The problem with “differentiation”
Shouldn’t we all seek to individualize instructions to meet each child’s needs? Who could oppose “differentiation”? Well, I do.
Shouldn’t we all seek to individualize instructions to meet each child’s needs? Who could oppose “differentiation”? Well, I do.
Last week, the Biden administration released new guidance for how schools should handle discipline for students with disabilities.
School shootings are profoundly tragic—scarring not only the families whose children become victims, but casting a shadow over the lives, mental health, and outcomes of the surviving students. But evidence is also clear that it’s not only horrific mass shootings that can lead a child to miss school. Any feeling of not being safe can prompt children and teenagers to stay home.
Are charter schools helping students succeed?
The publisher of Lucy Calkins’s troubled reading curriculum has halted the release of an updated version over concerns about conservative states’ new curriculum laws. —New York Times Children’s needs were sacrificed more than any other group’s during Covid-19 policymaking decisions.
A major, though largely unnoticed, development in America’s support for families with children is the recent release of the “Family Security Act 2.0” by Senator Mitt Romney, along with fellow Republicans Richard Burr and Steve Daines. It could and should serve as the starting point for bipartisan negotiations for a new federal investment in families that might stand the test of time.
In 2004, the late Sara McLanahan published a landmark article called “Diverging Destinies: How Children Are Faring Under the Second Demographic Transition.” The paper was the first scholarly attempt to propose that the decline of the two-parent family in the United States since the 1960’s was intensifying the already unequal l
“New data suggest that the damage from shutting down schools has been worse than almost anyone expected,” the Economist tweeted recently to promote a
A few years ago, when I was writing my book about Success Academy and school choice, I had a moment of self-doubt bordering on despair.
“Nudges” to induce specific actions take many forms in education.
Post-pandemic confidence in public schools has plummeted, especially among Republicans. —Gallup Asian Americans’ academic success is not a problem. Are White parents pushing against standardized tests just anxious about their children getting out-competed?
Editor’s note: This is an edition of “Advance,” a newsletter from the Thomas B. Fordham Institute written by Brandon Wright, our Editorial Director, and published every other week. Its purpose is to monitor the progress of gifted education in America, including legal and legislative developments, policy and leadership changes, emerging research, grassroots efforts, and more.
One of my favorite quotations comes from J.R.R. Tolkien’s The Fellowship of the Ring. When Gandalf the wizard recounts the story of the ring and the havoc that it has brought to Middle-earth to the hero Frodo, Frodo says to him, “I wish it need not have happened in my time.” To which Gandalf replies, “So do I, and so do all who live to see such times.
High-achieving students from low-income backgrounds are half as likely to be placed in a gifted program as their more affluent peers, according to our new study.
Few people have done more to boost academic standards in U.S. schools than Michael Cohen and Laura Slover, coauthors of a new paper offering a bright vision for revitalizing them. But there are reasons to doubt the feasibility of its proposals.
The “tripod” of standards, testing, and accountability has taken a real beating in recent years, following decades in which it was accepted dogma within reform circles.
Back in February, Bloomberg’s Adrian Wooldridge published a column claiming that “America is facing a great talent recession.” He noted that, “today, demand for top talent in the corporate world and elsewhere is exploding just at a time when the supply is t
Dozens of states and cities provide “college promise” programs.
Fifty years of data on gifted youth finds that, contrary to some assumptions, achieving success later in life doesn’t cause unhappiness.
The universe of private elementary-secondary schooling in America today is diverse and confusing, with innumerable twists and turns in efforts to use public funds to help families access schools that suit them—including private schools of all colors and stripes. But the virtue of these institutions is that they’re different, which also means very different from each other. Which complicates the quest to deploy public dollars to assist families to choose them.
I read Mike Petrilli’s very interesting article “How to narrow the excellence gap in early elementary school” in Fordham’s June 2 Education Gadfly Weekly.
The relationship between teacher and student has profound effects on learning. A new study explores whether schools can strengthen this relationship over time by keeping students with teachers for more than one year.
A fifty-year longitudinal study of over 2,000 gifted students finds no connection between success and unhappiness. —The Wall Street Journal The story of Glenn Youngkin’s rise to political prominence in Virginia through education.
This is the first edition of “Advance,” a new Fordham Institute newsletter that will monitor the progress of gifted education. Here, Wright recounts recent developments that reinforce two truths: Gifted education is a clear and substantial good, and it can be much better.
Research has found that high-quality pre-K programs can have positive impacts on children’s learning and development, improving outcomes like literacy and math skills in the short-term and even increasing