I am writing in response to the editorial detailing Maine’s fourth graders’ National Assessment of Educational Progress scores (“Maine in no position to shrug at ‘nation’s report card,’” Feb. 2). I am a teacher with very high standards and would never say that we can’t do better at the teaching of reading and math.

However, it is upsetting that journalists consistently report “proficient” levels as grade level. While the editorial didn’t explicitly make that statement, non-educators often see “proficient” as “grade level” when no clarification is given. As the NAEP itself states:

Myth: The NAEP proficient level is like being on grade level.

Fact: Proficient on NAEP means competency over challenging subject matter. This is not the same thing as being “on grade level,” which refers to performance on local curriculum and standards. NAEP is a general assessment of knowledge and skills in a particular subject.

If only 26% of our students were able to read at grade level, I would expect parents to be knocking on the school door with a lot of questions.

NAEP proficiency is aspirational. It’s an important goal, but it shouldn’t be used to make the situation seem so dire — “Our children can’t read!” — that taxpayers wonder what they are paying for. Seventy-five percent of our children are poised to become lifelong readers, and we’re working very hard to bring the other 25% to grade level.

Kathleen Mikulka
Cape Elizabeth