> What still isn’t known I didn't see in the article the question of why Texas was going out of their way to yield flat test numbers like this, year after year

> What still isn’t known I didn't see in the article the question of why Texas was going out of their way to yield flat test numbers like this, year after year. It looked the author could've (or maybe not) been hinting that this is numbers-rigging -- to smoothly pass No Child Left Behind metrics, or to affect the real estate market in some way, or some other government goal. Rather than numbers-rigging, I suppose it could also be useful for educators to see who needs more help, relative to their peers.