See Rankings Below or Click on These Links for More Information: Press Release | Factors | Prior Years' Rankings | MQ Home | Methodology | About Us
|
|
2006-2007 Smartest State Award |
||||||||||
| ALPHA ORDER | RANK ORDER | |||||||||
| RANK | STATE |
SMART RATING |
2005-2006 RANK |
CHANGE | RANK | STATE |
SMART RATING |
2005-2006 RANK |
CHANGE | |
|
45 |
Alabama |
-11.00 |
43 |
-2 |
|
1 |
Vermont |
18.57 |
1 |
0 |
|
46 |
Alaska |
-11.91 |
44 |
-2 |
|
2 |
Massachusetts |
16.09 |
3 |
1 |
|
50 |
Arizona |
-17.61 |
50 |
0 |
|
3 |
Connecticut |
14.46 |
2 |
-1 |
|
32 |
Arkansas |
-3.44 |
37 |
5 |
|
4 |
New Jersey |
14.35 |
4 |
0 |
|
47 |
California |
-13.10 |
46 |
-1 |
|
5 |
Maine |
10.79 |
5 |
0 |
|
27 |
Colorado |
-1.32 |
23 |
-4 |
|
6 |
Virginia |
10.07 |
7 |
1 |
|
3 |
Connecticut |
14.46 |
2 |
-1 |
|
7 |
Montana |
9.55 |
9 |
2 |
|
28 |
Delaware |
-2.47 |
25 |
-3 |
|
8 |
Wisconsin |
9.04 |
8 |
0 |
|
29 |
Florida |
-2.90 |
36 |
7 |
|
9 |
Iowa |
8.82 |
14 |
5 |
|
41 |
Georgia |
-6.92 |
40 |
-1 |
|
10 |
Pennsylvania |
8.69 |
11 |
1 |
|
42 |
Hawaii |
-9.31 |
42 |
0 |
|
11 |
Nebraska |
6.40 |
12 |
1 |
|
20 |
Idaho |
1.29 |
28 |
8 |
|
12 |
New Hampshire |
5.90 |
15 |
3 |
|
35 |
Illinois |
-4.32 |
32 |
-3 |
|
13 |
Minnesota |
5.33 |
6 |
-7 |
|
24 |
Indiana |
0.06 |
26 |
2 |
|
14 |
Rhode Island |
4.31 |
16 |
2 |
|
9 |
Iowa |
8.82 |
14 |
5 |
|
15 |
Kansas |
4.27 |
13 |
-2 |
|
15 |
Kansas |
4.27 |
13 |
-2 |
|
16 |
New York |
3.66 |
10 |
-6 |
|
31 |
Kentucky |
-3.24 |
35 |
4 |
|
17 |
South Dakota |
3.25 |
18 |
1 |
|
44 |
Louisiana |
-10.95 |
45 |
1 |
|
18 |
Maryland |
2.27 |
19 |
1 |
|
5 |
Maine |
10.79 |
5 |
0 |
|
19 |
Wyoming |
1.35 |
17 |
-2 |
|
18 |
Maryland |
2.27 |
19 |
1 |
|
20 |
Idaho |
1.29 |
28 |
8 |
|
2 |
Massachusetts |
16.09 |
3 |
1 |
|
21 |
North Dakota |
0.95 |
20 |
-1 |
|
39 |
Michigan |
-6.43 |
27 |
-12 |
|
22 |
Missouri |
0.94 |
21 |
-1 |
|
13 |
Minnesota |
5.33 |
6 |
-7 |
|
23 |
North Carolina |
0.84 |
22 |
-1 |
|
48 |
Mississippi |
-14.78 |
49 |
1 |
|
24 |
Indiana |
0.06 |
26 |
2 |
|
22 |
Missouri |
0.94 |
21 |
-1 |
|
25 |
Texas |
-0.11 |
24 |
-1 |
|
7 |
Montana |
9.55 |
9 |
2 |
|
26 |
South Carolina |
-1.19 |
29 |
3 |
|
11 |
Nebraska |
6.40 |
12 |
1 |
|
27 |
Colorado |
-1.32 |
23 |
-4 |
|
49 |
Nevada |
-15.81 |
47 |
-2 |
|
28 |
Delaware |
-2.47 |
25 |
-3 |
|
12 |
New Hampshire |
5.90 |
15 |
3 |
|
29 |
Florida |
-2.90 |
36 |
7 |
|
4 |
New Jersey |
14.35 |
4 |
0 |
|
30 |
Tennessee |
-3.01 |
41 |
11 |
|
43 |
New Mexico |
-10.60 |
48 |
5 |
|
31 |
Kentucky |
-3.24 |
35 |
4 |
|
16 |
New York |
3.66 |
10 |
-6 |
|
32 |
Arkansas |
-3.44 |
37 |
5 |
|
23 |
North Carolina |
0.84 |
22 |
-1 |
|
33 |
Washington |
-3.85 |
30 |
-3 |
|
21 |
North Dakota |
0.95 |
20 |
-1 |
|
34 |
Ohio |
-4.00 |
31 |
-3 |
|
34 |
Ohio |
-4.00 |
31 |
-3 |
|
35 |
Illinois |
-4.32 |
32 |
-3 |
|
36 |
Oklahoma |
-5.81 |
39 |
3 |
|
36 |
Oklahoma |
-5.81 |
39 |
3 |
|
40 |
Oregon |
-6.87 |
38 |
-2 |
|
37 |
West Virginia |
-5.82 |
34 |
-3 |
|
10 |
Pennsylvania |
8.69 |
11 |
1 |
|
38 |
Utah |
-6.30 |
33 |
-5 |
|
14 |
Rhode Island |
4.31 |
16 |
2 |
|
39 |
Michigan |
-6.43 |
27 |
-12 |
|
26 |
South Carolina |
-1.19 |
29 |
3 |
|
40 |
Oregon |
-6.87 |
38 |
-2 |
|
17 |
South Dakota |
3.25 |
18 |
1 |
|
41 |
Georgia |
-6.92 |
40 |
-1 |
|
30 |
Tennessee |
-3.01 |
41 |
11 |
|
42 |
Hawaii |
-9.31 |
42 |
0 |
|
25 |
Texas |
-0.11 |
24 |
-1 |
|
43 |
New Mexico |
-10.60 |
48 |
5 |
|
38 |
Utah |
-6.30 |
33 |
-5 |
|
44 |
Louisiana |
-10.95 |
45 |
1 |
|
1 |
Vermont |
18.57 |
1 |
0 |
|
45 |
Alabama |
-11.00 |
43 |
-2 |
|
6 |
Virginia |
10.07 |
7 |
1 |
|
46 |
Alaska |
-11.91 |
44 |
-2 |
|
33 |
Washington |
-3.85 |
30 |
-3 |
|
47 |
California |
-13.10 |
46 |
-1 |
|
37 |
West Virginia |
-5.82 |
34 |
-3 |
|
48 |
Mississippi |
-14.78 |
49 |
1 |
|
8 |
Wisconsin |
9.04 |
8 |
0 |
|
49 |
Nevada |
-15.81 |
47 |
-2 |
|
19 |
Wyoming |
1.35 |
17 |
-2 |
|
50 |
Arizona |
-17.61 |
50 |
0 |
| METHODOLOGY--This
fifth Smartest State designation is awarded based on 21
factors chosen from Morgan Quitno’s annual reference book, Education
State Rankings, 2006-2007. To calculate the Smartest State
rankings, the 21 factors were divided into two groups: those that are “negative”
for which a high ranking would be considered bad for a state, and those
that are “positive” for which a high ranking would be considered good.
Rates for each of the 21 factors were processed through a formula that
measures how a state compares to the national average for a given
category. The positive and negative nature of each factor was taken into
account as part of the formula. Once these computations were made, the
factors then were assigned equal weights. These scores then were
added together to determine a state’s final score (“SUM” on the
table above.) This way, states are assessed based on how they stack up
against the national average. The end result is that the farther below the
national average a state’s education ranking is, the lower (and less
smart) it ranks. The farther above the national average, the higher (and
smarter) a state ranks. This same methodology is used for our annual
Healthiest State, Safest and Most Dangerous State and Safest/Dangerous
City Awards.
The table above shows how each state scored in Morgan Quitno’s fifth annual Smartest State Award. |
Home
Page