The nationwide push to create or expand private school access over the last few years—through vouchers, tax credits, or education savings accounts (ESAs)—has ignited parental curiosity in such choices. But has the supply side of the equation kept pace with that heightened demand (and opportunity)?
In a new study, researchers from Washington University in St. Louis use nine years of student-level data from public high schools in St. Louis and the surrounding suburbs to estimate the effects of in-school suspension (ISS) and out-of-school suspension (OSS) on a student’s probability of transferring to another school.
Missouri adds “grade level” reporting to state test results, addressing parent and stakeholder confusion about proficiency scores.
On this week’s Education Gadfly Show podcast, Brandon Brown, CE
Ask most people where student achievement is strongest, and they’ll point to the Northeast: Massachusetts, New Jersey, Connecticut—the usual suspects. And that’s been mostly true. These states have stronger tax bases and serve (on average) wealthier populations. They have long invested more in public education and built systems to protect it.
The Gates Foundation’s support for education reform has done much good. As the Foundation expends vast sums during its final twenty years, Finn urges Bill Gates to use his resources—financial, yes, but also influence—to press for fundamental changes in K–12 policies and practices.
Texas Governor Greg Abbott recently signed into law a universal education savings account program, breaking through years of legislative resistance.
The granting of tenure typically occurs after K–12 teachers have worked three years in the classroom. In many places, that’s it, just time-in-harness.
Since the pandemic, classroom disruptions have surged, prompting Texas lawmakers to push for stricter discipline policies.
On this week’s Education Gadfly Show podcast, Tom Toch, director of FutureEd
A new wave of middle school math policies is poised to reshape who gets access to advanced math options, and when.
Earlier this month, Dana Goldstein of the New York Times argued that both political parties have abandoned the ed-reform agenda. Michael Petrilli responds, offering a robust agenda that would actually bring marked improvements to public schools.
Earlier this month, I was flattered to be invited to a conference at Marquette University Law School, sparked by an article I’d written making the case that education reform has misfired by prioritizing testing, measurement, accountability, and other structural reforms instead of trying to improve classroom practice. It’s an argument I’ve made elsewhere and the theme of my Substack.
The last decade’s political shifts have banished many previously popular education reforms to the proverbial wilderness. Charter schools, perhaps the most successful and lasting education reform in recent history, are not immune to these changes.
Pandemic school disruptions, frustrations with ineffective reading methods, and sinking test scores lit a fire under the nascent science of reading movement which has borne fruit
President Trump’s AI mandate for education raises concerns about data privacy, human connection, and critical thinking. —Jessica Grose, New York Times A rural Wyoming community decided to establish a charter school for students otherwise facing hour-long commutes.
On this week’s Education Gadfly Show podcast, Genevieve Collins, Texas State Director for American
Note to readers: This essay is adapted from a presentation I gave to policy advocates last week; I thought you might find it helpful as well.
Are Dana Goldstein and I watching the same state of education politics? She claims in the pages of the New York Times that, presently, “neither party, nor even a single major political figure,” wants to claim the mantle of education reformer.
If discipline disparities are really driven primarily by bias and systemic racism, we would expect to see the largest disparities in states with the most regressive racial attitudes. Yet mapping the data reveals a strikingly different picture. What if it’s not racism that mostly explains racial discipline disparities, but socioeconomic factors?
Over the past month, the Trump administration terminated $773 million in National Science Foundation (NSF) grants supporting STEM education research and innovation.
What matters more when we evaluate a school’s contribution to a child’s future: reading and math test scores or students’ opinions about its academic environment?
Many teachers see Chromebooks as a major source of off-task behavior in class, proving our point.
On this week’s Education Gadfly Show podcast, Starlee Coleman, president and CEO of the National Alliance for Public
On April 23, President Trump signed two executive orders that could significantly impact school discipline policies nationwide, as well as the federal government’s approach to civil rights investigations. The first is directly targets discipline; the second aims more broadly at the use of “disparate impact.” Petrilli has weighed in on these matters before, but given the news, it’s worth doing so again.
Editor’s note: This story was produced by The Hechinger Report, a nonprofit, nonpartisan news outlet focused on education.
