having a growth in liberal mindset and direction but it will be a long time before we can be pulled from where we're at now. I'm in Oklahoma.

[jacobisrael]

01:23 PM on 07/17/2011

47 Pennsylvania ......... 461
48 North Carolina ....... 454
49 Georgia .............. 448
50 District of Columbia . 445
51 South Carolina ....... 443

[Entropy113]

10:02 AM on 08/12/2011

*citation needed.

[mindstaterev]

02:35 PM on 08/29/2011

If you did any research at all on this, you'd see the highest performing states are the ones with the lowest percentage of students taking the SAT.

The Dakotas only have 4% of students take the SAT--those who are planning on going to college or have "potential". In other words, it's self selecting so not a good measurement to use comparing states.

[jacobisrael]

06:34 PM on 08/31/2011

“If you did any research at all on this, you'd see the highest performing states are the ones with the lowest percentage of students taking the SAT."

What you're saying is that there's an inverse correlation between the percent of students who take the test, and the state's average SAT score? This is partially true. But it accounts only for about 20-30%.

[jacobisrael]

01:23 PM on 07/17/2011

22 Colorado ............. 518
23 Ohio ................. 515
24 Idaho ................ 511
25 Oregon ............... 499
26 Arizona .............. 496
27 Washington ........... 494
28 New Hampshire ........ 491
29 Alaska ............... 489
30 California ........... 485
31 West Virginia......... 484
32 Nevada ............... 483
33 Hawaii ............... 482
34 Maryland ............. 479
35 New Jersey ........... 478
36 Connecticut .......... 477
37 Massachusetts ........ 477
38 Texas ................ 474
39 New York ............. 473
40 Vermont .............. 472
41 Maine ................ 469
42 Florida .............. 469
43 Virginia ............. 468
44 Delaware ............. 468
45 Indiana............... 467
46 Rhode Island ......... 463

[jacobisrael]

01:20 PM on 07/17/2011

Note how much different the following ranking is from the contrived ranking above, which gives a lot of credit to states for questionable and very subjective criteria which has little to do with reality:

Rank State SAT Math
1 North Dakota ......... 592
2 Iowa ................. 583
3 Minnesota ............ 579
4 Wisconsin ............ 572
5 Utah ................. 563
6 South Dakota ......... 563
7 Illinois ............. 560
8 Kansas ............... 557
9 Nebraska ............. 556
10 Missouri.............. 550
11 Michigan ............. 549
12 Tennessee ............ 543
13 Mississippi .......... 540
14 Alabama .............. 538
15 Montana .............. 536
16 Oklahoma ............. 536
17 Louisiana ............ 535
18 New Mexico ........... 530
19 Wyoming .............. 525
20 Arkansas ............. 523
21 Kentucky ............. 522

[Stephen Rodenbough]

01:47 PM on 07/15/2011

This is why we need to have FEDERAL standards for Public Education so there is no loss of quality of schooling when one moves from Boston,MA to Biloxi, MS. We already have Federal Funding,it's time for Uncle Sam to start pulling the strings already attached to the money they give!

[sobrien]

04:12 PM on 07/19/2011

Follow the money - see how each state's funding influences the quality. States do not have low standards - they just do not fund them.

[Larry Motuz]

05:13 PM on 07/14/2011

I compared these state rankings in math and science with Red States versus Blue States at: http://www.vaughns-1-pagers.com/politics/red-blue-states-summary.htm

This is the result.

Well above Average 100% Blue 0 % Red

Above Average 80% Blue 20 % Red

Above Average plus 90% 10%

Average 47% Blue 53% Red

Below Average 25% Blue 75% Red

Far Below Average 0% Blue 100% Red

Below Average minus 14% Blue 86% Red

This is very disturbing and points to an educational deficit being a cultural and political divide in America.

Source: Myself

[sobrien]

04:15 PM on 07/19/2011

Brilliant. States that are controlled by a political party dedicated to killing education (through funding and treatment of workers in education) are killing education.

[Larry Motuz]

12:05 PM on 07/20/2011

Thanks, and fanned back.

[LoneTree]

01:41 AM on 07/21/2011

Welcome to the ranks of the innumerate.

[LoneTree]

01:03 PM on 07/21/2011

"...I linked State Rankings prepared by the American Institute of Physics with the outcome of 2008 voting by state. Your comment implies something is very wrong about that..."

There is. Neither was intended to be linked to the other. That's a problem, from the standpoint of statistical analysis (you may as well link to the population of Monarch butteflies), but it isn't the real problem that renders your analysis mathematical invalid.

The real problem with your analysis is that you count STATES, which don't take tests of get jobs, instead of counting PEOPLE, who do take tests and get jobs. For example, California ranks "below average", so that counts as "one blue state that ranks as below average".

What your pseudo-analysis ignores is that California is > 12% of the population of the entire United States, so it could just as easily (if the population of test taking and job getting people were redistributed) count as 8 states. That would make seven more "blue states" that are "below average".

If you don't agree with this, don't understand it, or simply disagree with it, take a printout of this to your local junior college. Have a math professor there, preferably one with a concentration in statistics provide her analysis of this, and accept her explanation, whether he agrees with me or not. Okay?

[Larry Motuz]

01:40 PM on 07/21/2011

I will do as you ask. That said, I am not comparing the results of different surveys here.
I have taken the historical vote by state and bridged it to State Rankings in Math and Science.

We both know that it sometimes requires a statistical tour de force to compare survey populations. But, I did not do that.

However, I will look into what you suggest.

[Daniel Hicks]

10:18 PM on 07/21/2011

A simple way to approximate this is to take a weighted average: you multiply each State's score by the proportion of US population living in the state. However, this will give a distorted view depending on which states are counted as red or blue. If you go by vote in the 2008 election, you'll be sure to end up with higher blue scores since way more of than half population lives in 2008 blue states.

However, without running the analysis, I think it's safe to say the overall trend is similar to what's predicted above. Thinking of electoral votes as I scan the data, (Texas is a huge red state not far from Cali in the data, NY is a huge blue at the very top, Arizona big red near the bottom, etc.) population will not change the overall trend, but would certainly affect the significance value you'd get.

[Sandra McConnell]

09:07 PM on 07/13/2011

This just makes me sad.

[mrdpavo]

06:42 PM on 07/13/2011

Thank God I was educated in Massachusetts...perhaps why I was in the 95th percentile on my SATs hahah

[Sanity Rules]

10:55 AM on 07/13/2011

Note that the blue states occupy the top of the list, and the red states are at the bottom. If the GOP had its way, the educational levels of the higher achieving states would be deprived of educational funds and eventually be dumbed down to the lower levels.

Doing this will allow the GOP to have an uneducated America buying into their bag of lies and deceit. It's so much easier for the GOP to sell a lie to someone uneducated...

[sobrien]

04:17 PM on 07/19/2011

I wonder how much teaching evolution as "one theory" affected this?

"The jury is still out on Science" - GOB

[Daniel Hicks]

10:20 PM on 07/21/2011

It'd be hard to measure an indirect effect of anger at a biological principle on the teaching of physics and calculus, which is all this study measures. I can't imagine it's nothing, but who knows if it's significant or not.

[Ronnie Avatar Dixon]

01:22 AM on 07/13/2011

It's ironic that my state, Minnesota, the second best for education, has a government shutdown. lolz

[restoretheconstitution2]

03:11 PM on 07/12/2011

This is extremely misleading and I've seen ti for years. When comparing students here to other nations, we have got to realize that we don't compare with ALL of their children. We only are comparing with those in certain schools, in certain places, in these nations. China doesn't educate every single kid. Neither does India.

There are still kids in the farms and fields all over china, and with billions of people, we are asking all of our children who are required to go to school to rank with those who simply aren't and don't get all counted. On average, the number of students we have don't compete with the average in China or India, but how many kids in those nations are in poverty and don't go to school? Find a real average and report back with factual stats instead of embellished ones with the aim of making us look bad.

[PCPrincess]

01:14 PM on 07/14/2011

You don't have an accurate idea of what those countries are like. You are espousing an old idea of what those societies are like, some of it based on years of propaganda meant to make American's believe we were the best.

[TRhett]

05:52 AM on 07/16/2011

Actually, his/her basic premise is true: One of the reasons America compares dismally with the rest of the (supposedly developed) world is that our education statistics include ALL students; whereas most countries' statistics include their best and brightest - whom they recognize and cultivate early in the process. They make no pretenses to "universal education", and early in the process put students on specific "tracks" based on ability. Those who are obviously college/professional material are put on one track, the others are put on a more vocational track. The students on the "college/professional" track are the ones who form their statistics - so it's easy to see why the results would be skewed. My mother happens to have a PhD in Educational Leadership, and is the Chairperson of the school board in our area (a very good school district, although in an "average" state), and this is one of her pet peeves. In America, EVERYONE is encouraged to do things like take the SAT's, even though many of them really have absolutely no need (or desire) to do so; because of that lack of motivation, their scores drive the averages down and result in comparisons like this.