confirms that high school students who complete the Free Application for Federal Student Aid (FAFSA) are more likely to attend college than those who do not. This, of course, is the whole purpose of the federal financial aid program — to help lower- and middle-income students pursue higher education.

Despite the recent unfortunate — to put it mildly — rollout of the simplified FAFSA, the country would still be better off if all high school students completed the form. But even before the current fiasco, on the number of high schoolers filing the FAFSA was worrying. Access to federal aid is contingent on the FAFSA, and if students do not fill it out, they cannot access a major source of financial support for college.

Several states have moved in the right direction in requiring completion. One of the first, Louisiana, saw a 20% increase in FAFSA completions in one year after requiring high school seniors to complete the form to graduate. But the state is its universal FAFSA mandate over concerns about sharing financial information with the federal government, “invading” families’ privacy and jeopardizing their “liberty.” 

Worries about privacy seem misguided, as families share financial information with the government every year by filing tax returns, and much of the data in the FAFSA comes directly from these. Dropping a statewide mandate will not only hurt those students and families who might not learn about available financial aid; if fewer students go on to postsecondary education, it will make it more difficult for states to meet their higher education attainment goals.  This, in turn, will jeopardize the economic benefits to the state that accrue from having a more educated workforce.  

Hopefully, more states will require high school graduates to fill out the form. But beyond hoping, there is a way to make sure this happens: All colleges and universities could require the FAFSA as part of their application for admissions, whether students are applying for financial aid or not. 

This would create much stronger incentives for more states to mandate that high schools take on the responsibility of mandating FAFSA for their graduates. Even students who don’t require need-based financial aid receive large subsidies from both public and private nonprofit colleges and universities, because the full sticker price does not cover the actual cost of the education received. The difference can be quite large — in many cases greater than the value of a Pell Grant — both at public flagships and more selective private schools. The more selective the university, the larger the subsidies, since selectivity is closely related to the resources that colleges have available to spend on students. These are covered in a variety of ways that are supported by federal and state policies: direct government subsidies to colleges and universities; contributions from donors who receive tax benefits; exemptions from income tax on earnings on endowments; and local property taxes. 

If the FAFSA became a routine part of the college application process for all, it would level the playing field for all students in terms of required submissions and make it more likely that more high school students would receive the financial aid they need. Families that pay full freight might object, but the checks they write don’t cover the full cost of their children’s education any more than the small contributions asked of students who receive large scholarships. Why should the wealthiest families be treated differently than those applying for Pell Grants? Both are receiving public financial benefits, just in different forms. The burden on these families would be minimal since most of the information would come directly from the IRS.

Requiring the FAFSA from all applicants would also offer more information to policymakers on the income distribution of students attending college. Since both the federal and state governments heavily subsidize higher education, understanding how those subsidies are distributed across the population is important for making good public policy. These subsidies are, in part, justified on the basis of supporting economic and social mobility. Without knowing who is receiving them, it is impossible to evaluate their effectiveness.  

Having all families fill out the FAFSA whether they are applying for need-based financial aid or not would make possible better federal and state policies in support of the country’s higher education goals.

Now, policymakers and education leaders are beginning a pivot to math, where drops in scores on both the PISA and NAEP exams have been far more acute.

What’s the plan?

One strategy states will assuredly consider is to focus on the continued adoption of High Quality Instructional Materials — curriculum aligned to college- and career-ready standards. The trend toward these materials in both reading and math accelerated when troubling that disadvantaged students were not getting equitable access to high-quality teaching. Federal recovery dollars then helped to adoption across the country.

These materials have been a major step forward for teachers who, for decades, were provided with low-quality textbooks or online resources that didn’t reflect high standards or research-based teaching practices. Introducing an objective quality rating into the textbook adoption process disrupted the K-12 publishing industry for the better and helped to ensure that all students had access to educational programs rooted in high expectations.

But before going all-in on HQIM in math, state and district leaders should consider the implications of an important nuance in how instructional materials are evaluated by EdReports and other ratings agencies: to qualify for an acceptable rating, the materials must focus on grade-level work.

In reading, most students can benefit from grade-level instruction so long as they have passed the . They become better readers when they build knowledge and vocabulary, learn to navigate more complex texts and exercise critical thinking — all of which can happen regardless of the students’ starting point. A seventh-grader at a fifth-grade reading level can grapple with seventh-grade content and become a better reader. The struggle can be productive.

But in math, specific topics that are taught during one school year are foundational for what’s taught in the next. If students fall behind, , making it harder to catch back up. A student who didn’t quite grasp enough about the concept of decimals in elementary school can struggle to understand percents in sixth grade and then to apply them in seventh. Teachers can have a hard time addressing unfinished learning when their materials are focused largely on grade-level content. Math is cumulative — a fact that doesn’t change when a student happens to move on to the next grade level.   

Each day, we see a clear relationship between foundational concepts and grade-level mastery in the data we gather within our supplemental math program, . For example, when students attempt to learn the Pythagorean Theorem having already understood concepts such as estimating square roots and classifying triangles, they have a 72% chance of achieving mastery. When they don’t know these predecessor concepts, that success rate drops to 32%. Similar rates exist for nearly all the topics in the program. 

The importance of addressing unfinished learning in math proficiency is also consistent with learning science. Among the most foundational principles of cognition is that students have , which can be overwhelmed by tasks that are too cognitively demanding. Once students memorize information and master skills, their brain is free to use their working memory on other, higher-order tasks. But if they don’t master those lower-order skills, their working memory strains and their understanding of new ideas is impeded. 

Does this mean that students should instead spend all their time addressing every learning gap from previous grades? Of course not — instructional time is too limited. If students spend an entire school year working only on unfinished learning, they finish the school year behind again, having missed out on grade-level content that’s foundational to the next year. The cycle continues, year after year, making it nearly impossible for them to ever catch back up.

But it also doesn’t mean that instruction can ignore those gaps. As Dan Weisberg and I argued in 2019, teachers need strategies to both maintain high expectations and address unfinished learning from prior years. Advances in technology, and especially in artificial intelligence, make both objectives more achievable than ever. However, a curriculum that does both would have a hard time qualifying as High Quality Instructional Materials, since it would not focus on the major work of the grade.

Teachers clearly that students are behind. So do advocates for HQIM, many of whom guide schools to access that help teachers better understand predecessor relationships. But guidance documents aren’t the same as instructional materials that could actually help teachers address foundational learning gaps. And since those materials don’t fit a grade-level-only definition, teachers often need to source their own materials to diagnose and address foundational learning gaps and then somehow integrate it into their classroom workflow. Not only is this difficult to do, but it’s what HQIM was supposed to avoid.

What can be done to ensure students have access to both grade-level content and pathways to proficiency?

Some states are broadening their definition of HQIM to allow for more than just grade-level content. Texas recently launched a in math that allows publishers to include both on- and off-grade material so long as the grade-level standards are fully covered. California seems to be on a similar path, as its new is now more focused on grade bands (i.e. grades 6-8), as opposed to individual grade levels. (Most states use grade-level bands in their science standards.)

Others who prefer to hold tight to grade-based core instruction can consider changing the definition of HQIM when it comes to evaluating supplemental resources. Rather than simply applying the same grade-level-only filter, evaluation criteria for intervention solutions can focus on the ability to accurately diagnose relevant skill gaps (no matter how far back), embed rigorous content and assessments, develop custom learning pathways, activate student engagement and integrate with core instruction.  

High-quality instructional materials help to ensure students have access to an academic trajectory that’s aligned to college and career-readiness. But access alone is not enough to unlock social mobility — mastery is what matters. For as long as the nation’s schools have taught math, they have to serve students who, for whatever reason, are not performing at grade level. That’s been true regardless of the quality of the curriculum or the training of the teacher. 

Instructional materials are the most important tool an educator can put to use in the classroom.  But as with any tool, quality should reflect both an aspirational vision for what it can do and the science to make sure it can deliver. 

The current definition of HQIM sets an appropriately high aspirational vision. But for students to meet that bar in math, their teachers need more than what HQIM — as currently defined — can offer.

The creation of — highly realistic but artificial images, audio and video — used to require high-powered equipment and considerable skill. Now, with in generative artificial intelligence, any kid with a smartphone can make one. 

Adolescents, mostly teenage boys, are exploiting readily accessible deepfake tools to create graphic images and videos of female classmates, causing profound distress and disruption in across the country, from , California, to , New Jersey. High school students outside Seattle were photographed by a classmate at a school dance who then “undressed” them on his phone and circulated supposedly .

The impact could be significant. Experts that so-called deepnudes can hurt victims’ mental health, physical and emotional safety, as well as college and job opportunities. Comprehensive data is lacking, but documented incidents indicate that this is a troubling trend that demands immediate attention. 

While anti-child pornography statutes, Title IX regulations regarding online harassment and revenge-porn laws already exist, these measures were not designed to handle the unique challenges posed by deepfake technology. 

Schools, educators and law enforcement are scrambling to respond to this new phenomenon. In some cases, students have been harshly disciplined, but 13- and 14 year-old boys for engaging in impulsive behavior on phones their parents have handed them is not an appropriate, just or sustainable solution. It is incumbent upon adults to make the technological world safe for children.

The Biden administration has rightly technology companies, financial institutions and other businesses to limit websites and mobile apps whose primary business is to create, facilitate, monetize or disseminate image-based sexual abuse. But these steps are largely symbolic and will result in voluntary commitments that are likely unenforceable. 

The U.S. Department of Education is to release guidance on this matter, but its track record of issuing timely — and, frankly, practical — information is underwhelming. 

It’s also impractical to rely on slow-moving legislative processes that get caught up in arguments about for offending images when students’ well-being is at stake. As any school leader can tell you, laws only go so far in , and the ambling through Congress don’t address how K-12 institutions should respond to these incidents. 

So, where does that leave us?

Educators need support and guidance. Schools have a critical role to play, but to expect them to invent policies and educational programs that combat the malicious use of deepfakes and protect students from this emerging threat — absent significant training, resources and expertise — is not only a fool’s errand, but an unfair burden to place on educators. 

Communities, districts and schools need statewide strategies to prevent and deter deepfakes. States must use this summer to bring together school administrators, educators, law enforcement, families, students, local technology companies, researchers, community groups and other nonprofit organizations to deliver comprehensive policies and implementation plans by Labor Day. These should, among other things:

• Recommend curriculum, instruction and training programs for school leaders and teachers about the potential misuses of artificial intelligence and deepfakes in school settings;

• Update school-based cyber harassment policies and codes of conduct to include deepfakes;
  
• Establish discipline policies to clarify accountability for students who create, solicit or distribute nonconsensual, sexual deepfake images of their peers;
  
• Update procurement policies to ensure that any technology provider has a plan to interrupt or handle a deepfake incident;
  
• Build or purchase education, curriculum and instruction for students and families on digital citizenship and the safe use of technology, including AI literacy and deepfakes;
  
• Issue guidance for community institutions, including religious programs, small businesses, libraries and youth sports leagues, to promote prevention by addressing this issue head-on with teens who need to understand the damage deepfakes cause;
  
• Issue detailed guidance about how schools must enforce, the federal law that bans sex discrimination, including sexual harassment, in schools.

Is this too ambitious for state government? Maybe. But there is no choice. As the grown-ups, and as citizens of a democracy, we have a collective responsibility to decide what kind of world we want our children to live in, and to take action, before it’s too late.

That’s because personalized, competency-based learning offers a promising alternative to traditional instruction and has been shown to help accelerate academic gains. Teachers can design personalized learning experiences that target instruction to address specific skills while ensuring that students meet the same academic standards and learning objectives that they would in a traditional classroom.

By better understanding each student’s level of understanding and need, educators can minimize the potential for compounding gaps in essential knowledge and skills. This is critically important, because if students haven’t firmly grasped foundational concepts from years before, their path to proficiency is obstructed, and they are bound to struggle.

In mathematics, for instance, students must first understand how to multiply decimals, which is taught in fifth grade, before they can confidently calculate percentages in seventh.

Miami-Dade Public Schools recognized this early in the COVID-19 pandemic and implemented a that utilized need-driven decision-making to ensure that resources reached individual students at the appropriate levels.

Rather than following rigid timelines and lesson plans, Miami-Dade dedicated extra time to foundational competence. The district developed and implemented strategies to evaluate students based on their level of academic achievement in meeting essential standards in both their current and previous grades.

As a result, while other school districts have struggled to recover from pandemic-related learning loss, has returned to pre-pandemic proficiency with minimal disruption. On the 2023 statewide accountability assessments, which are designed to measure progress toward critical learning benchmarks, Miami-Dade surpassed the state in the proportion of students scoring at grade level or higher in both English and math.

This highlights the importance of utilizing innovative educational strategies to meet students where they are. When young people succeed in school, they become more motivated to explore new topics — and that’s important. A new report from Gallup and the Walton Family Foundation surveyed over 1,000 students, ages 12 to 18, and found that less than half felt motivated to attend school.

Too often, traditional education falls short in helping students see relevance to their everyday lives. Project-based learning is an example of a competency-based learning experience that integrates knowledge with practical applications. This strategy cultivates critical thinking skills that are essential for success beyond the classroom, while helping students deepen their understanding of core concepts by using what they know to solve real-world problems.

For example, a study of a middle school project-based showed, on average, that students performed higher than a matched comparison group on state English Language Arts assessments by 8 percentage points in year two and 10 percentage points in year three. By aligning competencies with academic standards, educators can ensure that students receive a rigorous education that prepares them for academic achievement.

The effectiveness of competency-based methods is evident in performance-based schools like the . Lindsey Unified ranked No. 1 in English Language Arts growth on the 2019 Smarter Balance Assessment Consortium achievement test when compared with 63 similar districts, rising from the 33rd to the 87th percentile. By coupling core content with skills like communication, teamwork and adaptability, Lindsey Unified equips its students with both the knowledge and skills they need to thrive in a rapidly changing world.

Lindsay Unified is not alone. A RAND study of that participated in a personalized learning intervention found that after two years, students who started in the bottom quartile demonstrated greater gains than peers with similar demographics, prior academic performance and socioeconomic status that were not part of the intervention groups. The 32 schools were located predominantly in urban areas and served large numbers of minority students from low-income families.

Personalized learning cannot improve student outcomes without a major shift in mindset and significant changes in teaching methods. There is no quick fix or simple solution. Education must be reimagined in a way that celebrates each student’s individuality and considers how factors outside of school influence what happens within them. By implementing systems that provide tailored, differentiated support, learning can be made relevant and engaging for students.

Disclosure: The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation funded the RAND study and provides financial support to The 74. Walton Family Foundation provides financial support to The 74.

Similarly, educators share a deep concern for the well-being of their students, families and communities. However, they lack the life-saving constraints and coherent, systemwide guidance SOLAS gives sea captains.

In 2023, a team of education leaders and researchers launched the (EAC) to address harms caused by the absence of SOLAS-like guidance. We saw too many education initiatives that were initially successful fail to endure because of a lack of consistent licensure, accreditation, continuing education or accountability grounded in evidence.

To fill this void, our are creating guidance for decisionmakers in the form of . These are being vetted, curated and organized based on scientific research and on data from high-performing schools, districts and states that consistently produce strong results, especially for marginalized populations. These resources, focused on academic achievement and social-emotional well-being, could become the basis for specific education policies, programs, and practices. They will be accessible on our website, distributed through collaborating partner organizations and promulgated through convenings with education agencies.

Just as the maritime safety standards improved safety and saved lives, the EAC is committed to constraining the use of non-evidence-based programs that cause waste and even harm. For example, , an  intervention targeted to lowest-achieving first graders, has been used with at an per child, which has resulted in total expenditures of $2.5 billion. But, as noted in the , “Reading Recovery students subsequently fell behind and by than similar students who hadn’t had the tutoring, according to a [December 2022] . The tutoring seemed to harm them.”

 Even the much-touted reading initiative that moved Mississippi from the lowest-performing state on fourth-grade NAEP reading scores to 21st in the nation, may have serious flaws. EAC co-founder Kelly Butler, CEO of Mississippi’s , worries that not all components of the state’s education system are being held to the same level of accountability, which can undermine sustainability.

To fulfill its mission, EAC’s first goal is to make evidence the basis for licensure, educator preparation programs, and continuing education. Toward this end, we are collaborating with national organizations including , at the Hunt Institute, , , and the to identify evidence-based resources for licensure, educator preparation and continuing education. We plan to present the results of these collaborations to an audience of higher education professors through the Alabama Department of Education, through the University of North Dakota at a conference for K-12 educators from across the state and through the New Hampshire Department of Education’s conference for teachers and administrators. We are also identifying selection criteria for model policies as a first step in recruiting and convening a coalition of states that will audit the degree to which their licensure, educator preparation programs, accountability and continuing education policies align with the evidence-based resources identified by the EAC and other trustworthy organizations.

To ensure that successful reform efforts will be sustainable, our second goal requires focusing on what is necessary to make evidence central to decisionmaking in nine major components of the U.S. education system: educator preparation, state policy, district and school leadership, assessment, parent and family advocacy, professional learning, linguistic diversity, special education and instructional materials. These components are represented by nine EAC teams that are identifying and organizing evidence-based resources for use by education decisionmakers. Already, Stephanie Stollar, co-lead of the EAC’s educator preparation team, is advising the leaders of 12 educator preparation programs on the use of evidence-based resources and practices to ensure new teachers are equipped with the knowledge and skills they need to improve student achievement.

Because education is a complex, multifaceted system, decisionmakers need to adopt a systems perspective, recognizing that failure of one component can impact the effectiveness of the entire ecosystem. Once the full set of constraints and guidance is in place, accountability will be possible and will contribute to educational equity by significantly and permanently improving the achievement and social-emotional and behavioral well-being of all students — with special attention to those with learning differences and other marginalized groups.

In the for the transformation of the profession into an evidence-based system, educators will relinquish certain freedoms — notably the leeway to employ ineffective practices — but will gain guidance that empowers them to fulfill their original purpose by profoundly impacting the future of students, families and communities. The alternative is to continue rearranging the deck chairs under the guise of education reform.

Those guesses are surely correct at least sometimes. But what if they were right more often? Could it help schools put more students from economically disadvantaged backgrounds on a path to economic security? 

To find potential answers to these questions, the Urban Institute, where I lead the Center on Education Data and Policy, recently launched the . This year, we will in innovative research and development through our first request for proposals. The goal is to help educators understand which skills in schools are most strongly associated with long-term success, through research linking students’ competencies to upward mobility and by building new, easily collectable measures. An example of this could be a metric for career preparedness encompassing job-preparation and technical abilities.

It is important to first define how we view “mobility” through the context of this work, as we are using a of the term developed by the Urban Institute:  

• “Economic success: When a person has adequate income and assets to support their and their family’s material well-being.
• Power and autonomy: When a person has the ability to have control over their life, to make choices and to influence larger policies and actions that affect their future.
• Dignity and belonging: When a person feels the respect, dignity and sense of belonging that comes from contributing to and being appreciated by people in their community.”

An example of the types of work that Urban institute seeks to fund is in the area of noncognitive factors such as teamwork, grit and communication, which have been identified as predictors of wages and other positive life outcomes. A potential project could link data on noncognitive factors in school-age students at many schools to adult economic outcomes and compare variations among schools against economic mobility. 

To take it a step further, research could seek to determine whether a student’s noncognitive factors are more predictive of mobility if they are measured by a teacher of the same race.

A second objective is to expand the universe of mobility measurements. For example, has demonstrated that a student’s percentage of friends with high socioeconomic status is a key correlate of upward mobility for people with lower socioeconomic status. A potential project under this RFP could develop a new measure of social capital that could be collected in PK-12 schools. A proposed study might consider how the measure works in rural versus urban areas, and how it should incorporate school and neighborhood segregation.

Identifying the pre-K-12 skills that matter most for lifetime success takes a long time, between developing new measures, collecting data on them in schools, waiting many years for students to reach adulthood and connecting all the needed information. But the advantages to having this evidence are too great to ignore, and the current landscape is too bleak: Students who grow up in the poorest 20% of families have a of remaining poor as adults.

This is not to say that those pre-K-12 skills are the sole causes of, or potential solutions to, . Students face barriers that affect their ability to learn, such as substandard and inadequate health care, and that diminish the fruits of their labors after they leave school, such as and . This is why we are pushing all our grantees to consider individual students’ circumstances both in and beyond school. 

Today, most schools largely rely on the same measures of student success they’ve used for decades, such as reading and math scores, attendance and graduation rates. If our initiative is successful, schools in 2034 will regularly measure a set of skills that drive economic mobility and consciously work to improve them. That could make a real difference helping all students thrive after graduation — and put more low-income students on a path to economic security.

This year at SXSW EDU, I teamed up with The Leadership Academy to facilitate a conversation on the role of AI in education, specifically in relation to the principalship. discussed the potential benefits and challenges of embedding AI in schools and how it might impact the role of the principal. We also explored the implications of AI for equity and access in education. As education leaders come to terms with integrating AI into our schools, they need to consider these issues:

AI can help principals avoid burnout and focus on the “human” work.  

The role of the principal is currently unsustainable. In 2022, 85% of principals reported experiencing high levels of job-related stress, compared with 35% of the general working adult population. The risk of principal burnout has sweeping  implications for the field. has a negative impact on teacher retention and is associated with decreased student achievement. AI can help make principals’  jobs more manageable and sustainable by helping them save time and even automate administrative and analytic tasks. 

The time and technical assets afford principals with more bandwidth, so they can focus on more sophisticated,  human-centered activities such as building relationships with their faculty and the community, and fostering a positive climate, which is . AI offers an answer to a vital question that was posed by Kentwood, Michigan, Superintendent Kevin Polston during the panel: “If time is our most precious commodity, and humans are the most important value that we have in our organizations, how do you then create more time for your people to do those innately human things that change outcomes for kids?” 

Education leaders must consider the risk of bias in design.

During our discussion, Nancy Gutierrez, executive director of The Leadership Academy, emphasized the importance of who is at the table in the design process. To illustrate the risks, she referred to sobering examples, such as the initial designs of self-driving cars being more likely to . In terms of education, she noted that teachers might use AI to design work that inadvertently reflects their biases about a student’s capabilities, based on that child’s identity. Bias in AI is simply a reflection of existing human biases, so district leaders and principals should redouble efforts against bias that might undermine students. Eva Mejia, an expert in design and innovation at IDEO, underscored how involving educators in the design process and increasing transparency could mitigate some of these risks and enhance innovation in schools.

The role of the principal must evolve in line with technological advancements, with a focus on leading change.

Schools must actively learn about and adopt AI, rather than being passive recipients, and principals must be prepared to lead this change effectively. Principals are drivers of school success, and AI is yet another means for them to foster innovation in their schools by modeling a exploratory mindset for students and adults. For example, principals can cultivate spaces where teachers and students feel free to work with AI out in the open, sharing best practices and pitfalls for the benefit of other educators. What might principals and teachers accomplish by testing and leveraging computing power to elevate academic rigor, rather than banning tools that are already integrating in the professional world?

Unfortunately, many school leaders are doing this work at a disadvantage. When I ask principals in urban districts why they have not done more to leverage AI in their schools, the most common answer is, “I just don’t have the time.” Too often, the folks who lead the schools with the greatest needs have the least time to be proactive. They fall behind because they do not have the bandwidth to capitalize on new opportunities or innovative solutions. District leaders must commit to investing in the resources — time and material — that principals need to create the conditions required for schools to remain current and competitive.  

Integrating AI into schools is not just about bringing in new technology. It is about rethinking what leadership looks like. Education leaders have the opportunity to use their expertise in school systems, learning and development to think about how AI can be used to close equity gaps, instead of widening them, and position principals to focus on what matters most — children.

All the while, many of their most gifted educators sit patiently in their classrooms, waiting to be called on but overlooked in favor of individuals outside their school doors.

Instead of focusing on external recruitment to hire talent, districts need to look within to identify those educators who aspire to the next level and to invest in the training needed to help them get there.

Not only do these efforts signal to staff they are valued and respected, but they cultivate talent at a time of seemingly never-ending turnover.

For 20 years, I worked as an educator in New York City Public Schools, where aspiring leadership programs are deeply embedded. When I transitioned to a superintendent role in a small suburban district, my eyes were opened to the reality that most districts lack professional advancement programs to help educators thrive at each step in their careers. 

Because promoting and hiring leaders is a significant investment of time and resources, the team at Uniondale Union Free School District wanted to ensure our educators were happy, successful and around for a long time. And the only way to do that was to provide support at every step of the leadership ladder. To achieve our goal, we applied a three-point theory of action to professional development.

The first focuses on teacher assistants, who play a — particularly post-pandemic — as students need significant support with literacy, math and social-emotional learning. However, many of these experienced education professionals were frustrated over being relegated primarily to administrative tasks. That was a missed opportunity we couldn’t afford to waste.

Over the past three years, we’ve allocated a portion of our CARES Act funding toward a program called the Teacher Assistant Learning Lab that offers instructional sessions led by contracted staff development experts and in-district teacher leaders. Topics are tailored specifically to TAs and include classroom management, how to read individualized lesson plans, literacy instruction and effective use of small-group teaching.  

The program, which takes place over four Saturday sessions and a three-day summer institute, also helps provide a pathway for TAs to move into teaching. Since 2022, three TAs have become teachers in our district.

Creating an effective teacher-to-administrator route required us to deconstruct the traditional pipeline. Rather than focus our efforts solely on individuals ready to step into a new role, we put the call out for any educators who were thinking about administration, but unsure if it was the right fit. 

Our Aspiring Leader Program consists of an educational cohort made up of teachers from across the district who were nominated by their principals because of their leadership potential. The program is facilitated and run by Matthew Ritter, assistant superintendent of data, assessment and accountability, and focuses on understanding various leadership styles, improving school systems and facilitating change. Teachers are expected to meet with their principals regularly to develop a project for their school that impacts student learning or well-being. The last session of the program includes presentations of these projects to senior leadership staff.

One has already been hired as an assistant principal in September 2023, and having completed six months of preparation, walked in fully prepared for the challenges ahead.Last year, we had 12 participants in the program, and this year we have nine.

The program allows assistant superintendents and other senior leaders to locate the innovators in their district and provide teachers with a platform to advocate for and pursue their career goals.

Still, leadership can be lonely, with overwhelming demands and an expectation to never show weakness. After witnessing the stress our administrative staff has endured since the pandemic, we wanted to construct a districtwide network of support.

Our Administrator Development Series provides every new assistant principal, principal and dean of students with external professional coaching to ease the transition. What makes the model so successful is our commitment to confidentiality. Because their coaches are not employed by the district, participants are encouraged to be completely transparent when discussing their challenges and mistakes, knowing they won’t be shared with their supervisors. In turn, they receive objective and unbiased feedback to help them navigate a new path forward.

In addition to one-on-one coaching, administrators connect and support each other through monthly meetings to discuss problems of practice and a book discussion focused on leadership.

Our theory of action is that developing leaders will help our schools become centers of excellence and innovation, where all students will receive an education that prepares them for college and careers. This has worked well for two essential reasons. First, our school board members are supportive of our financial investment in professional development, knowing that the upfront expense of nurturing leaders internally is minimal compared with the cost of continual turnover. Second, as the program has evolved, we’ve relied on feedback from TAs, teachers and new administrators to identify learning gaps and tailor programming to their specific professional needs.

With all the talent embedded in our district, providing educators with an equitable opportunity to share their gifts has been incredibly beneficial. Our district’s chronic absenteeism rate has decreased by 5% in the last two years, and participation in Advanced Placement classes has increased by 14% in the last three years. We’re not only able to watch qualified professionals rise through the ranks, we’re able to maximize their skills to launch new initiatives that help strengthen our schools overall.

The stress, burnout and strains on teachers have compounded so significantly that students, families and educators themselves face an undeniable crisis. Educators for Excellence’s seventh annual teacher survey shows that just 19% of teachers say the profession is sustainable and only 16% would recommend it to others. Simply put, America’s education system is failing teachers and students.

While the world has evolved rapidly, the same cannot be said for the teaching profession. When I began teaching in 2007, I can vividly remember pausing after dismissing my after-school club and realizing I had been with students for the past nine hours. My day was focused solely on my classroom. I had little time to take care of personal matters, let alone collaborate with or learn from my colleagues to better our collective teaching skills. I loved my work and knew it was important, but I also knew that my students weren’t getting my best under these working conditions.

The survey results paint a picture that is eerily similar to the conditions of my school in 2007. Teachers are still asked to do too much with too little. They are rarely afforded opportunities to demonstrate the full extent of their skills or collaborate with their colleagues to increase their professional learning: Just 26% say the profession is dynamic and less than half, 46%, say it’s collaborative. This is evidenced by historically low teacher morale, with less than half expressing a commitment to staying in education for the long haul.

Piecemeal solutions have been ineffective, as evidenced by teachers’ calls for change. Instead, what’s needed is an urgent and sweeping transformation of the profession. Teachers unequivocally want something different, but they also want to — and ought to be — meaningfully engaged in designing and implementing the change that comes.

When teachers are given the opportunity to voice their opinions to those who can make meaningful change in the profession, they are clear in what they want to see. First, teachers want more collaboration: 63% report wanting more time to work with colleagues, making it the most popular activity out of 13 provided options, including wanting more time for grading, lesson planning, professional development or even classroom instruction. They also report wanting to learn about innovative approaches to teaching and learning: alternatives to the one-teacher, one-classroom model; how to use research-backed instructional practices; and how to incorporate emerging technologies that drive student success, such as artificial intelligence. 

How can teachers drive transformation within their own profession? Though state and national policy has a critical role to play, an often overlooked but deeply essential tool for unlocking transformation exists elsewhere, in one built by educators themselves: teachers contracts. 

Contracts serve as the guiding document of the profession, creating the structure within which teachers and students navigate teaching and learning. They are intended to be democratic documents, allowing teachers to shape the profession from within their ranks and empowering them to lead from their classrooms.

Far too often, though, they instead create rigidity and immutability that prevent school leaders and teachers from shaping their school together and evolving alongside the rest of the world. They usually codify a one-size-fits-all job description that ignores teachers’ individual skills and passions, limiting the ability of a school community to shift and meet the students’ needs through the talents of their educators. With just a third of teachers reporting being very satisfied with their union’s negotiating priorities, the moment begs reflection on how contracts can address dissatisfaction with the state of the profession and instead welcome innovative new approaches.  

Thankfully, there are shining examples where districts have seriously rethought what teacher contracts look like, designing them in a way that directly addresses educators’ strengths and needs. Take Ravenswood City School District in California, for example. There, district and union leaders worked together to develop a contract that allows issues such as class size and compensation to be renegotiated at specified times during its term. This offers a unique built-in mechanism for reflection and adjustment, giving teachers a regular opportunity to build a profession that supports them and their students’ ever-changing strengths and needs. The contract also provided for salary increases and an innovative career ladder designed to incentivize and reward exceptional performance. Ravenswood’s new approach was tested through a soft launch and pilot year with built-in opportunities for renegotiation, allowing teachers to get a feel for the changes and the ability to make final revisions.

To fundamentally redesign the role of the teacher, creating modern classrooms ready to better serve students and truly appreciate educators, contracts must be modified to reflect the collaborative, dynamic and sustainable profession teachers are asking for.

Right now, starting with Teacher Appreciation Month and continuing far beyond, is the time to ignite a national conversation around the crisis in K-12 public education. It is time to elevate the voices and power of teachers and to deliver upon a fundamental shift in the education structure. Voices from the Classroom shares the shifts teachers would like to see. It’s time to listen. 

As the nation faces a teacher shortage that has reached an — with at least — why not tap into a talented pool of educators who could help close that gap? The Mississippi Department of Education created a to do just that, and the results are encouraging. Students assigned to teaching candidates participating in the pilot performed just as well on average as peers taught by traditionally certified teachers on state standardized tests, and even outperformed them in math.  

A few years ago, the department asked district leaders and principals how it could help them address teacher vacancies. School leaders lamented that they had outstanding paraprofessionals and other staffers who wanted to be teachers, wanted to continue to live and work in their communities and had fulfilled every prerequisite to becoming a teacher except the licensure test. If only there were a way for these educator candidates to demonstrate their subject matter knowledge and pedagogy in a performance-based manner. If only there were an alternative pathway to get them into teaching positions. 

The department responded by launching the three-year pilot in fall 2019. It was designed for school employees who had a bachelor’s degree and classroom experience as a long-term substitute, paraprofessional or emergency-licensed teacher. Nominated by their principals, 126 staff members from eight school districts participated, serving as teachers on a special, non-renewable license established specifically for the pilot. The program utilized performance-based measures to determine candidates’ readiness for licensure, including their students’ achievement and growth on standardized tests such as the Mississippi Academic Assessment Program.

The department partnered with , to conduct an external evaluation of the pilot. Laski examined how the candidates’ students performed on state standardized tests compared with students of traditionally certified teachers selected at the outset of the pilot; students of teachers in other classrooms in the same school, grade and subject; and students of teachers holding emergency licenses. The was designed so observed differences in test scores between pilot candidates and teachers in the first and second groups could be attributed to the pilot candidates themselves, not simply to differences in student assignment. The third group was included because, if not for the pilot program, most of these vacancies would be filled with emergency-certified teachers. 

When looking at average scores across all standardized test subjects, students assigned to pilot group candidates performed just as well on state standardized tests as those taught by educators in each comparison group. And, in both the 2020-21 and 2021-22 school years, students assigned to pilot candidates scored roughly 0.2 standard deviations higher on the state’s standardized math tests than peers in the same grade and subject in their school. This translates to roughly six months of learning — a significant and impressive increase. Additionally, and importantly, the research found that the pilot candidates were more likely to continue teaching in their district in subsequent years than teachers in comparison groups.

In November 2023, buoyed by these results and positive stakeholder feedback, the Mississippi State Board of Education approved the department’s recommendation to officially create a . This new pathway will initially be available to candidates teaching a state-tested subject in grades 5 through 8 so the department can continue to examine student academic growth data.

As policymakers and state, district and school leaders explore ways to address teacher shortages, they should take note of Mississippi’s willingness to try something new and its methodical, phased approach. After all, the current reliance on licensure testing alone isn’t cutting it. Students — and schools — would be better served by licensure pathways based on an individual’s demonstrated ability to help students learn. The country has an enormous opportunity to tap a talented pipeline of educators who are being kept out of the classroom. What are we waiting for? 

This is the context in which I’ve been thinking about the , a measure placed on the November ballot that would high schools to offer, and students to take, a semester-long personal finance course. 

Of course, I’m in favor of increased financial literacy. Many Americans lack such skills, and it leaves them at a serious disadvantage. It’s important to understand things like how to save for retirement (many people ), how to pay taxes (many people ) and how to avoid predatory lenders (many people fall victim to and credit card companies). High school may even be a good place to teach such skills — there is some decent that financial literacy can improve personal finance , like saving.

But I’ll be voting against the ballot initiative. There are several reasons why I oppose it, related to the idea of mandating curriculum via ballot measure in general and to this specific initiative in particular. 

The primary general reason I oppose this initiative is that it sets a terrible precedent. While we might all like financial literacy, it’s not hard to imagine future ballot initiatives that try to change curriculum in ways we might not like. Referendums could try to strip race- and LGBT-related content from the curriculum, mandate abstinence-focused sex education or ban environmental content in science classes. Education policy is already too much like a pendulum, giving educators whiplash with constantly shifting demands. The last thing we need is to pile on new mandates via popular vote — and ballot measures in particular are notoriously difficult to undo.

Another general reason I oppose this initiative is that California already has paths for education policymaking that are subject to electoral accountability, and those elected folks should be allowed to do their jobs. There’s the governor and the state legislature, plus the state board of education and more than 1,000 local school boards on top of that. If voters want their government officials to do something about a curriculum issue, they can lobby for change or vote them out of office. The legislature has indeed already been in this area, with new curriculum requirements in ethnic studies and computer science and a financial literacy proposal very much like one on the ballot.

Beyond that, legislators, boards and executives in state government are much better positioned to pass rules that make sense in the context of existing education policies. In this case, for instance, California high schoolers , and that course covers many of the same topics as the new proposed mandate. Why not simply sharpen the list of subjects that need to be included in the economics course, rather than layering another partially duplicative requirement on top? The California Department of Education can also work to ensure that appropriate supports are provided to teachers — especially high-quality curricular materials that align with the new expectations — so financial literacy classes don’t become just another complicated-to-understand, unfunded burden on educators.

As for the specifics, I’m not opposed to teaching students about financial literacy, but it’s important to consider the tradeoffs in terms of what will be replaced. With in math and English Language Arts and widespread disengagement from school, I am worried about new course requirements that would distract from the educational core. 

And while financial literacy is great, it is no substitute for more direct actions the government can take to help people make better and easier decisions. We can teach children about doing their taxes, but we can also increase that saves taxpayers from needless fees from for-profit tax-preparation companies. We can coach children in how to manage checking and savings accounts, but we can also ban or sharply cap overdraft or ATM fees. We can teach young people the importance of early retirement, but we can also create safer and more generous retirement options that . 

If I’m feeling bored, the next time I get in my Lyft, I’ll bring up education policy, as usual. But I’ll tell the driver to oppose the financial literacy ballot initiative and leave the education policymaking to the policymakers. Or maybe I’ll do what my husband does when he doesn’t want to talk to his drivers and just tell them I do HVAC repair while I put in my headphones.

For years now, it’s been conventional wisdom that the legacy of Brown is, at best, complicated and possibly even an outright failure. On the one hand, it ended the evil practice of sorting kids into schools by race. By citing the Constitution in seeking to end this once-common policy, the justices reimagined the American social contract and marked a hugely important milestone for the country. On the other hand, despite optimistic predictions, the public schools .

Read now, and you can see that the contradiction was there right from the beginning. The court lamented the impact that racially isolated schools can have on children of color, but the ruling itself didn’t outlaw racial imbalances. It simply made it illegal to assign kids to school based on their race. In later cases, the court explicitly declined to outlaw the racial imbalances that arise indirectly from policies that do not mention race.

This was the right call. Had the court done so, school districts would have been empowered to engage in social engineering on a revolutionary scale. Kids would have been reassigned to schools with the singular goal of eliminating any racial disparities in enrollment, leading districts to ignore all the other factors that might determine which school is the best fit for which child: size of the school, convenience of location, values, curricular focus, pedagogical approach, etc. This would have been a disaster for the country, and low-income kids of all races would have become pawns in a radical social experiment.

However, by defining the constitutional violation so narrowly, the court limited its jurisdiction to those districts that had a history of explicit racial segregation. Only they would be forced to end racial imbalances in their schools. And even in these cases, the courts’ scrutiny would end as soon as a district was found to have atoned for the sins of its past.

In effect, the court boxed itself into a corner that keeps getting smaller. Even as districts have stricken any mention of race from their school assignment policies, racial divisions have persisted or even worsened. Why? Because children are primarily assigned to schools based on their address, and American cities are largely divided along lines of race and income level, even within the same neighborhood. So schools come to mirror those imbalances. What’s more, the bundling of housing and education has driven up the cost of homes near elite, coveted public schools, further exacerbating these longstanding inequalities.

Today, Linda Brown, the little girl who gave her name to the landmark 1954 case, wouldn’t be turned away from a public school because of her race. Instead, she’d likely be rejected because of her address. I fear that’s no great improvement.

Take a look at elite, coveted public schools across the country, like Lincoln Elementary in Chicago. Or Mary Lin Elementary in Atlanta. Or Mount Washington Elementary in Los Angeles. The attendance zones of such schools often mirror of their neighborhoods from the New Deal era. In effect, the zones are doing the same work that redlining did back in the 1930s and 1940s, boxing out low-income families of all races. Call it .

The courts have decided that they are powerless to deal with these issues, even though these policies violate the clear language of Chief Justice Earl Warren’s 1954 opinion, which declared that public schools “must be made available to all on equal terms.” This is the forgotten promise of Brown.

My organization, Available to All, has just released a 50-state report titled “.” Looking at the laws that govern public school admissions, our report found that American families have very weak legal protections governing access to public schools. Legal discrimination based on geography or income is common, while neutral enrollment policies like lotteries are required only in rare cases, for example in charter school admissions. 

This leaves schools free to use a home address or family income level to turn a child away. Lack of oversight means school staff can and admit one family over another. Finally, the laws are riddled with inconsistencies and loopholes, meaning parents have to navigate a system in which the rules vary from school to school. Some public schools are required to have lotteries; others are not. Some are required to use exclusionary school zones to turn kids away; others are forbidden to do so.

We call on policymakers and the courts to bring much-needed oversight to public school enrollment. That means providing procedural protections for American families applying to public schools, including a right to apply to any public school, regardless of their address, and an appeals process for challenging schools that deny a child enrollment. State law should require schools to collect and publish data like acceptance and denial rates. And — perhaps most importantly — there need to be legal reforms that reduce the importance of exclusionary maps, by, for example, requiring that public schools reserve 15% of their seats for children who live outside their zone or district.

It’s time to take action and finally, after 70 years, fulfill the promise that Brown made.

Jametrice Powell McAdams, a parent of a charter school student from Hueytown, Alabama, says, “Raising my voice for all charter schools starts with me raising my voice for my son’s charter school. Raising my voice means standing up for my son’s future. Raising my voice means being an active fighter against the school-to prison-pipeline statistics. Raising my voice means my son gets a fair shot at a quality education.”

Julia Rivera-Tapia, charter school parent and administrator from Las Cruces, New Mexico, says, “Advocating for charter schools has become one of the most important responsibilities I have. I believe that every family deserves the freedom to choose the best school for their children, and charter schools offer that option. As a parent myself, I have seen the transformative effect that charter schools can have on children’s academic and personal growth. My three children have been studying in charter schools since the beginning of their academic journey, and I have personally witnessed the positive impact it has had on their lives, enabling them to achieve great success in their studies while retaining their bilingualism and becoming amazing individuals.”

“Raising my voice for charter schools means making sure all families have a choice to send their students to a school that best represents them. When I raise my voice for charter schools, I am doing so for our community and our students, who deserve the opportunities we provide and the ability to navigate and make informed choices about their child’s future. More people need to be aware of the power of community and culturally grounded education,” says Zak Domingello, executive director at Ricardo Flores Magon Academy in Denver.

Former Washington State lawmaker Eric Pettigrew says, “As a member of our state House, I became an advocate for charter public schools — which I believe provide a great complement to traditional public schools, especially for students of color. This past legislative session, as our lawmakers considered what policies to advance, I continued to advocate for these unique public schools and urged my former colleagues to ensure that all students across Washington state have access to a public school that meets their needs.”

Cheryl Stahle, academic administrator at West Virginia Virtual Academy in Parkersburg, says, “My ‘why’ as an advocate for charter schools is deeply rooted in the belief that every child deserves the opportunity to succeed and reach their full potential. Charter schools teach children that anything is possible when they embrace the unknown without fear. I am passionate about empowering young people to shape their own destinies and showing them the unlimited possibilities that are only constrained by their imagination. Through my work in charter schools, I strive to be a quiet disrupter and leave a legacy of transformative change in the lives of students and families.”

“Public charter schools such as the Hmong American Peace Academy are transformational,” says Dr. Chris Her-Xiong, founder and executive director of the Milwaukee school. “The scholars are transformed from at-risk to ambitious, independent thinkers and prepared to succeed in college and in life. The families are transformed through the children taking strides toward success, opting out of the cycle of poverty and lack of opportunity. The communities served by the schools are transformed through shared ambitions and experiences. The cities are transformed through the proof that turnarounds are possible and that education can deliver on its promise of prosperity. To transform a life is to transform our world, and that is why I advocate for charter schools.” 

Daniyal Hussain, a high school senior at Cottonwood Classical Preparatory Academy in Albuquerque, New Mexico, says, “Something that makes me most excited about the future of public education is the aspect of student advocacy. I originally thought that because I was a high school student, no one would want to listen to what I had to say. That was far from the truth. In fact, I was able to attend recent legislative meetings where I could say what I truly thought was important. I am excited for the future where we will have more students speaking out and more people wanting to listen to students about what is truly needed for public education.”

When we raise our voices, more people hear us. That’s why we raise our voices to advocate for charter schools. We need everyone to hear us screaming from the rooftops: Every student deserves a high-quality public education.

This vision encompasses the knowledge and skills needed for success in school and the dispositions that students must have for success beyond the classroom. But despite decades of education reform efforts stemming from the 1983 publication of A Nation at Risk, numerous factors have impeded widespread innovation in schools. Striving to create meaningful learning experiences for all students, Liberty Public Schools, home to approximately 12,500 students from Liberty and Kansas City, Missouri, has taken significant steps in designing a learner-centered ecosystem. This work has evolved through local, regional and state-level collaboration, ensuring that the ideas of students, educators, policymakers and the business community are incorporated.

Strategic planning efforts have defined what it means to be learner-centered so that all children can thrive. These approaches focus on the unique abilities and interests of each student, compared with the traditional, one-size-fits-all model. Through significant community engagement and professional development across all 19 schools in the pre-K-12 system, the district developed a Graduate Profile and Vivid Vision. For over a decade, the district has been working to offer various learning experiences, such as elementary- and secondary-level microschools and the UnSchool Challenge.

Get stories like these delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for The 74 Newsletter

These are rooted in Missouri’s educational standards but designed with students at the center. EPIC elementary — EPIC stands for “Every Person Inspired to Create” — was established in 2014 as an incubator for experimenting with such innovative practices as project-based learning and then implementing them across the district. It is a school of choice — meaning a lottery-based educational option outside their traditional neighborhood elementary school that a student’s family can opt into. At the secondary level, North Nation by Design and EDGE are microschools within traditional high schools that focus on collaboration with peers and professionals, student voice and choice, content-specific seminars, problem-based learning and real-world experiences. The UnSchool Challenge, developed in an effort to rethink alternative education, incorporates reverse internships in which business and community partners mentor students both on projects they are passionate about and areas they desire to pursue beyond high school, whether in the workplace, college or the armed services.

With the support of the community and in collaboration with other innovative districts, Liberty Public Schools has created a learning network that extends beyond its boundaries, allowing for exchanging ideas and best practices. Organizations like Education Reimagined reaffirmed our aim to transition from traditional approaches. Acceptance into Digital Promise’s League of Innovative Schools expanded our partnership with like-minded leaders in innovative districts nationwide to learn from one another. The district’s shift in culture and a growing desire to collaborate across the region resulted in a Business to Education (B2E) partnership with area Chambers of Commerce, civic organizations, philanthropic foundations and higher-education partners to expand real-world learning experiences for all students.

One of its key partnerships has been with area districts that are part of the Kansas City area Real World Learning (RWL) initiative. The network is a collaboration of area Missouri and Kansas school districts that connects students with business, industry and higher education to provide experiences that prepare them for success beyond graduation. Through internships, dual-credit classes, industry-recognized credentials, client-connected projects and entrepreneurial experiences, students develop the knowledge and skills needed to excel in college or the workplace.

In Missouri, the State Board of Education and Department of Elementary and Secondary Education are working to redesign traditional approaches to assessment and accreditation. Creating the Success Ready Students Network and establishing Innovation Zones has laid the groundwork for personalized learning that aligns with the Aurora Institute’s definition of competency-based education. By emphasizing the importance of ensuring that students graduate with at least one market-value asset, Missouri is designing a more personalized and effective approach to education.

As the state faces changes in leadership and governance, it must remain committed to innovation and personalized learning experiences for students. By building upon the successes of the past and embracing new approaches to assessment and accreditation, Missouri can create the learning ecosystems that students need and deserve.

The Liberty Public Schools’s learning ecosystem exemplifies what is possible when educators, policymakers and the community unite to prioritize student success and create a learner-centered approach to education. By continuing to innovate and collaborate, districts in Missouri and across the country can work to scale innovation that truly meets the needs of all learners.

Not many make it all the way through to graduation. And for those who do, even with a degree, entering the workforce can be equally difficult.

If they come from a family that struggles to make it from one paycheck to the next, they’ll feel pressure to contribute right away, which may lead them to accept jobs below the education level they worked so hard to attain. First-generation graduates are 8% more likely to take a job that their bachelor’s degrees.

They need help, clearly. That’s why my organization, Big Brothers Big Sisters of New York City, has been running a College and Career Success Program for about five years. Some 600 students have participated in that time, and around 350 undergraduates — all of whom are former Littles in our other programs — are in this project now. The majority attend the State University of New York or City University of New York, but participants are enrolled at about 75 schools across the country. Most are in bachelor’s degree programs, but we support students at community colleges as well.

The idea is simple: Littles have the opportunity to opt into our College and Career Success Program while they are in high school. We help them identify colleges as juniors and apply, with the support of a counselor. After graduation, they’re able to formally join the program, which guarantees them support through college and into their first career job. They then connect with a mentor, or Big, who checks in on the students throughout their undergraduate years and ensures they have the support, guidance and resources they need to graduate. It is the role of the Bigs to explain their own journey and the help they accessed along the way. This is important because many students feel they have to do it on their own and that asking for help is a sign of weakness or failure. But in reality, no one succeeds alone.

Students and mentors have a monthly check-in guide that brings structure to their conversations around college persistence and success. These check-ins have themes that shift each semester, covering everything from navigating campus life to laying the foundation for success after graduation. They include understanding and accessing college life and resources; getting engaged on campus in ways that align with interests and potential career aspirations; identifying a peer group that can support overall college and career goals; and identifying opportunities on campus that can introduce a potential career path and bolster a resume. 

During the first two years of college, these check-in guides are meant to help students stay on track to graduate in a major they are interested in. Right now, it’s working for 82% of our college students.

The conversation shifts starting in the third year toward career exploration and access. We leverage corporate partners to offer what we call Career Pathways programming, which pairs college students with a mentor in an industry they are interested in. Career Pathways are done in cohorts with 15 students and 15 employees from a company or professional organization. They meet weekly for 10 sessions, where students learn about the different careers that exist in a particular industry.

Students have the chance to identify a career and then map out with their mentor actions they can take in college to build their resumes. They will also participate in informational interviews with someone who has the job they want and have an opportunity to connect with the entire cohort of mentors to build their professional network. We also ask mentors to share their professional networks and opportunities with the students.

It’s still early, but results are promising. We had our first graduating class last year, and 80% of participants left the program with a career job or internship. If those results continue, scholars in our program will make it to the finish line and be positioned well for the life that starts beyond it.Most professionals know that embarking on a path to career success takes more than just a degree. It also needs the helping hands and guidance of a network that can open doors that students might otherwise not have access to. The norms of campus life and college resources are unknown to most first-generation students, as is the concept and importance of networking. We hope this program helps level the playing field for these young people.

Those last three examples offer a glimpse into the nearly 300 career and technical programs available to Rhode Island high school students, a 30% increase since 2019.

These aren’t the CTE programs of the past, remnants of an outdated track for at-risk students whom traditional high schools didn’t serve well. Historically, CTE failed to help students get to and through college or on a path toward future-ready careers and economic stability. In Rhode Island, we’re changing that reality and hope to serve as a model for others.

Today, students in our CTE programs take three or more courses that help them earn industry- credentials on top of other rigorous academic classes we expect all high schoolers to take, including four years of college-ready math. Additionally, many take free college courses while still in high school and enroll in Advanced Placement classes. Rhode Island has the for students earning a passing score of 3 or higher on AP tests, and many of them participate in CTE programs.

Improving outcomes for students is critical as the nation recovers from the pandemic’s disruption to education. Student achievement took a huge hit, as seen on the and other measures. And that will have a lasting impact on students’ earnings and other outcomes, unless policymakers come up with innovative recovery strategies.

In Rhode Island, we’ve grown and strengthened career and technical programs following conversations with students that revealed many felt a disconnect between what they wanted for their futures and the opportunities schools prepared them for. Students are much more engaged when they see their learning experiences as purposeful, and engagement is especially critical now, amid the nation’s

We also sat down with employers to improve the quality of our CTE offerings. We redesigned learning standards for each of these programs to ensure they helped students develop the knowledge and skills employers say are needed. And we’ve formed partnerships with businesses that have led to real opportunities for young people. For example, General Dynamics Electric Boat, which builds submarines essential to national security, hosts annual “signing days.” This year, nearly 100 Providence Public Schools seniors who were either enrolled in a CTE program or expressed interest in a career in the trades were offered full-time jobs once they graduate, with starting salaries around $60,000.

I also love hearing individual stories about students, like Macey Nenna, forging their own path.  She received her emergency medical technician certification while attending Westerly High School and is now working toward her nursing degree at Rhode Island College. Since she earned college credit while in high school and can make money as an EMT, she’s in a vastly better financial position than most college students. And her twin brother, Michael — who participated in a construction CTE program at Westerly High School and interned with a civil engineer — is studying engineering at the University of Rhode Island and runs his own landscaping business.

We’re so committed to making opportunities like these available to all students that we allow students to attend CTE programs outside their home school or district if a similar program isn’t available there. Students can attend a school that has a CTE program they’re interested in, regardless of their zip code or family background. Furthermore, schools work hard to improve existing programs and build new ones when demand is there.

We’ve also made it a priority to ensure our programs are inclusive of differently abled students, through targeted grant funding that provides CTEnteachers in every district who are trained to meet the needs of students with learning differences and individualized education plans. The training has included coaching, guidance on modifying instruction and assignments, and instruction in making learning experiences and workspaces accessible.

I’m the proud mom of a differently abled high schooler. It’s great to know schools in Rhode Island are not placing unnecessary barriers on his, or any other student’s, opportunity to learn and thrive.

Parents and educators want all students to have the kind of educational experiences that ignite big dreams and build bright futures. CTE programs like the ones we’re offering in Rhode Island can help serve those goals by being centered on student interests and employer needs, are rooted in academic rigor and are forward-looking.

Edwin Locke and Gary Latham are two scholars who’ve spent nearly 50 years studying goal setting. In the , they advise organizations to set goals that are meaningful and “difficult but attainable.”

One meaningful purpose of schooling has been to prepare students for college and careers. Georgetown University project that by 2031, 72% of jobs in the United States will require at least some college, while 55% will seek applicants with an associate degree or more. This is the reverse of the educational requirements of 40 years ago, when 70% of jobs required a high school diploma or less.

New York’s Board of Regents has made in the last decade, but there’s a general sense they remain aligned with college readiness expectations. State tests give parents and teachers a sense of whether students, all the way down to elementary school, are on track to being college-and career-ready.

With this system in place, it makes sense for New York City’s achievement goals to align with the proportion of students who will eventually need to be prepared to succeed in college over the next decade. In other words, the K-12 and higher education goals should match: Having 72% of K-12 students reading and writing proficiently, and a similar number on track to complete some college, is a meaningful goal for school leaders, teachers and parents.

One advantage is that this goal removes “we’re above average” as the aim, and it gives school districts a target that’s grounded in what the state’s future economy needs. It also applies the same goal for every group: low-income students, English learners, white students, etc. — all must reach 72% proficiency, the same high floor of excellence.

What might it take to get there?

Last year, just 48% of New York City third-graders could read and write proficiently. Increasing that number by 3% a year, across each grade, could have 72% of eighth-graders meeting standards by 2031 and 75% by 2032.

Principals and teachers would need to follow classes of students as they move through school, something most reporting and accountability systems don’t currently do. The trajectory would look like this for each new class:

To reach that goal, each district would have to increase literacy achievement by 3% a year, not just among third-graders, but across every grade. Three percent fits the “difficult but attainable” criterion.

Why not set a goal of 100%? Isn’t it OK to be ambitious and aim high, even if districts miss?

No Child Left Behind famously asked schools to get 100% of students proficient by 2014. managed to achieve the goal. Locke and Latham warn leaders that if a goal is set at a level no one can reach, it eventually undermines individual motivation and effort. People in an organization can easily become demoralized if they believe the goals set for them are unachievable. Better for district leaders to treat 72% as the floor for all and raise it once they have experience on what it takes to get there.

For districts whose communities insist on 100%, they might consider the approach the United Nations uses with its sustainability goals, which aim for . In schools, this would mean getting to no students at “below standard” and all students scoring as “partially proficient” or higher.

Preparing students to be college and career ready is , but it is one of the most important. As school leaders develop and refine their strategic plans, it’s crucial that they keep “meaningful and difficult but attainable” as the criterion.
Growing 3% a year feels do-able from classroom to classroom. It’s realistic, . If New York City is consistent in its efforts, it will be one of the nation’s leaders in literacy achievement.

It was in the nation’s capital that I first met Ramona. I was in the process of opening Elsie Whitlow Stokes Community Freedom Public Charter School, named for my mother, who was a teacher and is an inspiration to me. I alighted upon Ramona, with her considerable advocacy, activism and academic expertise, as well as strong leadership skills, as a potential board member.

Back then, Ramona was president and chief executive of the National Urban Coalition, a position she held from 1988 to 1998, presiding over many initiatives, including one promoting math and science education among children of color. Ramona and I were extremely concerned about the state of the District of Columbia’s public school system, especially how it failed children growing up in the city’s most underserved neighborhoods. Families with means were fleeing for suburban schools, leaving behind those parents and guardians who lacked such options.

The D.C. Council had just passed the 1995 School Reform Act, allowing charter schools — tuition-free public schools run independently of the city system — to open. In those days, public charter schools were a novel concept. While D.C. law had established equal per-student local funding for students at charter and traditional public schools, payments were often delayed — a cause of many sleepless nights for public charter school pioneers.

In the end, Ramona did not join our board. She did, however, become a powerful voice for equality in per-student funding and access for charters to surplus city school buildings, which came to be enshrined in D.C. law. These issues required Ramona’s persistence and hard work throughout this part of her career, as the District continued to divert public money outside the per-student funding formula to traditional schools. The city also continued to sell or lease school buildings that it couldn’t fill to private developers for condominiums.

In all these struggles, Ramona stood by our side, at one point even leading a lawsuit against the city with two public charter school co-defendants. She championed the cause of children whose families would otherwise have lacked choice, and worked with public charter schools as our enrollments grew.

Today, the charters educate nearly half of D.C.’s public school children and have raised student performance and graduation rates. This has prompted reform of the traditional system and given families choices that are a world away from what was available in the mid-1990s. Without the support of stalwarts such as Ramona, the charter reform would not have blossomed as fully.

Our pre-K-6 school, which started with a class of 35 children in 1998, now has over 500 on two campuses. Our bilingual immersion school has a mission of community service and teaches students to be global citizens, assisted by study tours to Martinique for those studying French and to Panama for those studying Spanish. We also have an International Baccalaureate program and are a feeder school for D.C. International Public Charter School, which specializes in French, Spanish and Mandarin immersion.  

All this progress owes much to Ramona’s rock-solid support for the charter movement, a commitment that clearly traces back through the influences on her life. This began with her teacher and librarian mother, the first woman to earn a doctorate in library science from Columbia University, after graduating from Atlanta’s Fisk University, a historically black college. Ramona followed in her footsteps, graduating from Fisk as well.

Foreshadowing a lifetime of activism, Ramona was taken on her first demonstration — protesting racially discriminatory hiring practices — at age 3. She was profoundly affected by attending a segregated school and by the 1954 Brown v. Board of Education Supreme Court decision integrating the nation’s public schools. At age 17, Ramona attended the 1963 March on Washington, later recalling how she had saved up her money over the summer to take the bus from Atlanta to D.C.

After graduating with her bachelor’s degree in philosophy in 1967, Ramona moved to England with her U.S. Air Force husband and continued her education by obtaining a master’s degree in philosophy from the University of East Anglia in 1969. Returning to the States, she earned her doctorate at Boston University with a dissertation making the case that famed scholar and civil rights activist W.E.B. Du Bois should be considered a philosopher as well as an economist and historian.

Ramona took Du Bois’s activist-academic tradition into her professional life, teaching at Emerson College and establishing the nation’s first African-American studies department, at Northeastern University, in 1973. However, it was after moving to Washington, D.C. to begin a career at the National Urban Coalition that activism became the focus of her professional life. Other roles included executive director of the Congressional Black Caucus Foundation and President Bill Clinton’s appointee to the Presidential Board on Historically Black Colleges and Universities.  She was CEO and president of the coalition when I met her.

It was while leading the coalition that Ramona was instrumental in coining the term “African-American” in 1988. And it was in her work as executive director of the D.C. Association of Chartered Public Schools that she helped shape the educational landscape that we know in the District today.

Ramona liked to quote Du Bois’s prescient prediction that “the problem of the 20th century is the problem of the color line,” adding, “It’s up to us to be sure that’s not the problem of the 21st century.”  

Inspired by Ramona’s legacy of fighting for social justice, our school has created the Founder’s Award for Excellence and Community Service. The first of these will be awarded to Ramona posthumously at this year’s graduation ceremony.

Every child must be educated about the environment and climate change, not only in science classes, but as a subject integrated throughout all classrooms — be it reading a short story on wildfires in an English class, calculating fossil fuel emissions in math or creating stunning posters and imagery about the state of the planet’s plastic crisis in art. Education inspires curiosity and fires up imaginations.

The power of art was recently brought vividly to life with the , which saw the artwork of two students shine — Luke Pohl Bogdan, from Maryland, who won the 5-to-17 age group with an entry titled Sparring Earth, and Teague Smith, from Idaho, who was the 18+ age group winner with a Plastic Trash Shark.

For both students, taking part in the competition was a way of speaking up about an issue they care about while embracing a subject they love — in this case, art.

“It made me really proud to win the poster competition, as this is the start of my artistic journey,” said Luke. “Plastics are destroying Earth and harming animals. We must act before Earth becomes a big waste pile. I like to draw action cartoons, and we need action to save Earth from plastics.”

For Teague it was the seas that he specifically wanted to focus on. ”I chose to spotlight the oceans in my poster because they’re disproportionately affected by plastic pollution,” Teague explained. “Plastics present a significant threat to our planet’s ecosystems, emphasizing the urgent need for action.”

The competition exposed the students to three important aspects of climate education that EarthDay.org presented at the in Denver on March 20 and will be a key part of a released April 8.

First, it gave them an outlet for expressing their concerns about the climate, which is an important way for them to deal with their anxiety about the very real and documented climate crisis. Second, it reinforced , which trains them to make the right choices for the planet by using less energy and resources and being much more mindful of pollution and land and water degradation. And third, it highlighted the skills and enthusiasm young people will need to fill critical jobs in a green economy — increasingly referred to as the green-collar workforce.

Dennis Nolasco, a member of EarthDay.org’s education team, helped ease his students’ climate anxiety when he was a teacher in California and wildfires devastated the landscape. Realizing that climate change is not something far off in the future, but here and now, he designed a unit for his eighth-grade English class around climate change, and they were fascinated by it. 

He asked them to read a series of short stories about other extreme weather events and then challenged them to write their own about what they had just experienced with the wildfires. They then read their stories out in class, and he led a discussion about how these made them feel and what they revealed about the changing climate.

“I was slightly amazed to see how much information they soaked up from local news as we began discussing the causes of the fires,” Nolasco said. “Most importantly, the students asked  — will the fires be back? I learned that the truth is powerful. Those students benefited from having the time and space to understand the world around them.”

Lessons like these also counter misinformation about climate change. The science is in — it is real. Teaching that is critical. To further help promote the cause of climate education, our organization has just released a as a call to action for every state to assess where it is right now and where it needs to get to in terms of climate education. Clicking on each state produces a list of what is taught about the climate and what specific issues that state is facing. It also suggests whom people can write to if they want to press for climate education as a mandated topic at state level.

“One of the things we realized after visiting a lot of schools locally, in Virginia and Maryland, is that parents, teachers and students really wanted to know what their own home state was teaching on climate education and then compare it to what other states were teaching — or even if they were teaching it at all,” said Emily Walker, an EarthDay.Org education coordinator.

At the college level, the organization is working with student groups to help them advocate for environmental causes on their own campuses, with plans to roll out teach-ins throughout April. 

With Earth Day on April 22, there’s never been a better time to advocate for teaching the next generation about the climate crisis and giving them the tools they will need to cope with it. Climate education can play a critically important role in saving the planet.

But while reading scores have improved somewhat, 73% of and 78% of still score below proficient on national reading tests. And the yawning gaps between groups of students have stayed the same or even expanded.

In 2022, Black fourth-graders 69 points lower than their white peers, a gap that hasn’t budged significantly since 1998. The disparity between children poor enough to qualify for free school meals and those who are not is now 56 points, 14 points larger than in 1998. The trend for eighth grade is .

Like , D.C. has taken steps to address this reading crisis. In 2020, the D.C. Council adopted requiring measures like teacher training, and in September, a literacy recommended additional reforms.

These efforts are a good start, and the task force’s recommendations should be implemented and funded. But, like most other jurisdictions, D.C. has focused on ensuring that children receive systematic instruction in foundational skills like phonics. Important as phonics is, it’s just one ingredient in proficient reading. In addition to being able to decipher or decode words, students need to be able to comprehend text.

making this possible are background knowledge and vocabulary. If schools improve phonics instruction without also systematically building knowledge, many students will reach higher grades able to decode complex texts but unable to understand them. That explains why, when states adopt early literacy policies focused on phonics, gains on elementary school reading tests by or .

For both aspects of reading instruction — decoding and comprehension — a good curriculum is crucial. Teachers should receive training in the science related to reading, including the evidence showing that it’s vital to building students’ academic knowledge beginning in the early grades. And to help them translate their understanding into effective practice, they need a coherent curriculum that is grounded in that science. Unfortunately, most widely used literacy curricula are not, so district and school leaders need reliable guidance.

  tries to address this need by requiring that all schools adopt a “science-based reading program” beginning with the 2024-25 school year. But the law doesn’t instruct the state superintendent’s office or any other entity to identify those that are effective. In fact, it defines a “science-based” program as one that covers foundational reading skills and “comprehension strategies” — with no specific mention of the need to build knowledge.

An increasing number of states are issuing lists of approved literacy curricula that districts are either encouraged or required to choose from. Some also incentivize districts to train teachers — and, ideally, school leaders — in how to use the curricula. 

D.C. should develop its own list, relying on evaluation tools created by The Reading League, for foundational skills like phonics, and the Knowledge Matters Campaign, for knowledge-building.

One complicating factor is that the district developed its own English language arts curriculum, which states that it includes the “build[ing] of background knowledge through reading and experiences.” For example, a first-grade unit covers “the different forms of money and how it is made and earned.” From the limited material we’ve seen, it’s hard to tell whether this home-grown curriculum builds knowledge as effectively as those created by trained experts (the Knowledge Matters Campaign, for example, has identified ). The district’s curriculum also has not been subjected to rigorous review, as far as we know.

In any event, according to several reading instructors, there has been little or no training in how to use the curriculum. Nor is it clear how many schools are in fact using it.

One of us accidentally learned, from a staff member, that a district elementary school was using a curriculum called Core Knowledge Language Arts — one of those identified as effective by the Knowledge Matters Campaign. That’s good news, but how many other schools are still using curricula focused on comprehension skills? And what curricula are D.C.’s many charter schools using — if they’re using any at all? At this point, no one seems to know.

The district should at least collect and publish information on which literacy curricula are being used, as the literacy task force has recommended. If school choice is to be meaningful, parents deserve to know what curriculum a school is using. And armed with this information, officials could gain a clearer picture of what is working.

As D.C. moves forward with implementing science-of-reading reforms, it has the opportunity to provide much-needed guidance to schools in finding curricula that pair effective phonics instruction with effective knowledge-building — and to encourage professional learning grounded in the specifics of those curricula. By doing so, D.C. could narrow achievement gaps that haven’t budged since 1998 and provide a true success story that could be a model for the nation.

To solve these challenges, the state and the nation at large need a that is prepared to address the concerns of today, find solutions for tomorrow and transition the country to a more climate-conscious economy. Unfortunately, the rapidly growing clean-energy sector is bumping up against serious labor constraints, having difficulty filling jobs and ensuring that workers have the needed skills. In the next seven years, there are expected to be over  in the U.S. In 2022 alone, green job postings on LinkedIn jumped 20% — yet the pool of workers with the skills required to fill them grew by only 8.4%.

Regions like the Yampa Valley need help attracting and developing talent that can combat this worsening crisis. A leader in this initiative is Lyra, a nonprofit that seeks to reimagine education by designing and broadening climate-driven career pathways and empowering school communities to drive their own reforms. The organization does this through : innovation zones, mission accelerators and that is increasingly pertinent to solving some of the state’s most dire challenges. 

The Climatarium brings together education, industry and state and local policymakers to encourage collaboration to build climate-related education pathways and offer youth leadership and career opportunities in relevant fields. There are five in the state, including one in the Yampa Valley. The hubs have created regional partnerships

among seven colleges, 20 rural K-12 school districts and more than 40 employers and community-based organizations. They are developing and sustaining a range of green job pathways, including in energy, agriculture and outdoor tourism. 

These offerings have the potential to impact more than by creating college and career opportunities in highly in-demand fields. This, in turn, can boost the economic prosperity of rural areas of the state by creating strong talent pipelines that are attractive to industry. To expand these best practices and ensure their impact, there needs to be broader, statewide support, which is why it is so important that , the Seal of Climate Literacy Diploma Endorsement, recently passed through the House Committee on Education.

Students can earn the seal on their high school diplomas by, for example, taking Advanced Placement physical, life or earth sciences, or participating in a career education program geared toward alternative energy, like solar farms. The bill’s sponsor, Democratic state Sen. Chris Hanson, said the seal would help students get skills for jobs that are expected to grow by , including installing solar panels, electric chargers or heating and cooling systems. The seal would also prepare students for college by signaling their understanding of climate-related issues to admissions officers and could even result in college credit. 

The bill is also endorsed by Superintendent Kirk Henwood of the South Routt School District, which is located in the Yampa Valley. Henwood that, “having a seal of climate literacy furthers our efforts to ensure that our high school graduates have the verified skills and knowledge needed to enter the workforce and postsecondary education opportunities.” He added, “understanding the climate and environment is critical to sustain a rural way of life where land and water are literally the building blocks of our world.”

While the bill is waiting for final passage, it shows that progress is being made to prepare Colorado’s workforce for the energy-related jobs of today and tomorrow. It’s a win for the state — and, said Lyra CEO and founder Mary Seawell, other states are interested in replicating both the Seal of Climate Literacy and place-based approaches to climate education.

Other state and federal leaders can and should commit to this work – supporting a 21^st century education system that is more responsive to labor market demands, the community and the . This includes expanding high-quality opportunities in career and technical education, youth apprenticeships, STEM programs and other pathways so young people are prepared for careers across the energy sector. This work is critical to transforming students’ lives, ensuring that communities stay economically vital and guaranteeing that places like the Yampa Valley never stop being breathtaking.

Disclosure: Walton Family Foundation and the City Fund provide financial support to the Progressive Policy Institute and The 74.

Through it all, we believe this post-COVID, tech-accelerated world needs a pragmatic approach to accountability, one that measures conventional academic attainment and adds critical social-emotional and career skills to the mix. Most importantly, this approach must honor the unique strengths and opportunities each community faces and ensure all its voices are heard, including students, families, teachers, administrators, and business and local leaders.

We call this approach Accountability Plus. 

Over the last three years, our organization, , has partnered with over 150 schools and districts across the United States to rethink what success means for their students. We help each district and its community — the school board, business leaders, families, staff and students — generate a unique vision for success and systems for tracking, celebrating and communicating what students have achieved.

These locally defined accountability models expand the definition of success to emphasize real-world skills like problem solving, collaboration and communication, as well as whole-child outcomes like physical, mental,and emotional well-being, while maintaining an emphasis on growth in math, reading and other academic subjects. School systems then track student progress through like performance tasks and portfolios, not just standardized tests.

Logan County Schools in Kentucky is a great example of what is possible when both state and district policies are oriented to the whole child and measure what matters. As a member of the the district has been designing and testing a local accountability model that focuses on measuring four “” — student performance, growth, readiness and well-being — through state testing, classroom observation and school climate survey data.

This model doesn’t ignore standardized test scores, but uses them as one of multiple measures. It is powerful to see communities determine what matters most and hold themselves accountable to getting there using a process that tells a more complete story.

Another example involves the Hawai’i State Public Charter School Commission. Learner-Centered Collaborative and several other consulting organizations have been engaged with a network of Hawai’ian-focused charter schools created to integrate Hawai’ian culture, language and identity.

Our engagement with these schools began with a review of their vision, mission and values to ensure clarity of purpose. From there, we helped them develop one-page that are specific to each school. Each provides a high-level overview of desired success metrics (e.g. 70% of students participate in school-provide leadership opportunities) as well as where the data will be sourced from (e.g. student surveys) and how well the school is is attaining specific outcomes (e.g. 55% of students participated in first semester).

In Hawai’i, the metrics also include a strong cultural identity,  social-emotional skills such as collaboration and adaptability, and academic measures like reading and math.

We are now creating dashboards to help educators visualize their schools’ results and brainstorm ways to improve them. 

The key is that they are not seeing tests as the sole focus of their efforts. Instead, they are emphasizing ongoing assessment and continuous improvement based on the data collected through their expanded set of metrics. This is a model that can be adapted for any community.

We and our partners are not the only ones answering the call for a pragmatic approach to accountability. Action is being taken in communities across the country where there is a clear dissatisfaction with the industrial-era model of education and its legacy accountability system. 

Getting started takes only belief in two things: that every school has the ability to listen to students and the broader community, and that it can redefine success and establish shared goals for accountability around metrics that matter.

In a recent letter, Secretary of Education Miguel Cardona invited states to apply for funding for innovative, flexible accountability models. Conditions are ripe for educators, policymakers and stakeholders to collaboratively define what matters most and to develop holistic models that incorporate multiple measures of success. These honor and celebrate the many ways in which people are smart, rather than just ranking and sorting them based on narrow measures. 

It is incumbent upon everyone who has a stake in the education of young people to create new accountability models that serve the unique needs of every child. Redefining success and creating meaningful accountability frameworks can ensure that all learners know themselves, thrive in their communities and actively engage in the world as their best selves.

For a handful of minutes, the skies will darken Monday in a total solar eclipse where the sun’s rays will be completely blocked by the moon’s orbit — something Hoosiers can only view with special glasses, but more on that later.

Our sister outlet, the Kansas Reflector, compiled its own , which we’ve tweaked to fit our Hoosier audience. Our Kansas neighbors aren’t in the path of totality like Indiana but provided some great context before the big event.

Wait! There’s going to be a solar eclipse?

Get stories like these delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for The 74 Newsletter

Yes! On Monday, April 8, 2024, to be precise. Portions of the state will be completely dark for just over four minutes, as detailed by the Indiana Department of Homeland Security. While the skies will start to darken as early as 1:50 p.m., complete darkness will occur in Indianapolis between 3:06 and 3:09 before the skies lighten again at 4:23. Other parts of the state will roughly follow that same timeline but may be off by a few minutes.

What’s a solar eclipse again?

According to our : “A total solar eclipse happens when the Moon passes between the Sun and Earth, completely blocking the face of the Sun. The sky will darken as if it were dawn or dusk.”

Just imagine that you’re watching an important TV program and your beloved spouse passes in front of the set. They instantly become much less beloved.

Now, let’s equate your TV set with the sun and your spouse with the moon. It’s just like that.

Who will get to see it?

All of Indiana will experience some portion of the eclipse but a portion of the state will be in the “Path of Totality,” where the moon will completely block the sun. This band, stretching from Bluffton to Evansville, has attracted for the rare event.

How rare? While partial solar eclipses happen two or three times each year somewhere on earth — and there are roughly two total solar eclipses every three years — Indiana won’t experience another until .

Any advice on watching it?

Don’t look at the eclipse with your naked eyes. Let me repeat that, in italics: Don’t look at the eclipse with your naked eyes.

The sun is usually so bright that we can’t physically stand to look at it. An eclipse cuts down on the brightness, but doesn’t stop solar radiation that can cause . This happens to people. It literally scars their retinas. They see a phantom image of the sun for the rest of their lives.

But I can still sneak a peek, right?

Please don’t do that. If you don’t believe me, listen to Shannon Schmoll, the director of the Abrams Planetarium at Michigan State University.

“We don’t ever, ever want to look directly at the sun. It will harm our eyes and can cause permanent damage,” she told journalists during a . “So to look at this, you need to use either eclipse glasses or some sort of eclipse viewers.”

So where do I find those solar viewers?

The American Astronomical Society of reputable manufacturers and retailers. For the record, they do not recommend going to your prominent online retailer of choice and searching for “cheap eclipse glasses.” You can do better. For goodness’ sake, think of your eyes.

Some public libraries are distributing glasses and the Department of Natural Resources has .

Could I just use a camera instead?

Nope. An unfiltered look at the eclipse will leave your fancy digital camera . You need a specialized to take photos of the event with a standalone or phone camera.

Okay, okay. Let’s get glasses and filters aplenty. But does this mean the world is about to end?

No. Millennia of eclipses have come and gone, and , for better or worse.

People are handling this totally normally and rationally online, right?

Haha. Of course they aren’t!

A bonkers story from online technology website some of the wilder claims circulating online. Among them: The eclipse will bring down electrical grids and cellphone service, it will disrupt the “” in which we all live, and assorted Biblical nonsense.

Will animals act all weird?

Take a read through the . In short, we know that birds and insects quiet down during an eclipse, but they don’t freak out or anything.

“The eclipse is strong enough to suppress that daytime diurnal activity — of day-flying insects and birds going to roost — but it’s not strong enough to initiate the kind of typical nocturnal behaviors we see at sunset,” said Andrew Farnsworth of the Center for Avian Population Studies at the Cornell University Lab of Ornithology.

For their part, the Indiana Department of Natural Resources if they have trouble with leashes but note that animals, generally, don’t look directly at the sun.

What is the state government doing?

In anticipation, Gov. Eric Holcomb has  letting Indiana call on a nationwide aid compact should the upcoming eclipse stress the state’s emergency response systems. Due to the number of people, officials expect a “widespread and significant impact” on Indiana’s “critical infrastructure systems,” including for communication, emergency response and transportation, according to the order.

Alcohol regulators are even getting in on the fun and will be able to .

If you might be driving, be prepared for potential slowdowns and traffic disruptions. Pack plenty of water, food and fuel along with chargers, maps and emergency kits. The Indiana Destination Development Corporation (IDDC) has for safe viewing.

And, perhaps our favorite thing, First Lady Janet Holcomb made ‘Path of Totality’ deviled eggs.

Any events in Indiana I should know about?

Tons! The Indianapolis Motor Speedway, for example, was selected as a National Air and Space Administration (NASA) broadcast location. Now it’s got a packed schedule  multiple astronauts, IndyCar drivers, NASA officials and Indiana Gov. Eric Holcomb. The brickyard will also host technical and family-friendly educational programming.

Speaking of the IDDC, they’ve compiled a of all the other festivities around the state.

Indiana Capital Chronicle Reporter Leslie Bonilla Muñiz contributed to this story.

is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Indiana Capital Chronicle maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Niki Kelly for questions: info@indianacapitalchronicle.com. Follow Indiana Capital Chronicle on and .

In its 2016 state-by-state, college-by-college Teacher Prep Review, the branded the reading preparation program at Rhode Island College (RIC) with an “F.”

Then, in 2023, the gave it an “A+.” A meteoric change.

The council has been assessing teacher-preparation programs nationally since 2000. Its evaluations are controversial and often dismissed as out of touch with what teacher prep programs were actually doing. Well, yes. The council has long condemned the now debunked approach to reading instruction as outright harmful, even though it dominated higher education’s prep programs for 50 years. Instead, its evaluation criteria judges programs according to the novices need to become competent reading teachers.

Get stories like these delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for The 74 Newsletter

To be fair, the University of Rhode Island got an “A.” But today is about the “A+” story. What happened in the relatively short time between “F” and “A+”?

Recently, in a conference room at RIC, I put that question to Associate Professor  (special education) and Associate Professor . (Interim Dean Carol A. Cummings and Interim Associate Dean Beth Pinheiro were also there.)

RIC’s transformation story starts slowly. Around 2009, the reading professors began refining their coursework with more science-based lessons, in effect seeding what will become fertile curricular soil. “We didn’t feel like we were jumping on a bandwagon or letting go of anything,” like Balanced Literacy, Obel-Omia said. “We were just building our competencies.”

McDermott-Fasys has of how RIC worked with various partner organizations toward “shared responsibility between general education and special education.” Together, they broke down silos that too often led to the need for “specialized language schools [which] in our area often had no seats available.” (And cost a fortune.)

Mending the division between general and special education led to the realization that a successful revamp of their reading program would hew to the needs of the dyslexic population. What works for them, works for all kids.

Together they studied a multi-tiered support system that teaches educators to chart and monitor struggling students. This framework can apply to all subjects, and problematic behavior, by sorting skills and remediation, in this case for reading, into three tiers of intensifying personalized support:

Tier I is for all kids, the general education that builds foundational skills. Tier II are intervention techniques for those showing signs of struggling. Tier III is for students whose special needs lie beyond the capacity of a regular classroom teacher, like those with serious dyslexia.

But RIC’s reading redesign folks wanted more. In 2016, they began working with the Center on their protocol.

They identified what RIC graduates should know and be able to do to support all their students, whether they had special needs or not. Then the program redesigners took a microscope to their curriculum looking for redundancies, gaps and opportunities.

Proficient reading requires many skills to come together. Glitches in any one of those skills can screw up a kid’s progress. For example, the inability to hear the distinction between the sounds that make up words will leave the kid entirely in the dust. Thus, a course of study must teach novices to:

Provide an aligned sequence of all the necessary skillsHave assessments that flag problemsBe equipped with techniques that ameliorate or resolve those problems.

The professors broke down their courses into units that could be mapped. What was actually being taught? In what order? With what intensity? The mapping laid bare previously unseen details of their curriculum. Some competencies seemed randomly spread across the four courses already designated for teaching reading.

The shocker: finding few early intervention units (Tier II). If kids are struggling with general education, what are available methods of getting the kid back on track before turning to specialists? And whose responsibility are early reading problems, the classroom teacher or special educators? The redesign team decided that responses to early red flags should be shared by both.

So they reorganized the content into four new, well-aligned courses. Two classes focus on the foundational skills. But a new, dedicated intervention course equips all teachers to help a child starting to struggle. The specialists still have their specialized training, but now they also take a general education course so everyone shares an understanding of the spectrum from general to special education.

The philosophy of the elementary department changed from “my course” to “our scope and sequence,” McDermott-Fasy proudly told me.

When Rhode Island’s 2019 passed, RIC compared its demands with the newly-aligned program. They were in superb shape. The state approved their program in 2023, the same year the council gave them the “A+”.

The ’s new document estimates that with effective instruction, over 90% of students would learn to read without needing specialist attention.

Rhode Island has about 4th graders, of whom roughly 3,300 kids were proficient in the 2023 English Language Arts state test. As new and improved teachers emerge from Rhode Island’s public prep programs, they’ll join the existing classroom teachers also learning science-backed techniques.

In the fullness of time, we could have 9,000 proficient 4th-grade readers, prepared for academic success and a better shot at thriving in their lives.

is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Rhode Island Current maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Janine L. Weisman for questions: info@rhodeislandcurrent.com. Follow Rhode Island Current on and .