Has productivity growth been understated because added schooling didn't raise skills?
Core argument: Average U.S. reading scores moved from 255 out of 500 in 1971 to 256 in 2023 and math scores from 266 to 271, essentially zero improvement despite educational attainment rising 3+ years since the 1970s.
Math and reading scores on tests that have been surveyed over longer periods also show essentially zero improvement in the population average scores. The average score on the reading test in 1971 was 255 out of 500, in 2023 it was 256 and math scores went from 266 to 271. Educational attainment has risen by 3+ years since 1970s but population level reading and math scores have barely changed, and scores within educational attainment groups have fallen. As more people are pushed through lowered standards to a high school diploma, the wage premium to this degree has fallen, suggesting that much of its value was in the differentiating signal rather than skill gains. If this story is true, and more education hasn’t been raising productivity, then all the GDP growth we thought was due to more skilled workers is actually coming from somewhere else. That means we’ve been undercounting TFP, and technological progress for decades. If we take the SF Fed TFP data and remove the adjustments they make for gains in human capital (based mostly on rising educational attainment), we get something that looks like this. The Great Stagnation is shrunk by about a third!

