Skip to main content

Mobile Navigation

  • National
    • Policy
      • High Expectations
      • Quality Choices
      • Personalized Pathways
    • Research
    • Commentary
      • Gadfly Newsletter
      • Flypaper Blog
    • Events
    • Scholars Program
  • Ohio
    • Policy
      • Priorities
      • Media & Testimony
    • Research
    • Commentary
      • Ohio Education Gadfly Biweekly
      • Ohio Gadfly Daily
  • Charter Authorizing
    • Application
    • Sponsored Schools
    • Resources
  • About
    • Mission
    • Board
    • Staff
    • Career
Home Advancing Educational Excellence
Home
Advancing Educational Excellence

Main Navigation

  • National
  • Ohio
  • Charter Authorizing
  • About

National Menu

  • Topics
    • Accountability & Testing
    • Advanced Education
    • Career & Technical Education
    • Charter Schools
    • Curriculum & Instruction
    • ESSA
    • Evidence-Based Learning
    • Facilities
    • Governance
    • Personalized Learning
    • Private School Choice
    • School Finance
    • Standards
    • Teachers & School Leaders
    • Think Again
  • Research
  • Commentary
    • Gadfly Newsletter
    • Flypaper Blog
    • Gadfly Podcast
  • Events
  • Scholars Program

About Our Research

We conduct research on the education policies, interventions, supports, and conditions that advance educational excellence for all young Americans. We distill sometimes complex research findings into user-friendly, actionable reports to educate and equip policymakers, practitioners, parents, students, and communities to take action to improve K–12 education.

view

High Tech, Low Standards: High School in the Age of Distraction

A new national survey finds that school-issued devices, AI misuse, and grade inflation are undermining learning and leaving many students feeling unprepared for the future.

Brian R. Fitzpatrick, Ph.D. 9.9.2026
NationalReport
view

Remediation in Higher Education: A Symposium

Is remediation in additional-topics providing a valuable service to society? Or does it amount to paying for someone's education twice? Read competing views of the issue in this rare Fordham look at the higher-education system.

Robert M. Costrell, David H. Ponitz, Laurence Steinberg, David W. Breneman, William N. Haarlow 7.1.1998
NationalReport
view

The State of State Standards (1998)

Three Fordham staff members analyze trends spotted in academic standards across the disciplines. They found that too many state standards are vague, anti-knowledge, entranced with 'relevance,' and focused on teaching rather than learning.

Michael J. Petrilli, Chester E. Finn, Jr., Gregg Vanourek 7.1.1998
NationalReport
view

Spending More While Learning Less: U.S. School Productivity in International Perspective

With OECD data, Walberg shows that the United States' educational system is the 'least productive in the developed world.'

Herbert J. Walberg 7.1.1998
NationalReport
view

The Tracking and Ability Grouping Debate

Tracking and ability grouping strategies differ widely from school to school. They diverge even more widely from their portrayal in the popular criticisms of the 1980s. This report digs into the sensitive matter of whether those criticisms are valid today. The answer tells a more complicated and more honest story than we have heard before on this topic.

Tom Loveless 7.1.1998
NationalReport
view

State Math Standards

In this review of state math standards, authors Raimi and Braden found a disturbing lack of 'mathematical reasoning' in most of the 47 state standards they examined; only three states earned 'A's' while 16 states flunked.

Ralph A. Raimi, Lawrence Braden 3.1.1998
NationalReport
view

State Science Standards

This review of state science standards is the final in our series of reports analyzing state standards in the five core content areas. For this review, author Lawrence S. Lerner analyzed the science standards of 36 states and found that state science standards are the strongest of the five disciplines we studied. Based on his analysis, six states earned 'A' grades, seven earned 'B's,' and only nine flunked.

Lawrence S. Lerner 3.1.1998
NationalReport
view

State History Standards

The second in a series of evaluations of state standards, this is our first review of state history standards. In his analysis, author David W. Saxe offers a scathing indictment of state history standards, which he judged to be little better than the oft-ridiculed National History Standards; four earned 'A's' or 'B's,' while 19 states flunked.

David W. Saxe 2.1.1998
NationalReport
view

State Geography Standards

This is the third in a series of reports on state standards published by the Fordham Foundation and is our first-ever look at state standards for geography. Authors Susan Munroe and Terry Smith found reason for hope in a few of the excellent standards they found (like Colorado's), but most of the documents they analyzed were extremely weak; only six states earned 'A's' or 'B's,' while 18 states failed.

Terry Smith, Susan Munroe 2.1.1998
NationalReport
view

State English Standards

Dr. Sandra Stotsky, the eminent authority on English language education, led off a Fordham series of standards reviews with a detailed critique of the English/Language Arts standards of 28 states. Massachusetts' were found to be the strongest, a beacon for other states to emulate.

Sandra Stotsky 7.1.1997
NationalReport

Pagination

  • First page « First
  • Previous page ‹ Previous
  • Page 15
  • Page 16
  • Page 17
  • Page 18
  • Page 19
  • Page 20
  • Page 21
  • Page 22
  • Current page 23
Fordham Logo

© 2026 The Thomas B. Fordham Institute
Privacy Policy
Usage Agreement

National

P.O. Box 110
Burke, VA 22009

202.223.5452

[email protected]

Ohio

P.O. Box 82291
Columbus, OH 43202

614.223.1580

[email protected]

Sponsorship

130 West Second Street, Suite 410
Dayton, Ohio 45402

937.227.3368

[email protected]