The "summer slide" affects some kids more than others. Measuring how far groups slide over the summer is also useful for figuring out how much they're learning during the school year.
The “summer slide” affects some kids more than others.  How far groups slide over the summer also helps for figuring out how much of their learning during the school year is actually due to school.

When one group of students shows markedly less growth than others, it’s a cause for concern. But what happens when it’s the high-achieving students who lose ground relative to their peers? Recently, Karen Rambo-Hernandez and Betsy McCoach found that high-achievers showed almost no change in the rate of reading level improvement between the school year and the summer. Average-achievers, conversely, showed substantial growth during the school year, but almost none during the summer. This suggests that school is benefiting average-achieving students, but that whatever high-achievers are doing during the summer is as beneficial as their time spent in school.

The slower improvement of high-achieving students during the school year is often written off as a ceiling effect of the assessment: there’s no way for students who get 100% on the pre-test to demonstrate increased knowledge. The researchers hypothesized another explanation that may also be playing a role, namely that the curriculum may not be sufficiently challenging. Using MAP test data, they compared 3rd-grade students’ growth rates during the the school year to their own growth rates during the summer. Then, they compared the school’s contributions to the growth of high-achieving and average-achieving students.

Finding that the impact of school on the highest-achieving students’ reading comprehension was virtually nonexistent, the authors speculate that school curricula may not adequately meet this group’s reading needs. Because many were initially reading at least three grade-levels ahead of their peers, advanced curricula may not have been advanced enough. In addition, this may be the result of using models of teacher accountability that encourage teachers to get all students to reach a proficiency threshold, as opposed to using value-added models that emphasize moving all students forward.

You can read the full article here:

Rambo-Hernandez, K. E., & McCoach, D. B. (2015). High-Achieving and Average Students’ Reading Growth: Contrasting School and Summer Trajectories. The Journal of Educational Research, 108:2, 112-129.

Amy August is a graduate student in Sociology at the University of Minnesota who studies education, competition, parenting, and sports.