A from Leanlab Education, a nonprofit research organization, examined publicly available LAUSD assessment data over several years.

found that schools using IM Math grew faster than similar schools that did not, even as math outcomes improved across LAUSD overall. The difference was equivalent to roughly three to four additional months of math learning each year. It also found that schools receiving curriculum-aligned implementation support saw math scores improve after that support began, with gains increasing over time.

What drove these results was not a single program, but an instructional vision that connected curriculum, professional learning and implementation support.

IM Math provided the instructional foundation, with lessons designed to build on one another from day to day and year to year. But adopting the curriculum was not the end of the story. The PartnershipLA worked alongside teachers and leaders in bringing that design into day-to-day practice through professional learning, planning support, coaching and classroom observations.  A coach-the-coaches model strengthened the partnership鈥檚 capacity to support schools over time.

Building on that foundation and with an investment from the Gates Foundation, the PartnershipLA and LAUSD worked together to roll out these practices across the district. LAUSD led the expansion, establishing the guidance, funding and leadership structures to bring high-quality math materials to schools systemwide, while the PartnershipLA contributed tools, lessons and coaching capacity to the district at large.

That combination mattered because teachers are the ones who bring the curriculum to life. With strong materials and aligned support, teachers guided students to reason, explain, question, practice and revise their thinking. That helped build understanding and fluency over time instead of memorizing disconnected steps. As lessons built on one another, students could connect what they learned yesterday to the work in front of them today.

Even well-designed materials lose impact when the rest of the system points in different directions. Professional learning drifts if it is not anchored to the curriculum that students use every day. Tutoring and intervention can give students more time without giving them a clearer path. None of this happens because educators or district leaders lack commitment. It happens because aligning a large system is hard, especially when leaders are being asked to show progress quickly.

Educators are already doing the hard work. The challenge for district leaders is to ensure the many supports around teachers work together in ways that are easier to sustain and more likely to reach students. If approved, California鈥檚 next round of investments will give districts a chance to turn this lesson into action.

Students who have been denied strong math instruction cannot afford further fragmentation in reform. They deserve access to grade-level mathematics that helps them see patterns, solve problems, and develop confidence in their own ability to do math. Educators deserve materials, time, and support that are all working toward the same goal.

The new findings offer a playbook, but not a shortcut: Start with a shared instructional vision, choose strong materials, align professional learning and implementation support around them and keep improving over time.

That is hard work. It is also how districts turn smart investments into lasting gains in student learning.

Disclosure: Gates Foundation provides financial support to 麻豆精品.

The abolitionist and is known for many things, but perhaps among the most significant is his views on education鈥檚 relationship to slavery. Douglass himself was in Maryland in 1818.

Douglass described in his how one of his enslavers, Mrs. Auld, began teaching him to read when he was a child. Mrs. Auld鈥檚 husband ordered her to stop giving Douglass lessons.

鈥淛ust at this point of my progress, Mr. Auld found out what was going on, and at once forbade Mrs. Auld to instruct me further, telling her, among other things, that it was unlawful, as well as unsafe, to teach a slave to read,鈥� Douglass writes. 鈥淭o use his own words, further, he said, 鈥業f you give a nigger an inch, he will take an ell. A nigger should know nothing but to obey his master.鈥� 鈥�

Congress enacted the on Jan. 31, 1865, abolishing slavery. It was not until June 19, 1865, that word of the amendment reached enslaved people in Galveston, Texas, marking the origin of the Juneteenth holiday.

The Biden administration in 2021. Today, Juneteenth commemorates the end of slavery in the U.S. But the story for formerly enslaved people continued to unfold in complex ways well after Juneteenth, including when it came to their educational journeys.

Juneteenth made clear that freedom was not just confined to someone鈥檚 physical enslavement, but mental enslavement as well, that barred enslaved people from receiving an education in Southern states.

Making learning illegal

In 1739, the took place in South Carolina. Fearing that educated slaves would go on to plot future rebellions, South Carolina passed an anti-literacy law in 1740, banning slaves from being taught how to read.

Most Southern states soon followed with between 1740 and 1834, in the hopes of preventing any further slave rebellions. These laws applied to both .

Despite these laws, still learned to read and write in the . Literacy was a .

was established in New York City in 1787. The one-room schoolhouse began with 40 students, the majority of whom had parents who were formerly enslaved. Six additional, similar schools were created with public funding by 1824.

Juneteenth and the path to freedom

story of formerly enslaved people鈥檚 , as well as white supremacists鈥� to formerly enslaved people experiencing liberation.

It also offers an important reminder that true freedom must also include the .

Formerly enslaved individuals had various responses to their newfound freedom in 1865, ranging from gratitude and joy to despair and loss.

Many formerly enslaved people decided to to reunite with family members and communities separated by slavery.

Others opted to remain where they had been enslaved, seeking to experience freedom in . In fact, of freed people remained in the South.

Regardless of their choices, the challenged the U.S. to acknowledge their liberation and welcome them as equals.

Relentlessly, they endeavored to establish themselves as free citizens within the nation. One of these newly freed people鈥檚 primary goals was to receive an education.

Learning to read, write and more

After the Civil War, newly freed people gathered in churches, homes, cellars, sheds, meetinghouses and even under shade trees in the fields where they worked the crops to learn how to read and write. They also learned basic job skills, .

had no formal training, and some of them were local Black people who were self-taught.

Other educators from the South and the North, sent by churches and aid societies.

White , including the American Missionary Association and the National Freedman鈥檚 Relief Association, sometimes funded these free schools for formerly enslaved Black people.

However, most of the money to fund these schools came from the newly freed Americans, who privately paid for their schools.

While about 90% of the were illiterate in 1865, this percentage dropped to 70% by 1880.

A journey into higher education

Newly freed Black people also began to have more options for higher education.

The first historically Black college and university, , was established in Pennsylvania in 1837, well before the Civil War. A total of four HBCUs were established by the end of the Civil War in 1865.

At this point, true liberation began, as a growing number of HBCUs offered academic freedom to Black Americans, who otherwise would have been prohibited from attending most colleges and universities.

following the Civil War, a total of 59 HBCUs had opened their doors to Black students.

In 1867, by act of Congress, Howard University was established in Washington, D.C. It provided not only basic college courses but also .

A promise that requires education

A whole new set of challenges and opportunities greeted the formerly enslaved Black Americans who sought freedom in the North. Most arrived in cities such as Chicago and New York, where they found some humanitarian support but also racial discrimination and poverty.

Their lives were constantly filled with both .

Education ranked high among the free people as a priority, as they looked to gain new skills and advance in life. They learned not only the basics in reading and math, but also job skills, citizenship and advanced learning in professional careers, such as law, medicine, pharmacy and teaching.

Ultimately, Juneteenth offered a promise of freedom 鈥� but education was necessary to make it happen.

This article is republished from under a Creative Commons license.

The heart of New York City鈥檚 initiative are the caring adults in schools who check in with students living in temporary housing, build relationships with families and help connect them to support during difficult moments.

Every public school and Department of Homeless Services shelter in NYC has access to the , a planning, case-management and interagency operations platform. It鈥檚 built to let school teams, shelters and partner organizations do the daily work of moving individual students toward promotion, graduation and postsecondary outcomes.

The success of this initiative has reinforced for me how relationships need infrastructure behind them to translate into system-wide change. That’s now at risk as the city considers cutting funding for the portal.

The Portal integrates student data from NYC Public Schools with families鈥� shelter information from DHS, helping school staff better understand how to support students living in temporary housing conditions. The ECFIK initiative builds additional features and functionality into the Portal by supporting the day-to-day work of caring adults 鈥� social workers, teachers and other school staff who volunteer to serve as the primary point of contact for a student in temporary housing. This allows these adults to document check-ins, coordinate referrals and access key information in one centralized place.

Families experiencing housing instability are often already carrying enormous burdens. The last thing they need is to repeatedly retell painful situations to different people because systems are disconnected. Having one caring adult serve as a single point of contact solves part of the problem, freeing families from having to navigate a rich but labyrinthine system of available resources across nonprofits and agencies throughout NYC. 

Technology addresses the other part of the problem. Better coordination helps preserve a family鈥檚 dignity. It allows schools and support staff to meet families with greater care and continuity, giving families the sense that people are really working together on their behalf and are coming to each interaction prepared to meet their needs. School staff cannot support students and families effectively 鈥� and thereby maintain trust and strong relationships 鈥� if critical information is fragmented across systems, buried in email attachments or dependent on staff chasing down phone numbers and updates from multiple places.

Importantly, the initiative鈥檚 integration with the Portal ensures that students鈥� needs and plans for support do not live in separate systems disconnected from the rest of the educational experience. A student needing clean laundry should rise to the same level of importance as a failed state exam, and the initiative makes that visibility happen.

Within the portal, caring adults and school staff see student support information alongside attendance patterns, academic performance and other school data, all following strict data privacy protocols and permission rules that respect students鈥� privacy and limit information to the adults who are supporting them. Having plans and outcome data living together allows schools to respond in real time instead of reacting too late and to pivot if an intervention doesn鈥檛 work. 

Caring adults all using a common platform designed with and for them also allows central program leaders to identify patterns, such as how families鈥� needs change in the last 10 days of the month or how the resources families seek differ across neighborhoods and boroughs. Instead of information living in scattered, static spreadsheets on individual computers, the data becomes a real-time tool to support deeper system-level understanding and action. 

An of the initiative鈥檚 first year found that the students involved experienced stronger academic performance and fewer mid-year transfers when compared to similar students who weren鈥檛 in the program. In elementary school that translated into a 8.8 percentage point gain in math. In surveys and focus groups, caring adults reported stronger relationships with families and a shift in school culture toward more empathy and support for students experiencing homelessness.

Beyond the data, the initiative has seen caring adults respond to needs both large and small, making life-changing impacts for their students鈥� families. One caring adult helped a family experiencing domestic violence secure relocation support after hours during a moment of crisis. Another helped a mother get haircuts for her two sons so they could return to school feeling confident. Many others have been the sole reason a student showed up to school that day: Because someone cared about them, was expecting them, was ready to listen if they needed anything. Because they felt known. 

The Portal didn’t get those boys their haircuts. It didn’t take the midnight phone call. It didn’t sit with a mother and figure out what comes next.

What the portal did was make sure that when someone was ready to do those things, they weren’t starting from zero.

That’s the part I care about. Not the software itself, but what it makes possible: that caring adults got to spend their attention on a family instead of on a spreadsheet.

That is what this initiative represents to me: technology that works behind the scenes, so the relationships front and center can hold and transform the trajectory of a family鈥檚 outcomes, one check-in at a time.

Marking the start of two weeks of intensive negotiations, the Legislature Monday with higher revenue projections than those proposed by Gov. Gavin Newsom, providing several billion dollars in additional spending for TK-12 and community colleges in 2026-27.

Several other significant issues remain unresolved. Chief among them is the $3.9 billion in education funding that Newsom would withhold until revenue projections 鈥� mainly tax receipts from taxpayers鈥� investments in AI stocks 鈥� come true. Education groups are threatening to sue over the delay.

June 15 was the constitutional deadline for legislators to pass a balanced budget or risk losing their pay for every day they鈥檙e late. They can amend the budget, as they usually do, before the next fiscal year starts on July 1, based on agreements with the governor.

In its current version, the Legislature鈥檚 budget adopted nearly all of what Newsom included in his May budget revision, with a record $127 billion for schools and community colleges. Legislators include a larger-than-required cost-of-living adjustment for most programs, $1 billion more for community schools, a $2.4 billion boost to ongoing special education funding and a $5 billion one-time block grant that districts and charter schools can spend however they want.

Barrett Snider, a founding partner of Capitol Advisors Group, a Sacramento-based school consulting firm, characterized Newsom鈥檚 budget as 鈥渁 great budget for schools,鈥� overall; most education advocates agree.

But the Legislature鈥檚 budget projects about $5 billion more in revenue than Newsom forecast just a month ago. That would translate to $2 billion more for schools and community colleges under Proposition 98, the formula that guarantees that 40% of general fund money goes to community colleges and schools. Combined with contributing $800 million less to the rainy day fund, freeing up that money for spending, the Legislature would mitigate some of the $3.9 billion that Newsom would withhold.

Here鈥檚 how the Legislature would spend most of the money:

• $700 million for districts to upgrade or add school kitchens 鈥� in line with the state鈥檚 priority that schools prepare fresh and nutritious meals. Family food pantries would be another use.
• $300 million one-time for career/technical education.
• $450 million on top of Newsom鈥檚 proposed $250 million to pay student teachers a stipend to teach in priority areas, including STEM and special education.
• $350 million more for the California newcomer鈥檚 program to assist refugees through 2032.
• $300 million more in assistance for homeless students, through 2032.

Contrary to what they have previously said, legislative leaders appear to be acquiescing to Newsom鈥檚 plan to withhold the $3.9 billion of forecasted Prop. 98 funding 鈥� only they want a clear repayment timetable. The joint Senate-Assembly budget summary says they commit 鈥渢o a reliable schedule to pay districts the $3.9 billion omitted from the May Revision.鈥�

Education groups, including the California Teachers Association and the California School Boards Association, view the withholding as a manipulation of the Prop. 98 minimum funding guarantee. They see it as a bad precedent 鈥� a tactic that has the effect of loaning money to meet the immediate expenses of other areas of the budget most affected by federal budget cuts, including Medi-Cal.

鈥淭his bill shortchanges our districts $3.9 billion they need right now, not in future budget years,鈥� said Assemblywoman Laurie Davis, R-Laguna Niguel, in voting against the budget Monday night.

Some education groups are also unhappy about another financial and structural shift suggested by the Legislature, to move all funding for the California State Preschool Program into Prop. 98.

The preschool program, which provides free preschool for 3- and 4-year-old children from families who earn up to the state median income, is provided by school districts, private nonprofits and community colleges. Currently, only the funding for school district preschools (about $2 billion) is under Prop. 98, while funding for nonprofit and community college preschools (about $800 million) comes from the general fund.

This is not a novel idea, early education experts said. Before 2011, all state preschool and childcare funding was under Prop 98. The Legislature shifted the responsibility then to lighten the financial burden on schools, which were facing massive cuts as a result of the Great Recession. Now it鈥檚 the nonProp. 98 programs that are facing the most severe financial pressure, precluding additional funding for early education.

The proposal drew ire from the school boards association, which said it would hurt funding for TK-12 graders over time.

鈥淭he result would be simple and devastating: the same funding guarantee would be stretched across more students and programs, reducing per-pupil resources for school districts and county offices of education,鈥� reads the statement from CSBA. 鈥淓arly learning is essential and deserves strong, stable and dedicated funding. No one disputes that. Yet, Sacramento cannot fund one essential priority by weakening another.鈥�

Scott Moore, the CEO of Kidango, one of the largest providers of state-subsidized preschools, said that, as an educational program, preschool deserves to be under Prop. 98.

鈥淚t鈥檚 a protected funding source that ensures that to the fullest extent possible, these programs get funded. It shouldn鈥檛 matter who the provider of state preschool is鈥� 鈥� whether a district or a nonprofit, Moore said. 鈥淲hat matters is the program itself.鈥� 

The Legislature is also proposing to add about $270 million in funding to pay for subsidized childcare for 22,770 additional children from low-income families. That funding would remain in the general fund.

With the heavily Democratic Legislature behind it, the Senate approved the budget bill 28 to 9, with the Assembly following late Monday, after three hours of discussion, by a margin of 59 to 18.

This story was originally published by . Sign up for their .

Three top Senate Democrats are accusing the Trump administration and Republicans of 鈥渢aking a wrecking ball鈥� to childcare programs, highlighting the issue in a midterm year where many Democrats are running on inflation and the high cost of living.

Childcare costs have skyrocketed in recent decades, outpacing inflation. There鈥檚 bipartisan consensus on the crisis: an found that 76 percent of Americans, including over 70 percent of independents and Republicans, view the cost of childcare as 鈥渁 major problem.鈥� 

Democrats have long highlighted the issue, but many Republican politicians also agree there鈥檚 a problem 鈥� if not on the solutions to it. Republicans, who largely oppose major new spending on social programs, control the White House and both chambers of Congress, meaning that Democratic-controlled states and cities like New York City and New Mexico have been taking the lead on major investments aimed at making childcare more accessible. 

Now, in a new report, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer and two fellow Senate Democrats are accusing the GOP of having 鈥渋nflamed the childcare crisis.鈥� 

The report on childcare from Schumer and Democratic Sens. Patty Murray of Washington and Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts, released Tuesday and shared first with The 19th, is the latest in a series of reports highlighting what Schumer says are the Trump administration鈥檚 鈥渂roken promises鈥� in areas including healthcare, housing and energy affordability. 

Even as childcare costs rise for families, wages for childcare providers remain low and draw fewer workers, creating a shortage of childcare slots and leaving many providers in a precarious position, especially since the funds Congress passed to stabilize the childcare industry during the COVID-19 pandemic have run out.

鈥淧eople in the richest country in the world should not view child care as a financial burden,鈥� Schumer said in a statement. 鈥淪enate Democrats are fighting to lower costs while continuing to expose how Trump and his administration鈥檚 continued broken promises have led to families struggling to make ends meet.鈥�

The report from Schumer, Murray and Warren charges that President Donald Trump and Republicans have 鈥渁bandoned America鈥檚 children and families鈥� by passing tax breaks for the wealthy and pursuing the war with Iran. 

鈥淭rump promised no new wars and lower costs 鈥� he broke that promise and even insisted that America couldn鈥檛 pay for child care because we had to pay for wars instead,鈥� Murray said in a statement. 鈥淢eanwhile, Democrats are putting forward an agenda that will make life more affordable for American families in all 50 states 鈥� and we鈥檙e making high-quality, affordable child care a top priority.鈥�

The Democrats point to Trump’s comments in April, when he 鈥渢he United States can鈥檛 pay for daycare鈥� because of the conflict in the Middle East, saying: 鈥淚t鈥檚 not possible for us to take care of daycare, Medicaid, Medicare, all these individual things.鈥�     

鈥淭he fact is that Trump and Republicans have done nothing to address the child care crisis in this country 鈥� in reality, they have made it worse,鈥� the report says. 鈥淩ather than lowering the costs of child care for the American people, Trump has taken a wrecking ball to federal programs and infrastructure that help American families access affordable child care.鈥澛�

The Schumer-led report charged that the Trump administration has 鈥渟ystemically attacked and undermined early childhood education programs鈥� with funding pauses, delays and personnel cuts at offices overseeing the federal government鈥檚 funding of childcare and , which funds early learning for low-income children. It also accused the administration of 鈥渨aging an all-out war鈥� on the childcare sector by freezing over $2 billion in federal childcare funds to five Democratic-controlled states over in childcare programs.  

Lawmakers in both chambers of Congress have introduced bipartisan proposals on childcare, and Republicans are also embracing the issue. Republican Reps. Ashley Hinson of Iowa, a candidate for U.S. Senate, and Ryan Mackenzie of Pennsylvania, who is seeking reelection in a competitive district, are among the cosponsors of the recently introduced bipartisan Child Care Modernization Act. 

鈥淔amily is at the heart of everything I do, and I鈥檒l keep fighting to make it easier to raise one,鈥�  

Mackenzie highlighted the rapidly increasing costs of childcare about the bill, saying: 鈥淚t鈥檚 more important than ever that we deliver the relief and reform that working families need to thrive.鈥�  

Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick, a fellow Pennsylvania Republican, cosponsored a bipartisan bill to expand a tax deduction for teachers to early childhood educators that . He鈥檚 also a cosponsor of the Improving Child Care for Working Families Act with Democratic Rep. Kim Schrier of Washington. 

But there鈥檚 been little appetite among Republicans for the kind of large-scale federal investments many Democrats argue are needed to make childcare affordable and accessible nationwide. Warren and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York , the Childcare for Every Community Act, which proposes new federal investments to create universal and affordable childcare. 

The One Big Beautiful Bill Act, Republicans鈥� party-line tax-and-spending bill passed last year, expanded some childcare subsidies and tax credits used by parents and employers, changes that experts said primarily benefit middle- and higher-income families. The Democrats鈥� report noted that childcare costs are especially burdensome for the lowest-income families and that 鈥渕any parents 鈥� disproportionately women 鈥� are forced out of the labor market as they simply cannot afford the high cost of care.鈥� 

Democrats have also criticized the bill for cutting Medicaid and food assistance programs, which many of the lowest-income families rely on. Federal cuts, combined with the COVID-era federal childcare funds running out and other economic pressures, have, in turn, .

鈥淎mericans are drowning under child care costs that just keep going up, and instead of doing anything to fix it, Donald Trump slashed the programs that help families afford care and gave billion-dollar tax handouts to giant corporations,鈥� Warren said in a statement. 鈥淔ixing the affordability crisis in this country means delivering universal child care, and Democrats are fighting to get it done.鈥�

In the absence of major federal action, some Democratic-controlled states and cities are leading the charge on universal childcare. And as Democrats focus on affordability in their messaging ahead of the 2026 midterms, candidates across the country are campaigning on universal childcare, universal pre-K and early childhood education.    

New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani, who and is working with Gov. Kathy Hochul to phase in his childcare plan, recently made New York the first city to open . New Mexico also became the first state in the country to families last year. 

The state鈥檚 departing Democratic Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham told The 19th that New Mexico鈥檚 investment also raised salaries and expanded benefits for childcare providers, a woman-dominated industry. 鈥淚t鈥檚 time,鈥� she said, 鈥渢hat America embraces universal childcare.鈥�  

鈥淲hen people refer to states like ours that still have some deep-rooted poverty issues, if we can do it, then anyone can do it,鈥� Lujan Grisham said in an April interview. 鈥淚’m not suggesting that it is a quick, 24-hour fix. 鈥� It took us all this time to build it out, but it is doable. And I think it could be some of the most important, impactful set of services and legislation for New Mexico families, and then a blueprint for American families, since the FDR investments in Social Security.鈥�

In remarks at the Center for American Progress鈥� IDEAS conference last month, Warren argued that Republicans are 鈥渇umbling the childcare issue at the most basic level.鈥� She also criticized her own party for not making major investments in childcare in its major party-line spending bills when Democrats controlled Congress for the first two years of President Joe Biden鈥檚 presidency, saying 鈥渨e lost childcare because not enough Democrats who were already in office were willing to fight for it.鈥�

鈥淚t would be political malpractice for Democrats not to be talking about childcare every chance we get, going into the midterms and beyond,鈥� Warren said. 鈥淲hen I look at the upcoming Democratic presidential primary, every 2028 candidate who understands what鈥檚 happening in this country, who wants to win, and who will deliver for families, will make universal childcare a core piece of their agenda.鈥�   

was originally reported by Grace Panetta of . Meet Grace and of their reporting on gender, politics and policy.

A recent from the Buffett Early Childhood Institute at the University of Nebraska offers new insights into the extent of the field鈥檚 attrition rates, finding that only 56% of the early care and education workforce that was active in 2023 remained active two years later. 

In other words, between 2023 and 2025, 44% of staff working directly with children 鈥� such as teachers, program directors and owners 鈥� left the workforce, representing a loss of nearly 90,000 early childhood educators across the eight states that participated in the analysis. 

鈥淚 figured it would be high,鈥� said Alexandra Daro, director of applied research at the Buffett Early Childhood Institute and an author of the report. 鈥淚 was surprised it was that high. 鈥� That鈥檚 insane.鈥�

Consistent, stable caregivers are critically important for young children鈥檚 development, noted Linda Smith, another author of the report who recently left the institute to lead The Child Care Trust, a nonprofit focused on early childhood policy solutions. Yet the field lacks good measures of how often early educators leave their jobs.

To better understand staff turnover, researchers at Buffett looked at data from state workforce registries, which are systems that track information about the early childhood workforce, including each employee鈥檚 age, role, credentials and participation in the workforce over time. The report focused on staff working in licensed early childhood programs, including both center- and home-based settings. 

Of the 45 states with a confirmed workforce registry, eight ultimately agreed to participate in the analysis, Daro said. The participating states were Illinois, Maine, Montana, Nevada, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania and Tennessee. 

In 2023, those eight states had about 205,000 early childhood educators in their registry data. By 2025, that number had dropped to under 116,000. 

The state-level findings show a wider range of outcomes. Turnover was lowest in Maine, at 39%. It was highest in Montana (62%), followed by Tennessee (61%). 

Of the six states that provided registry data broken down by role, turnover rates were highest among teaching staff, with center-based assistant teachers especially likely to leave. This is notable, Smith said, because 鈥渢he single biggest factor for outcomes for children is the quality of adult interactions.鈥� When new teachers are frequently cycling through a program, it becomes difficult for children to develop strong bonds with them, creating fewer opportunities for high-quality interactions. 

One of the most interesting findings from the analysis, both Daro and Smith said, is the impact of educational attainment on retention rates. Educators who had an early childhood-specific degree or credential, such as the nationally recognized Child Development Associate, or an associate or bachelor鈥檚 degree in early childhood education, were more likely to remain in their roles two years later. 

Daro called early childhood credentials a 鈥減rotective factor鈥� for the workforce, given how much they seem to contribute to retention. 

The researchers found that, compared to a 56% retention rate among all educators included in the eight-state analysis, 70% of educators with an associate degree in early childhood education remained in the workforce, 65% of educators with a CDA credential remained, and 63% of educators with a general associate degree did. 

鈥淐hildcare is hard work. It鈥檚 hard, physical work,鈥� said Smith. 鈥淚f you鈥檙e not trained to understand basic child development, how you react to child behaviors varies.鈥� 

But educators with a CDA, on the other hand, 鈥渒now what to do,鈥� she added. 鈥淭hey know how to manage children.鈥�

Daro believes that, with three more states currently in the process of implementing a state workforce registry, the field is getting close to being able to look at the national turnover rate in early care and education using this kind of detailed registry data. 

In the meantime, there is much to be learned from what these results from the eight states show, she said: High turnover rates, on top of low compensation and inconsistent qualifications among educators, adds to the volatility and instability of the early care and education sector. But educational attainment, particularly through a targeted early childhood education degree or credential, may offer a path forward.

The takeaway, Smith said, is clear: 鈥淲e need people trained in early childhood and child development. When they have that, they tend to stay.鈥�

Principals, superintendents and other school leaders are being subjected to sleek demos from presenters who know all the right buzzwords. Salespeople are showcasing technologies and hinting that, should administrators choose not to buy their product, students will be left behind. That the digital divide will grow 鈥� on their watch. 

This intense pressure will cause some school leaders to sign agreements that will not serve their students well. While most mistakes won鈥檛 rise to the level of prominent school districts supporting a failed startup, some administrators will nonetheless let anxiety rule the day. They will spend money on tried-and-true methods that could do more good than the shiny new thing. 

What can prevent this? Asking the right questions. 

I have spent years on both sides of the table. As a teacher, I used both good and bad ed tech, so I have seen what actually works in the classroom. As an employee of an ed tech startup I designed technologies that were sold to schools, so I know when promises are inflated to help the bottom line. As a professor of educational technologies and leader of the University of Southern California鈥檚 Center for Generative AI and Society, I study these technologies to know what works 鈥� and what doesn鈥檛 鈥� when it comes to AI鈥檚 influence on education.

That is why, with the support from my colleagues, I have written a titled “Beyond the Salespitch: A Practical Guide to Questioning EdTech Vendors.” Below are some key questions every school leader must consider before signing on the dotted line and committing limited resources to AI-powered ed tech.

Does the Tool Really Help Teachers in the Classroom?

• What specific cognitive skills does the product aim to develop (e.g., argument construction, data interpretation, metacognitive reflection)?
  
• How does it supplement learning rather than replace it? Ask for a step-by-step walk-through showing where student input is required and how feedback loops are built in.
  
• What evidence exists that students improve on the targeted skills? Request pilot study results, raw performance data or an independent evaluation report 鈥� nothing less rigorous will do. 
  
  

Does One Size Really Fit All?

• Which student populations were included in testing the product? Look for data on age, language proficiency, special education status and socioeconomic background. Biased data means biased performance.
  
• How does the system adapt to individual students’ profiles? Ask for a live demo of the personalization engine that shows adjustments based on prior performance and teacher input. 
  
• What safeguards are there for students who might become over-reliant on the tool? Ask how the product detects and flags excessive automation, prompting teacher intervention.

Who Owns the Content?

• Where is student data stored and processed? Identify the physical location of servers (domestic versus overseas) and any third-party processors involved. Ask how data breaches are handled and communicated.
  
• Who owns the text or media students generate using the tool? Ideally, the contract must state that all user-created content remains the property of the school district. Otherwise, your school becomes another content generator for a company. 

• Will our data be used to train future versions of the AI? If yes, require an opt-out clause and a clear explanation of how opting out affects service quality.听
  
• What happens if protected information (FERPA/HIPAA) is entered by mistake? Insist on a documented protocol for immediate deletion and breach notification. Consider clauses that allow you to exit agreements when large enough mistakes occur. 

Are Students Protected From Bias and Misinformation?

• What filters prevent misinformation or harmful content from reaching children? Get access to a live example of the system handling ambiguous queries that could lead to falsehoods. Stress-test it!
  
• Who is responsible when the AI produces inappropriate output? The contract should assign liability to the vendor for any harm caused by the tool鈥檚 autonomous decisions.

Can You Walk Away From the Contract?

• What are the cancellation terms? Look for a no-penalty opt-out clause that allows the district to discontinue use if outcomes aren鈥檛 met. 
  
• Is there an outcomes-based pricing model? Vendors that are willing to tie fees to measurable learning gains demonstrate confidence in their product.
  
• What support and training are included? Clarify the depth of professional development, response time for technical issues and availability of on-site experts.  

While AI has the potential to be a powerful tutor, a strong assistant and an equalizer in under-resourced classrooms, it can do so only if educators adopt tools with full information. School administrators should demand transparency, evidence and ethical safeguards from the companies that build them. 

District leaders should take these questions back to their board, curriculum team and legal counsel. Let them, not the slickness of a demo, drive the conversation. This can turn AI from a tempting shortcut into a responsible ally in education.

The decision, which is expected later this month, comes in response to President Donald Trump’s January 2025 ending the 158-year-old practice that was enshrined in the Constitution by the 14th Amendment. 

Trump wants to ban birthright citizenship for the children of undocumented immigrants and those whose parents are temporary residents.  

In another critical immigration-related case, the court will decide whether Trump can terminate the Temporary Protected Status that has allowed Haitian and Syrian immigrants to live and work in the United States for years as their home countries were in turmoil.

Many watching these two cases believe the justices will preserve birthright citizenship 鈥� but may strike down TPS for these two groups. Hundreds of thousands of lost that protected status last year. 

Ending birthright citizenship would be an abomination, immigrant advocates say, especially for children. 

鈥淏irthright citizenship is one of America’s most consequential commitments 鈥� the idea that where you are born, not where your parents came from, determines your belonging to this nation,鈥� said Adam Strom, executive director and co-founder of Reimagining Migration. 鈥淔or the millions of immigrant-origin children in our schools, this isn’t an abstraction. It’s the ground they stand on.鈥�

Several justices were skeptical of the government鈥檚 position as presented by Solicitor General D. John Sauer in oral arguments April 1. Sauer argued that the citizenship clause of the 14th Amendment was put in place to protect the offspring of formerly enslaved people, whose allegiance to the country was not under question. 

鈥淚t did not grant citizenship to the children of temporary visitors or illegal aliens, who have no such allegiance,鈥� he said, adding, 鈥渦nrestricted birthright citizenship contradicts the practice of the overwhelming majority of modern nations.鈥� 

Sauer said it demeans the priceless and 鈥減rofound gift鈥� of American citizenship.

But Justice Elena Kagan wasn鈥檛 sure the government鈥檚 overall argument was as strong as Sauer claimed. 

鈥淚 think even your brief concedes that the position you’re taking now is a one with respect to a substantial part of our history,鈥� she told him. 

Cecillia Wang, national legal director of the American Civil Liberties Union, said the law is clear and irrefutable. 

鈥淭he 14th Amendment鈥檚 fixed, bright-line rule has contributed to the growth and thriving of our nation,鈥� said Wang, the U.S.-born daughter of Taiwanese immigrants. 鈥淚t is workable, and it prevents manipulation. The executive order fails on all those counts. Swaths of American laws would be rendered senseless, thousands of American babies will immediately lose their citizenship, and if you credit the government’s theory, the citizenship of millions of Americans, past, present, and future, could be called into question.鈥�

Ernesto Casta帽eda, director of the Center for Latin American and Latino Studies and the Immigration Lab at American University, is among those who expect the justices to reject the federal government on birthright citizenship, even if 鈥渢hey have been very creative (in the past) when they want to go along with Trump.鈥� 

The court handed the president a number of wins on immigration in 2025, allowing, for example, federal agents to based on scant evidence they were in the country unlawfully. 

The justices might now view the president as less influential and feel more emboldened in going against him, Casta帽eda said: And ending birthright citizenship would rock every sector. 

鈥淚t impacts scientists, it impacts CEOs, it will impact a lot of people that we don’t think about,鈥� he said. 鈥淭hey may be here legally and contribute to the U.S., but they are not citizens yet and again their kids wouldn’t be able to have that citizenship dividend. They would be in a limbo situation. They might prefer to work in another country that makes things easier.鈥�

The 14th Amendment, adopted in 1866, a year after the Civil War ended, undid the high court鈥檚 infamous Dred Scott ruling of 1857. In that case, justices stated that enslaved people were and therefore could not expect any protection from the federal government or the courts. 

Tsion Gurmu, a Houston-based immigration attorney and legal director of the Black Alliance for Just Immigration, said the court should overrule what she called a 鈥渄angerous attempt to resurrect a system the 14th Amendment was designed to eradicate.鈥澛�

Her group filed an amicus brief in this case. 

鈥淭he birthright citizenship executive order would deepen (existing) harms by exposing children of Black immigrants to heightened surveillance, detention, and deportation,鈥� she said, adding it would strip their U.S.-born children of access to critical health and nutrition programs, 鈥渋nflicting the wound of a legal regime that once again makes citizenship contingent on ancestry.鈥�

Casta帽eda also sees a return to a pre-14th Amendment America if birthright citizenship were taken away, one where 鈥渟lavery was inheritable. Illegality will go from being a one-generation curse to a multi-generational curse.鈥�

And it would be catastrophic for schools as students鈥� educational rights would be under question, Casta帽eda said. 

Immigrant advocates feel less secure about Temporary Protected Status. 

Viles Dorsainvil, executive director of the in Springfield, Ohio, home to thousands of Haitian immigrants, said his community is bracing for one of three outcomes: The high court could rule in Haitians鈥� favor, allowing them to stay; end the program in a set time period, giving families three to six months to leave; or immediately call for their departure 鈥� either voluntarily or through aggressive immigration enforcement efforts. 

鈥淓verybody would be in limbo and workplaces will be disrupted,鈥� he said of the last scenario. 鈥淭here will be so much disturbance in the community.鈥�

But even if they win their case, Dorsainvil says he鈥檚 worried the government would find other ways to torment Haitians in America. Springfield was the target of and had to close schools during the 2024 election campaign after Trump repeatedly made , outlandish 鈥� and what many saw as racist 鈥� claims against the city鈥檚 Haitian community.

鈥淭he administration will continue to come up with policies that will make immigrants miserable in order for them to self-deport,鈥� he said. 鈥淭hat is the purpose: to force us to leave. We are preparing for that.鈥�

As more discussions about supplying adequate, affordable childcare are had across the state, childcare centers continue to struggle with staff retention.

Beth Ann Lang, deputy chief executive officer of Child Care Aware of Missouri, has been working to address Missouri鈥檚 childcare crisis for more than 20 years.

Lang said there are many deep-rooted issues within the early childcare industry, but she feels that low wages and a lack of education requirements for workers in the field heavily impact turnover.

A January  from Child Care Aware found a 26% to 40% staff turnover rate due to stagnant wages between 2020 and 2024. Lang said salaries vary by area, but she said many workers barely receive compensation higher than minimum wage and rarely receive benefits.

鈥淚f you鈥檙e not being paid and you don鈥檛 have an education base to be able to do your very best, then people don鈥檛 want to stay in our field,鈥� Lang said.

She said another aspect of the problem is that the education field is undervalued in the United States, which in turn has led to major systemic issues.

鈥淚f you鈥檝e ever looked at some other countries and how they approach education and early childhood education, it鈥檚 much more part of the larger system,鈥� Lang said 鈥淚t鈥檚 viewed as a very important job and one that actually makes money.鈥�

Amber Hansen, executive director of Seeds of Faith Preschool in Clinton, said she has been advocating for early childhood education to be more valued as a career in recent years.

鈥淐hildcare is not easy. There鈥檚 lots of factors that happen in these early years of brain development,鈥� Hansen said. 鈥淲e鈥檙e dealing with kids with trauma, foster kids. There鈥檚 lots of things that go into our job; it鈥檚 not just having them sit at a desk and complete a worksheet.鈥�

Hansen said specific issues with staff retention vary from year to year, but it remains a consistent problem.

鈥淩etention is a challenge for any childcare provider because of the pay factor,鈥� Hansen said.

Hansen鈥檚 teachers are contracted to remain on staff until the end of a nine month school year, so her day-to-day operations are mostly unaffected by staffing changes. However, she said problems could easily arise for centers under different circumstances.

鈥淚 could see that being a problem for 12-month programs because if you have a two-week notice of somebody鈥檚 quitting, that doesn鈥檛 leave you very long to find somebody, and then you鈥檝e got to run a background screening on them,鈥� Hansen said.

Lang said that for the state to begin to chip away at the problems within childcare, it must stop treating only the symptoms of the problem without also addressing the main issue at hand.

鈥淚f somebody鈥檚 bleeding, you put a Bandaid on them,鈥� Lang said. 鈥淏ut then you鈥檙e going to ask, 鈥榃hy are you bleeding? What caused that?鈥� 鈥�

She said she wishes legislators would try to look at the issue through the eyes of someone who works in childcare.

鈥淚 wish that every legislator would spend one day in a childcare program, whether it鈥檚 family-based or center-based to be just there seeing what it鈥檚 like, what the issues are, what the challenges are,鈥� Lang said. 鈥淪itting in a room of one-year-olds or in a family childcare program where you have two babies, a three-year-old and a five-year-old all running around at the same time needing you.鈥�

Lang said even though things seem hard now, she still holds out hope for conditions to change in the future.

鈥淥ver the next five years,鈥� Lang said, 鈥渋f we are actually as communities and as legislators and as education entities sitting together and discussing what needs to change, and making plans then enacting them, we鈥檒l be in a good place.鈥�

This story originally appeared in , a digital newsroom covering business and the economy in Missouri.

For 22 years, Kansas leaders protected a law allowing some undocumented students to pay in-state tuition to attend the state鈥檚 public colleges, universities and technical schools.

Those days are over.

During the recently ended session, the GOP-dominated state legislature passed overturning the policy that has allowed thousands of young Kansans to pay for and earn a college education. Only the veto of Gov. Laura Kelly, a Democrat, saved the law from repeal.

National challenges are also looming.

The has begun systematically suing the more than 20 states that have such laws. The Department of Justice argues in-state tuition laws incentivize unauthorized immigration and favor immigrants over U.S. citizens.

On June 3, , which is similar to the one in Kansas. Nebraska鈥檚 Republican governor had agreed to a consent decree to end the law after being sued.

Kansas Attorney General warns that Kansas could be next.

鈥淚f Kansas were to be sued by the federal government over this statute, Kansas would likely lose the lawsuit,鈥� Kobach said in given to state legislators.

Other GOP legislators are pressing the same message.

Sen. Mike Thompson, a Johnson County Republican, led efforts in the last legislative session to reframe in-state tuition as a public benefit, arguing the Kansas law is out of sync with federal law, a view that Kobach also holds.

鈥淭he DOJ is watching Kansas closely and if we allow this to continue, we will be sued, and we will lose,鈥� Thompson said in a social media post.

Targeting Dreamers

Since 2004, thousands of immigrant Kansas high school graduates, often called Dreamers, have used the law to earn degrees by paying in-state fees instead of far higher international student rates.

Republican legislators have targeted the law each session, trying to overturn it.

Supporters have long pushed back, including the Kansas Board of Regents, the Kansas Association of School Boards and immigrant rights advocates.

Rep. Louis Ruiz, a Kansas City, Kansas, Democrat who is retiring at the end of this term, fears what the future holds for the state鈥檚 undocumented K-12 students.

Ruiz has long supported the students, knowing that many were brought to the U.S. as young children by their parents. They view Kansas as home.

鈥淪ome people, especially some Republicans, try to claim that these students are getting a free tuition,鈥� Ruiz said. 鈥淣o, that鈥檚 not accurate. They are paying a rate as residents of the state.鈥�

Qualifications include graduating from an accredited Kansas high school after attending for at least three years.

An Obama-era program has also aided undocumented immigrant students. But it also is under heightened .

offers temporary protection against deportation for those who qualify and undergo vetting, including biometrics.

DACA recipients can get a work permit and often begin putting their degrees to work in chosen professions.

New applications to the program are on hold while federal court challenges play out.

DACA approval must be renewed every two years.

by the administration are causing people to lose their status. And some have been deported.

The Trump administration says extra vetting is behind the lengthened wait times.

鈥淚 was terrified that it wouldn鈥檛 be a quick renewal,鈥� said one Kansas City area DACA recipient of her renewal, which was granted in August 2025.

Still, her concerns linger. She requested to remain anonymous. Similar to several people interviewed for this story, she is protective of extended family and other immigrants in her social circles.

鈥淓ven if you鈥檙e a permanent resident, you鈥檙e not safe,鈥� she said. 鈥淭hey鈥檙e looking for anything to detain you and deport you without giving you your day in court.鈥�

There were 505,940 active DACA recipients in the nation as of Sept. 30, 2025, according to U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services.

Kansas had 4,230 DACA recipients at that time. Missouri, which does not allow in-state tuition rates for undocumented students, had 2,490 DACA recipients.

Also, a Board of Immigration Appeals decision in late April found that holding an active DACA status is not sufficient alone to protect against deportation. The decision conflicts with rulings in federal courts that have upheld the program鈥檚 constitutionality.

The is trying to calm DACA recipients鈥� fears, releasing detailed information about the ruling. The center emphasizes that DACA still offers protections from deportation. But the situation can become more complicated if a person is detained by immigration officials.

鈥淚 feel like every day I wake up and it鈥檚 something else, something new,鈥� said Maria, a former DACA recipient and a graduate of Olathe East High School.

Last year, Maria completed the process to become a legal permanent resident through marriage to her U.S.-born husband.

Maria grew up in Olathe, with no memories of her native Puebla, Mexico.

She immigrated at 2 years old with her mother, reuniting with her father who had migrated earlier.

Maria fully understood her legal situation as a 16-year-old.

She wanted to study abroad, along with some of her classmates. Her mother explained that it would be impossible for Maria to leave the country and safely return, because of her lack of legal status then.

The Kansas in-state law made college financially feasible. She earned an associate degree at Johnson County Community College, then a bachelor鈥檚 degree in business administration and a minor in psychology from the University of Kansas.

Undocumented Kansas students, even with the in-state tuition law, cannot receive public federal or state grants and scholarships or subsidized student loans.

鈥淗ad it been out-of-state tuition, even for Johnson County Community College, I would not have been able to graduate at all,鈥� Maria said.

A mother鈥檚 plan to protect her U.S.-born children

Karina Valtierra prepared her four sons for the possibility that she could be deported.

Valtierra鈥檚 DACA status lapsed for eight tense weeks this spring.

A native of Durango, Mexico, she鈥檚 lived in the U.S. since the age of 11 and applied for her DACA renewal early. But it didn鈥檛 arrive by her February expiration date.

As a result, she couldn鈥檛 legally drive, or work, and had to step away from her job teaching young children at a school in Wichita.

She gave an aunt power of attorney. She arranged for house payments to be covered for the family home. She spoke to her oldest child, a 17-year-old, about assuming the role as head of the household.

The youngest, at 13, struggled to understand.

鈥淛ust having to have that conversation with them was awful,鈥� Valtierra said. 鈥淎nd trying to explain, 鈥業鈥檓 protecting you guys, making sure you鈥檒l be OK if anything happens.鈥� 鈥�

Valtierra鈥檚 renewal was approved in late March.

She鈥檚 resumed teaching, putting the early childhood/leadership degree she earned from Fort Hays State University into practice.

DACA was never intended to be a permanent fix. It was a stopgap for a generation of immigrants who had been brought to the U.S. without documentation as children.

Obama instituted it by executive order in 2012.

Congress, despite periods of strong bipartisan support, never passed the DREAM Act, which would offer a route to permanent legal status for some undocumented students.

DREAM stands for Development, Relief and Education for Alien Minors Act. The act was first introduced in 2001.

Most of the original DACA recipients, and many former students known as Dreamers, are now in their 30s or older.

鈥淲e consider this our country, even though we don鈥檛 have a piece of paper that says this is our country,鈥� Valtierra said. 鈥淣ow we have kids, and we鈥檝e built a life in here.鈥�

鈥業n their crosshairs鈥�

Kansas Attorney General Kris Kobach has been a leading critic of in-state tuition laws and DACA. He has either filed or joined lawsuits against both, in Kansas and through national networks.

鈥淐ongress declared that no state may give in-state tuition benefits to illegal aliens unless the state extends the same tuition benefits to out-of-state U.S. citizens,鈥� submitted during the last legislative session.

More than two decades ago, the law鈥檚 authors took care to , ensuring that undocumented students had a higher burden to meet than native-born people, who can often establish residency for the purposes of tuition, in a year.

Early predictions of thousands of Kansas immigrant students enrolling using the in-state law each semester never materialized.

Enrollment peaked at 670 undocumented students statewide at institutions in 2015 and then again in 2017. The low was 169 students in 2006, according to state enrollment data.

The enrollments have been steadily declining for nearly a decade, with 310 in 2024.

Advocates worry that students aren鈥檛 being told by some colleges or academic advisers that the law still exists. Also, young people might be discouraged, given highly publicized crackdowns on undocumented immigrants by the current administration.

So far, the Justice Department has settled lawsuits with Nebraska, Texas, Kentucky and Oklahoma, ending in-state tuition programs in those states.

Lawsuits are pending in Democrat-led states of Illinois, Minnesota, Virginia and California.

If Kansas is sued, the legal action could reignite conflicts between Kobach, a Republican, and Kelly, a Democrat, or possibly her successor.

As attorney general, Kobach would need to defend the state鈥檚 law. Kobach is seeking reelection. Kelly is barred from doing so by term limits.

The two have wrangled in court recently over their respective legal lanes.

, alleging that he was failing to defend the state against the overreaches of the Trump administration.

In March, the Kansas Supreme Court issued a narrow decision that dismissed Kelly鈥檚 petition. Both sides claimed victory.

Kelly said that if Kobach continued to 鈥渞efuse to stand up for the state, Kansans can be assured that I will,鈥� according to

Advocates for immigrant students are preparing for the possible court challenge and other headwinds.

鈥淭he environment has definitely changed around the issue,鈥� said Alejandro Rangel-Lopez, campaign manager for New Frontiers, Loud Light鈥檚 project in southwest Kansas. 鈥淏ut I do believe we still have a really good law in place.鈥�

Rangel-Lopez, of Dodge City, helped organize some of the pushback during debates on , the bill that sought to end in-state tuition.

Planning continues, including gaining insights from states that have already been sued. And national organizations such as the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund, also known as , have also been contacted.

鈥淲e know the fight isn鈥檛 over yet because of the national environment and that we鈥檙e probably in their crosshairs,鈥� Rangel-Lopez said.

This first appeared on and is republished here under a .

That promise hasn鈥檛 disappeared. But it鈥檚 weakened.

Students and working adults still want postsecondary credentials that signal to employers and the wider world that they’re ready for the workforce. What they don鈥檛 accept so easily is that this signal must come in the form of a single, expensive, time-consuming college degree. 

Increasingly, they鈥檙e looking for credentials that cost less, take less time, fit around work and family, and lead more directly to labor-market value. The question is no longer whether higher education is changing. It鈥檚 whether colleges can adapt before students adapt without them.

Consider a recent Washington Post headlined, 鈥淪tudents are speeding through their online degree programs in weeks, alarming educators.鈥� It profiles a human resources executive who completed a bachelor鈥檚 degree in about three months and, later, a master鈥檚 in five weeks for just over $4,000.

While the details are unusual, the impulse behind them isn鈥檛. For many students, postsecondary education is no longer a four-year journey, in one stretch, on one campus, in one format. It鈥檚 a practical issue of getting useful learning, a meaningful credential and a better opportunity at a price and pace that make sense for them.

Still, if college becomes a sprint, it risks weakening essential skills that higher education should develop, such as sustained effort, reflection, conversation and mentorship, as well as the assurance that the credential represents real learning. 

The best approach is to see the situation as a warning and a signal. The demand for lower-cost, faster pathways is real. And data suggest that this isn鈥檛 some fringe development. 

The National Student Clearinghouse Research Center that more than 3.4 million students earned college-awarded non-degree certificates and two- and four-year degrees in the 2024-25 academic year, up 3.2% from the prior year. What鈥檚 revealing is the pattern within it. 

The number of college certificates awarded in fields such as medical assistant, early childhood education, health care, information technology and cybersecurity reached 579,400, a decade high. And 892,300 students who achieved a college-level certificate or degree already held a prior postsecondary credential. For many, higher education operates less like a single, continuous ladder and more like a set of credentials earned in stages. 

That rise in certificate attainment suggests that students are redefining what a credential must do for them. Many aren鈥檛 willing to wait years for one large, all-or-nothing payoff. They want credentials earned step by step. These stacked credentials help individuals get a job, earn a raise, transfer credits or move into the next level of study. 

Moreover, the clearinghouse reports that students ages 18 to 20 now surpass those ages 21 to 24 as the largest share of first-time associate degree earners. Finally, 52,500 students under 18 earned college certificates or associate degrees, likely through dual enrollment and other early pathways. 

Postsecondary education is becoming more varied, starting earlier and unfolding in shorter, more flexible sequences. Students are comparing and weighing certificates against majors, online programs against residential ones, work-based routes against classroom-only pathways and local low-cost colleges against high-price prestige universities.

They鈥檙e asking colleges direct questions like how much will this cost, how long will it take and what will I be able to do with it?

This pressure is driving interest in community colleges, career-focused bachelor鈥檚 degrees, competency-based education, apprenticeship degrees and other work-connected pathways. 

While these models differ from one another, they share the common premise that valuable learning doesn鈥檛 occur only in one place, on one timetable or in one institutional format. 

Still, the answer isn鈥檛 simply acceleration. A cheaper credential with weak labor-market value, poor transferability or uncertain quality isn鈥檛 a bargain. That鈥檚 why this moment shouldn鈥檛 be framed as a victory of disruption over tradition. 

The legacy degree model has strengths, including broad learning, academic depth and social formation. What it often lacks is affordability, flexibility and transparency. 

The newer alternatives address those weaknesses. But they introduce new ones, including thin content, uneven quality, weak transferability and uncertainty in students’ knowledge of their real value in the workforce.

The task, then, isn鈥檛 to defend the legacy degree at all costs or embrace every faster and cheaper substitute. It鈥檚 to build a better credential system that shows which options move careers forward and pay off in better earnings. 

For example, the American Enterprise Institute and Burning Glass Institute developed the , a first-of-its-kind index and navigation tool that reports on the real-world outcomes of virtually every certification in America, as well as more than 20,000 other non-degree credentials. 

These faster, cheaper and different credentials should preserve rigor while allowing students to move in shorter steps, making educational progress more understandable to employers and more manageable for students. They accept the reality that postsecondary education鈥檚 future will be more modular, work-connected and varied than the past.

That suggests four priorities for policymakers and employers.

First, create credentials that build toward each other. Shorter credentials should not be dead ends. They should lead somewhere, like to a better job and more advanced learning. The education and training system should make that easier, not harder. 

Second, transfers and credit recognition should become more routine. If students bundle education from multiple sources, they shouldn’t be penalized for moving between schools or formats. Pathways should be clear, so students can see where a certificate, associate degree, apprenticeship or online course takes them next.

Third, connect credentials to work. That doesn鈥檛 mean reducing higher education to narrow job training. It means recognizing that work-based learning, demonstrated competence and employer partnerships can make education relevant without making it thinner. The strongest approaches aren鈥檛 just shorter, but are better aligned with how individuals build knowledge and skills.  

Fourth, create report cards that publish outcomes. Students need good information about completion, earnings, transfer success and further study if they鈥檙e going to make wise decisions in a crowded and confusing market. The need is for clearer, more widely available evidence about which credentials actually open doors. 

Bachelor鈥檚 degrees will remain important. But students now live in a world where they increasingly expect credentials to be quicker, cheaper, clearer and connected to work. Colleges can resist that world for a while. Or they can help shape it. If they don鈥檛, students will keep building it on their own.

Educators hired in recent years on H-1B visas for hard-to-fill K-12 vacancies are waiting for renewals, forcing many from their schools 鈥� and, in some cases, from the country. Their sudden, unexplained departure has left students confused and brokenhearted.

The White House has also imposed a , inserting an obstacle cash-strapped schools can not overcome. 

sued the government last year over the charge, which was announced in September. A federal judge earlier this month , calling it an but the Trump administration has vowed to appeal. Like other immigration-related disputes involving the president, it could be headed to the U.S. Supreme Court.

No matter how that case plays out, the need for foreign-born educators has not abated: The Dallas Independent School District, home to 8,649 teachers, had 412 H-1B visa-holders on staff this school year, a spokeswoman told the 74. 

Public schools in Washington, D.C. had roughly 225 of overall.听

鈥淭hese staff members have brought global experience, multilingual expertise, and broadened worldviews as valued members of their school communities,鈥� D.C. schools鈥� spokesman Evan Lambert said in an emailed statement. 

He would not elaborate on what the district might do without them. A Dallas schools spokesperson also declined to answer questions about the impact of federal immigration policies 鈥� or about plans to fill classrooms in these staffers鈥� absence.

Three teachers in South Carolina鈥檚 Lexington District One went out on unpaid leave earlier this school year because their work visas were not renewed on time, a spokeswoman said. Their classrooms have been covered by various educators, including substitutes.

A mother of two young children in the district started a May 6 to draw attention to their plight and 鈥渢o publicly acknowledge that they are loved and valued.鈥�

The woman, who asked not to be identified for fear of retaliation, said the district is scrambling to fill these newly opened slots, leading to concerns about quality instruction. 

鈥淭hese dedicated educators have been a LEGAL and vital part of our community for years, enriching our classrooms with diverse perspectives and unparalleled dedication,鈥� she wrote in the petition, which has been signed by more than 1,100 people. 鈥淟osing them isn’t just a loss for our school district; it’s a loss for our children, our community, and our future.鈥�

The woman told 麻豆精品 she hoped the petition would alert other parents as to why these educators were suddenly gone. 

鈥淲e are in a deep, deep conservative state and it didn’t seem to be at the forefront 鈥� or even something people were aware of,鈥� she said. 鈥淚 can鈥檛 change federal policy. I can鈥檛 change how these people are being treated or the things they are losing, but I can bring awareness to it.鈥�

Her elementary-aged daughter lost her tutor, who provided instruction in French in a dual-language program.

鈥淚 loved that whenever she would teach us, she would explain the steps really slowly 鈥� and if we didn’t get it, she would explain it a little slower,鈥� the child told 麻豆精品 this week. 鈥淪he was always just really nice. She is my favorite teacher ever.鈥�

The little girl said she cried the first time she walked into the woman鈥檚 classroom after she left. She has seen her since, but can鈥檛 yet accept that the teacher might not be back.

鈥淪he paid some visits to the school and I have given her a hug, but I haven’t really said goodbye,鈥� she said through tears. 鈥淲hen she left, all of the happiness she gave me, I thought I was going to lose it.鈥�

The Department of Homeland Security said in a statement the government enacted the H-1B visa fee to address concerns about the program’s integrity and to protect American jobs. 

鈥淲e disagree with this blatant judicial activism dismantling President Trump鈥檚 historic efforts for immigration reform,鈥� a DHS spokesperson said in a statement. 鈥淯nder President Trump and Secretary (Markwayne) Mullin, our immigration system is being reformed to serve American citizens, American workers, and American families and to preserve our national identity 鈥� not to rapidly import foreigners who take American jobs, commit crimes, burden our welfare system, and erode our cultural and social fabric.鈥�

The National Education Association found in 2025 there were in the United States, spread across some 500 school systems. Texas, North Carolina and California public school districts employ the greatest number of these educators, the organization reported. But the figures are an undercount because they do not include charter schools. 

The international teaching pool is critical for districts large and small, said , chair of the education department at the University of California, Santa Cruz. She said, too, if the $100,000 fee were to stand, it would only harm students.

鈥淯.S. schools in general do better with stable teacher populations,鈥� Bartlett said. 鈥淎nd so when we bring in folks through the international labor market, we ought to be looking to see if they meet the standards of what we need for teachers to keep them, retain them, and then, our students will do better.鈥�

She added that while the issue plays out in the courts, schools might turn to another solution, the far cheaper J-1 visa. But it isn’t a flawless alternative, she said, because such visas are short term and prompt higher rates of turnover.

A showed that South Carolina in 2023 employed some 1,200 staffers with J-1 or J-2 visas, which allow for varied lengths of stay but often cap at three to five years. These hires had, on average, 11 years of teaching experience. Half taught math, elementary education, special education and Spanish. 

Ninety percent served in moderate to high-poverty schools, compared to 70% of the overall teacher workforce. Sixty percent taught in town or rural districts 鈥� 15 percentage points higher than the statewide average. These educators were concentrated in areas with greater attrition rates.

J-1 teachers generally plan for far shorter stays than H-1B visa holders, who can typically remain in the country for six years and often seek permanent residency. At 388, Dallas ISD employed close to the same number of J-1 teachers this year as it did H-1B visa holders, according to the district.

The 20 states that sued the government over the added fee noted H-1B鈥檚 importance in education in their , which cited a nationwide shortage of these and other 鈥渧ital鈥� personnel, including nurses, doctors and researchers.

鈥淲ithout access to skilled overseas workers, public schools would be forced to subject American children to larger class sizes, public research centers would lack staffing to support cutting-edge research, and hospitals would lose capacity to treat seriously ill patients,鈥� they wrote. 

The H-1B visa category was established in 1990 and has been used to bring over millions of high-skill workers in STEM and other fields: Some 400,000 such applications were approved in 2024, more than twice the number in fiscal year 2000, according to . Approvals peaked in 2022, when 442,425 applications were authorized.

Education and labor market experts say the administration’s efforts to curtail the H-1B program are in line with its other anti-immigration initiatives, including an attempt to dismantle the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, or , from which thousands of teachers have sprung. 

U.S. District Court Judge Leo Sorokin in Boston, after rejecting each element of the government鈥檚 case in defense of the H-1B fee, said . 

鈥淭he Defendants鈥� miscellaneous arguments that the President has the authority to impose the $100,000 tax based on his 鈥榠mmigration and commerce powers鈥� are nowhere to be found in the authorities they cite,鈥� he wrote in his June 8 ruling. 

Ulysses 鈥淯ly鈥� Navarrete, executive director of the Association of Latino Administrators and Superintendents, said the fee is not a policy, but a price tag, adding there is no way smaller school districts, community colleges and nonprofits can absorb the cost. 

鈥淭his is another attempt by this administration to attack diversity, equity and inclusion for all educators, students and the communities that we serve because when you simultaneously restrict who can enter this country and price out entry-level positions, you’re not protecting American workers … you are shrinking the talent pool of resources, especially at a time when we’re already facing a national educator shortage,鈥� he said. 

Gustavo Balderas, the new superintendent of the Puget Sound Educational Services District in Washington state, served at seven school districts before landing in his current position earlier this year. 

Three of those school systems employed foreign teachers, mostly on J-1 visas. Balderas said these educators filled critical slots as much needed native Spanish speakers, helping schools with their dual language programs. 

鈥淚t really is beyond the language, though,鈥� he said. 鈥淭hey are from the country and they are able to express the true authenticity of the culture to the kids.鈥�

At Acad茅mie Lafayette, a 1,400-student French immersion school in Kansas City, Missouri, two second-grade teachers had to stop working this spring because their H-1B visa renewals didn鈥檛 come through. Renewals for 13 others were coming up, a school leader .

Bartlett, of the University of California, said there are simply not enough American teachers to fill these spots and she鈥檚 not seeing any policy movement to fix that domestic shortage. 

So, instead, she said, schools have been benefiting from an international labor pool. But it comes at a cost 鈥� and not just in terms of high visa fees. 

鈥淲hen we recruit overseas, we are usually taking the most qualified teachers from those other countries,鈥� she said. 鈥淎lmost all countries that are economically less well advantaged than we are, and we are pulling from those countries, most notably, the Philippines 鈥� and Jamaica. Also Mexico. We disadvantage their schools, their economies and their children’s ability to learn and develop. So in many ways the whole system is problematic.鈥�

In the study, , two unnamed school districts carved out dedicated time for hundreds of elementary school students to work with a well-known AI reading tutor, either during class time or after school. Researchers followed about 350 students across two randomized controlled trials. All of the students were expected to log on for at least two 30-minute sessions a week.

They found that of the students assigned to work independently with the AI, just over 60% in the first district and 53% in the second ever logged on to the platform 鈥� at all.

Among all students, average weekly usage came to just over two minutes in District A and just over five minutes in District B.

Those who did log on averaged 13.2 minutes a week in District A and 25.8 minutes in District B, using the tutoring for just four to five weeks on average in an 鈥渋ntervention window鈥� that ran from 14 to 31 weeks.

For Carly Robinson, the paper鈥檚 lead author and research director for the , the gap between access and use isn鈥檛 a shock. “As we’re talking about bringing AI tools into the classroom, the challenge isn’t just building good AI tools,鈥� she said. 鈥淚t’s getting students to use them and engage with them effectively.鈥� 

That’s going to take 鈥渋ntentional design鈥� that appeals to both students and their teachers, who must choose whether to offer access.

鈥淗aving these tools available, even if they’re really good, doesn’t necessarily mean they’re going to get used if they’re not being embedded into kids’ learning experiences,鈥� Robinson said in an interview.

But she was careful to note that the study didn鈥檛 draw conclusions about AI鈥檚 effectiveness, or the degree to which students were interested or uninterested in the bot, saying many factors could be at play. 鈥淭his is not necessarily the students not engaging,鈥� she said. In the two districts, the AI platform 鈥渨as likely one of many tools available to teachers.鈥�

For the study, researchers randomly assigned a group of students to work on the platform alongside a few classmates and a human tutor whose job was to support their engagement and motivation and to troubleshoot any problems students might encounter. In District B, the tutors were actually middle-school students who 鈥渉ad a free intervention block in their school day.鈥� A typical session included a short check-in, 15 minutes on the platform and a few minutes of reflection.

Pairing students with a tutor worked, Robinson said 鈥� to a point. Usage increased by roughly one minute a week in District A and 4.4 minutes in District B. The number of stories students completed each week jumped 71% in District A and 80% in District B. 

What the human pairing didn’t do was move the needle on reading scores: Neither district saw a statistically significant improvement in end-of-year reading achievement. But Robinson said the study wasn鈥檛 primarily focused on that. Rather it was looking at the overall impact of adding a human into the equation, someone who provides 鈥渁ccountability, motivation and relationship building.鈥�

Wednesday鈥檚 findings mirror recent ones from Khan Academy founder Sal Khan, who that the rollout of his in 2023 was 鈥渁 non-event鈥� for many students. 鈥淭hey just didn鈥檛 use it much.鈥�

Khan said AI tutoring doesn鈥檛 necessarily make students motivated to learn, or to fill in gaps in their knowledge needed to ask questions.

The new data also raise an uncomfortable question for educators: Among students who used the platform on their own, those who logged on tended to be higher-achieving and less likely to receive special education services. So the students who stood to benefit most from extra reading practice were among the least likely to get it. 

Robinson said she sees that as a red flag for anyone considering AI tutoring as a quick fix for underserved students: 鈥淚 think it should give us pause about treating AI tutoring as an equity solution.”

Alex Sarlin, founder of the newsletter and a veteran industry watcher, said the new study 鈥渟hines a light on several of the most persistent challenges in ed tech implementation: low usage rates that don鈥檛 meet dosage recommendations, differential technology usage based on prior student achievement, leading to lower usage among the neediest students, and a faulty assumption that students will jump into new tools without structured guidance.鈥澛�

The researchers鈥� approach showcases a promising direction, he said, 鈥渁s it is increasingly clear that providing access to tooling is not nearly enough to drive usage, let alone outcomes.鈥�

Amanda Bickerstaff, co-founder and CEO of , which provides AI literacy training to teachers, said results like these aren鈥檛 all that surprising, given what we know about these tools.

All GenAI chatbots, she said, can make mistakes, lack important context about students and how they learn best, and can provide biased outputs. Her group has recommended keeping these tools out of the hands of students through second grade, 鈥渁nd only with significant human oversight and AI literacy training鈥� for students in grades three through five.

鈥淎t this stage, there has been little evidence that GenAI chatbot tutors meaningfully impact learning outcomes for students,鈥� she said, 鈥渙r that they are developmentally appropriate for students in elementary schools.鈥�

Robinson, the study鈥檚 lead author, said she sees the usage findings as part of a larger pattern playing out as schools adopt AI tools more broadly. Schools, she said, should consider offering students 鈥渄ifferent iterations of these things based on what they actually need 鈥� and that’s probably a more likely pathway to scale than just saying, ‘Let’s give everyone an AI tutor.’ 鈥�  

Historically, personalized instruction has depended almost entirely on human teachers, with the teacher-student relationship central to the experience. But advances in technology 鈥� most recently in AI 鈥� have changed this dynamic, Robinson and her colleagues write. Now, personalized instruction exists on what they term 鈥渁 spectrum of relational intensity,鈥� from a consistent one-on-one human tutor to a computer platform that students navigate alone. 

AI tutors may approximate human interactions, Robinson said, but students may still benefit from the care and companionship that humans provide. Logging on and sticking with something that might prove to be difficult, she said, is easier with a human in the mix. 鈥淭here is just this component of accountability that a human can provide, where it’s so easy to look away or check out of something when it gets hard when you’re dealing with a screen.鈥�

U.S. Secretary of Education Linda McMahon awarded Indiana a 鈥淩eturning Education to the States鈥� waiver, easing federal regulations on how the Indiana Department of Education can use $13 million in federal Title grants for 鈥渟tate-level activities鈥� including testing, teacher training, and afterschool programs. 

But McMahon, after months of negotiations with Indiana officials, did not grant the much broader request Indiana submitted last summer to waive restrictions on $350 million in Title grants that flow directly to districts and schools.

At issue are the $30 billion federal Title grants – such as Title I to combat poverty and Title III to help English Language Learners – that Congress created in the 1960s to give vulnerable students across the country extra help in school. Conservatives have wanted to scale those grants back for years, with Trump seeking to cut them and combine them into more flexible block grants to schools as far back as 2020.

The outcome in Indiana was similar to what happened in Iowa, where state officials proposed in March, 2025, a broad waiver of restrictions on how money is used by both the state and by individual districts. What started as a in state grants by the time it was approved in January.

The reduced Indiana waiver, combined with the scaled-back waiver in Iowa and a small waiver of requirements in Louisiana, suggest McMahon may not have as much legal authority to cut rules 鈥�  considered red tape and inefficient by some and guardrails to protect the neediest kids by others 鈥� as much as some states and conservatives hoped.

A spokeswoman for the Indiana education department said Congress would have to change the laws covering the Title grants in order for the state鈥檚 request to be granted.

Opponents of the waivers were relieved that McMahon did not waive the rules broadly. 

“I hope that it signals that, at least when it comes to waivers, the department is doing closer to the law than what some may have expected,鈥� said Phillip Lovell, Associate Executive Director of All4Ed, an education think tank that has opposed the waivers. Lovell said the Iowa and Indiana waivers show the Trump administration is 鈥渂eing a bit more moderate than what many of us had feared they would be.鈥� 

Nicholas Munyan-Penney, assistant director of P-12 policy of the EdTrust education nonprofit which has also opposed the waivers, said he was hopeful because Indiana鈥檚 request to include all districts and schools 鈥渓argely did get shot down.鈥�

鈥淢y sense is that they really are trying to be thoughtful about this, and are worried they won’t be able to defend parts going broader,鈥� he said.

But both Lovell and Munyan-Penney had concerns about McMahon approving some waivers of academic testing rules as Indiana reshapes its grading system for schools and districts.

McMahon did not address why Indiana鈥檚 full request was not approved at the . She instead proclaimed that it 鈥渇rees鈥tate and local funds from bureaucratic red tape compliance paperwork, and returns it to its rightful place in the classroom.鈥�

Indiana Governor Mike Braun, a Republican, and state education secretary Katie Jenner also did not address why the full request did not win approval.

Indiana Department of Education spokesperson Courtney Bearsch later downplayed the scaled-back waiver.

鈥淭he only component in the request that was not able to be granted would require an act of Congress to make it possible,鈥� Bearsch said. 鈥淚ndiana is ready and eager to lead those discussions nationally and continue to increase flexibility for states to improve education for our students.鈥�

Last year, McMahon encouraged states and school districts to apply for waivers that cut the 鈥渞ed tape鈥� of federal requirements to prove that each dollar of grants went to the specific group of disadvantaged students.

Indiana鈥檚 application last fall asked to combine multiple grants into a single fund so it could better focus the money on its main goals –  literacy, STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering and Math) proficiency and reshaping high school education.

Indiana also wanted to take some other grants to create an 鈥渋nnovation fund鈥� that would act as a school choice grant. The state proposed taking money aimed at improving struggling schools to help other schools nearby, whether charter or traditional district schools, that students could choose instead. Such a fund would 鈥渂etter support a growing ecosystem of effective, innovative school models,鈥� according to Indiana鈥檚 application. 

That proposal is not included in the waiver.

Indiana鈥檚 waiver added, however, a limited pilot program to try out combining Title funds for teacher training, reducing class sizes, mental health and afterschool programs at up to 15 percent of districts.

Federal officials Tuesday that the Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services will move to the Department of Health and Human Services, while the Office for Civil Rights will shift to the Department of Justice. It鈥檚 a decision that鈥檚 been in the making for more than a year, as the administration has attempted to dismantle the Education Department .

At a press conference Tuesday, senior department officials as new partnerships between the agencies. The officials said the changes won鈥檛 impact or reduce students鈥� rights, but instead improve efficiency. Senior department officials participated in the briefing on the condition that the speakers wouldn鈥檛 be identified by name. Education Secretary Linda McMahon did not take part.

Both the Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services and the Office for Civil Rights will retain some original functions, according to federal . But many specifics, such as staffing decisions and timelines, are still under discussion, the officials said. 

Special education advocates have protested that moving programs, including civil rights oversight, out of the Education Department will harm students with disabilities. 

In a  Tuesday, McMahon acknowledged that too many families must still fight for timely and appropriate special education services for their children. She said the changes will 鈥渂reak down bureaucratic barriers and strengthen the coordination of resources to improve programs.鈥�

鈥淚t should not require herculean effort to obtain what the law guarantees,鈥� McMahon said. 鈥淎s the Trump administration scales back federal micromanagement when it hinders success, we are equally committed to bolstering the efficacy of federal oversight where it is essential.鈥�

The Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services oversees the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, a landmark set of statutes that guarantee more than 8 million children with disabilities the right to attend public school. Critics say moving responsibility to HHS means taking oversight away from experts in specialized instruction and handing it to an agency ill-equipped to administer non-medical programs.

鈥淢oving IDEA oversight into HHS pushes students with disabilities toward a medical model, where disability is treated as a diagnosis to manage instead of a natural part of human life,鈥� Robyn Linscott, a director at The Arc of the United States, said in a Tuesday press release. 鈥淲hen that mindset drives education decisions, students are more likely to be segregated, underestimated or treated as separate from the school community.鈥�

The Education Department the special ed office already overlaps with HHS programs for people with disabilities.

The Office for Civil Rights has been a key avenue of relief for parents unable to get services for their children through complaints filed with their state, mediation, administrative hearings or due process cases. Families in states lacking local enforcement of special education complaints depend on OCR to investigate discrimination.

McMahon said in her statement that the partnership between OCR and the Justice Department will provide more responsive and coordinated enforcement of civil rights laws.

鈥淥CR and DOJ will combine their expertise and capacity to bolster evaluation, investigation, resolution of complaints and, above all, enforce critical protections for all students,鈥� she said.

Senior education department officials said during Tuesday鈥檚 press conference that OCR will refer complaints to the Justice Department for evaluation, investigation and resolution. The agency will still be in charge of case settlements, civil rights data collection and state assistance, and will make final determinations on whether to pursue action by referring cases to the Justice Department for enforcement.

Though McMahon said the moves will improve student and family outcomes, The American Federation of Government Employees Local 252, which represents 2,000 Education Department staffers, said the shift is breaking down government processes instead of streamlining them. 

鈥淭his isn’t efficiency 鈥� it’s chaos. Previous interagency agreements divvying up both P-12 and higher education programs to other federal agencies have led to massive delays in congressionally mandated funding and confusion for federal employees and the public alike,鈥� union President Rachel Gittleman said in an emailed statement. 鈥淭hat’s an insult to the millions of students and families who rely on these services and the taxpayers who count on federal oversight to prevent waste, fraud and abuse.” 

The Trump administration is using interagency agreements to circumvent to close the Education Department, a move that House members have warned would 鈥渃reate inefficiencies鈥� and 鈥渃ause delays and administrative challenges.鈥� When the Department of Labor picked up career and technical education last year, for example, some states had to wait months to access millions of dollars in funding.

The New York Knicks鈥� victory this weekend over the San Antonio Spurs, cementing their , brought joy to fans across the five boroughs.

Shortly after their win, Mayor Zohran Mamdani announced the city will host to honor the team. It will start at 10 a.m. at Battery Park and travel north along Broadway through the Canyon of Heroes before concluding at City Hall for a ceremony where the mayor will give the team the keys to the city.

The only problem: Some parents are mad that the parade is being held on the same day as . The biology and living environment exams are being administered in the morning. The 鈥淓arth and Space Sciences鈥� and 鈥淧hysical Setting/ Earth Science鈥� exams are being administered in the afternoon.

One mom has already started asking city and state officials, as well as the team鈥檚 owner, to move the day of the parade. (High school students who aren鈥檛 taking Regents exams that day don鈥檛 attend school.) And one student started to cancel school altogether on Thursday.

鈥淭his scheduling conflict creates a profound issue of equity and fairness,鈥� Michelle Weintraub, a mom of an eighth grader scheduled to take a Regents exam that day, wrote in her petition. 鈥淭he students most affected are those who have worked tirelessly all year to pass these exams. Depriving them of the chance to celebrate their city鈥檚 historic milestone 鈥� while adults and non-testing students freely attend 鈥� is inherently inequitable.鈥�

, the student who started a petition, played up the feelings of unity the Knicks have brought to the city 鈥� and suggested the parade could be a teachable moment.

鈥淭he parade is an educational experience in itself, rich with lessons about sportsmanship, history, and the power of dreams coming true,鈥� Cosa wrote in his petition. 鈥淏y supporting this request, we will allow the next generation of Knicks fans to experience this extraordinary moment, creating lifelong memories and sparking inspiration for future accomplishments in their own lives.鈥�

As mayor, Mamdani has embraced a sense of fun for the city鈥檚 school kids, so they could watch the Knicks in the championship games. And of course, many kids were grateful to him for bringing back traditional snow days. But to do that, he had to get a for the day off since students already were at .

Getting a waiver again would likely be a tall order.

Chalkbeat is a nonprofit news site covering educational change in public schools. Sign up for to get essential news about NYC鈥檚 public schools delivered to your inbox.

Parents and educators are now asking reasonable questions: Have the tools supported teachers in helping students learn? Or have they added distraction, cost and complexity into the school day? 

The next phase of educational technology should be defined less by adoption and more by how carefully districts choose what stays. 

As district and school leaders revisit technology policies, reconsider tools and respond to growing pressure from parents, educators and policymakers, they have an opportunity to replace reaction with rigor. Five questions should guide their decisions. 

First: What problem are we trying to solve?

Technology should not be a given in classrooms. It should earn its place by demonstrating that it can improve teaching and learning.

Too often, technology decisions begin with a product rather than a problem. A district hears about a new tool, responds to an incoming vendor pitch or feels pressure to 鈥渋nnovate鈥� to keep up with its neighbors. 

But the starting point when picking technology, or any tool, should always be instructional vision. Is the goal to help kids who are behind in math? Provide faster feedback on student writing? Expand access to tutoring in schools that lack staff? Reduce administrative burden so teachers have more time for instruction? 

A tool should be considered only if it鈥檚 tied to a clearly defined challenge, adds value and aligns with the district鈥檚 goals. Without that, districts risk adding technology on top of existing problems rather than solving them. 

Second: Is there credible evidence this tool works? 

Not all screen time is equal. There is an important difference between consumer technologies designed to maximize engagement and created to improve teaching and learning. 

Districts can start by reviewing testimonials, usage and satisfaction data, but they shouldn’t stop there. It鈥檚 important to understand whether a tool has demonstrated impact on student outcomes, in what context and for which children. This evidence should initially come through small-scale, rapid-cycle studies and then build up to more rigorous third-party research that has been .听

Artificial intelligence illustrates both the promise and peril of ed tech, and the importance of evidence. Tools that shortcut critical thinking, automate student writing or encourage dependence rather than learning should raise concerns. Technology that helps teachers personalize instruction, provide better feedback and reduce administrative burden deserve careful consideration.

The question isn鈥檛 whether a tool uses AI. It鈥檚 whether it鈥檚 proven to strengthen teaching and learning. 

Third: Does the tool support teachers or substitute for them? 

Human relationships are central to how students learn and are likely to become even more valuable in an AI-enabled world. No technology should replace the role of a skilled teacher, the value of peer debate or the importance of productive struggle.

But if technology is well designed and implemented, it can strengthen great teaching.  

aligned with classroom curricula can . High-dosage tutoring delivered in a can provide struggling students with that many districts cannot otherwise offer. can help teachers provide more timely feedback while for instruction and relationship-building. Translation and accessibility tools can expand access for multilingual learners and students with disabilities. 

These uses of technology strengthen teaching rather than replace it. That distinction should be central to every district’s decision. If a tool weakens the relationship between teachers and students, districts should be skeptical. If it helps educators better understand student needs, target instruction and free up time for interaction and connection, there may be a place for it in the classroom. 

Fourth: How will we know if the tool delivers the desired outcomes?

Districts have developed sophisticated processes for procuring technology. They need equally rigorous processes for removing tools that fail to improve outcomes. 

Before adopting a tool, school and district leaders should define what success would look like. What student outcomes do they expect will improve? Over what period of time? How will educators know whether the tool is helping? Who is responsible for reviewing the data, and how often? What happens if the expected impact does not materialize? 

This last question matters. Schools should be willing to walk away from tools that do not demonstrate value in the expected time frame. If a tool does not improve learning, help teachers or advance a clear instructional goal, it should not remain in the classroom.听

Fifth: Can we explain it clearly to families? 

At a time of rising concern about technology, transparency and specificity matter.

Families deserve to know which technologies are being used, why they were selected, what evidence justifies them, what they will and will not be used for, and how they are supporting their child鈥檚 progress. This is especially important for AI-enabled tools, as parents may reasonably worry about privacy, academic integrity and overreliance. 

A district should be able to explain in plain language how a tool accelerates learning. If this cannot be clearly communicated to families, that鈥檚 a warning sign. 

Words like 鈥減ersonalized,鈥� 鈥渋nnovative鈥� or 鈥淎I-powered鈥� raise more questions than they answer. Ultimately, parents want to know how a tool helps teachers teach and students learn. They want to understand how their children spend their day and what progress they鈥檝e made. 

The backlash against technology in schools has identified real harms. Parents are right to be concerned about tools that undermine attention, replace human interaction or encourage passive use. These don鈥檛 belong in the classroom.  

But the lesson of the past decade is not that technology is bad. It鈥檚 that schools need to be far more disciplined about what they adopt, why they adopt it, how they measure success and how they communicate those decisions. 

The future of learning should not be defined by how much technology schools use, but by how carefully they choose it and how quickly they let go of things that do not deliver.

On Thursday morning, Kenyan McDuffie聽, effectively clearing the way for Democrat Janeese Lewis George to become the city’s next mayor.

The Associated Press had not formally declared a victor as ballots continue to be counted under the District’s new ranked-choice voting system. But Lewis George maintained a substantial lead, and McDuffie acknowledged that the remaining votes were unlikely to change the outcome.

The result marks a significant turning point for a school system that has been governed by Mayor Muriel Bowser for more than a decade. For education advocates, Lewis George’s victory raises new questions about the future of a reform agenda that has driven notable gains in student achievement during that聽time. The Democratic nominee has proposed some changes to school governance 鈥� including an聽end to the IMPACT teacher evaluation system, as well as a move toward greater independence for the superintendent’s office 鈥� and her breakthrough suggests that voters are willing to embrace a broader shift in political leadership.

Correction appended June 16

The mayor鈥檚 race in Washington, D.C., technically won鈥檛 be settled until this fall. But on Tuesday night, the winner of the Democratic primary will assume presumptive leadership over a school system educating nearly 100,000 students.

That expectation is a function of sheer partisanship: Over 90% of local voters , opening a wide path for the party鈥檚 nominee to march to City Hall in November. But the road ahead for public education is much less certain. After nearly two decades of outstanding growth in both student enrollment and academic outcomes, as well as 12 years of leadership from a largely consensus-minded incumbent, the next mayor will need to provide answers to a range of new problems afflicting K鈥�12 schools.

The District鈥檚 long economic expansion of the 2000s and 2010s, which drew into its orbit, finally stalled in the face of federal job cuts and a pandemic-fueled flight from the urban core. Combined with a decline in birth rates, the slump has caused the student rolls to go negative for the first time in recent memory 鈥� just as on the horizon. Even a promising recovery from post-COVID learning loss is imperiled by a collapse in daily attendance, with missing one-tenth of the school year or more.

The two leading candidates to succeed Mayor Muriel Bowser are widely seen as ideological opposites. Attorney Kenyan McDuffie has courted business groups with a moderate pitch to bring down crime and avoid overextending city finances. Janeese Lewis George, a city councilor and self-described democratic socialist, won over the Left with a huge proposal to offer subsidized to all Washington families.

The broader clash in visions 鈥� playing out in the national Democratic Party 鈥� is overshadowing a K鈥�12 debate that could be more consequential in the long run. signal continuity with foundational policies enacted in the hard-charging reform period of the 2000s, including direct mayoral control over schools and holding teachers and schools accountable for student performance. Lewis George has issued a subtle challenge to that settlement, voicing a desire to grant education leaders more independence from the mayor鈥檚 office and scrap a framework.

The progressive favorite鈥檚 eagerness to break from the status quo secured the support of the Washington Teachers Union, which has long sought to de-emphasize teacher quality metrics and win more bargaining latitude for its members. WTU President Laura Fuchs, a frequent critic of the leadership of both District of Columbia Public Schools and D.C. charter schools, said teachers 鈥渨orked very hard to minimize the harm鈥� imposed by top-down reforms. Under Lewis George, she argued, educators would enjoy much better relations with city leaders.

鈥淲e do believe we will have a much friendlier and more listening ear鈥� with Lewis George in power, Fuchs said, while adding that she did not believe the candidate would necessarily supply every item on the union鈥檚 wish list. 鈥淲hat Janeese represents, in so many ways, is that she takes us seriously and believes that we are partners.鈥�

Neither of the two contenders could be reached for comment for this article. But the differences between them highlight a fissure in their party that has widened since the Obama-era peak of ambitious experimentation in public schools. Washington has seen some of the in student achievement of any American school district in this century, with student test scores climbing persistently during a time when they were stagnant almost everywhere else. But national Democrats have made little hay about the generational gains, which have attracted fewer boosters and national headlines than similar turnarounds in red states. 

Thomas Toch, director of Georgetown University鈥檚 FutureEd research institute and a defender of the District鈥檚 model of educational improvement, called the city鈥檚 approach 鈥渁 beacon nationally鈥� and warned against a change in direction.

鈥淚t is one of the most important reform success stories in the country, in part because the city has continued to do well by its students for a long time,鈥� Toch said. 鈥淭he leaders have sustained the reforms, and the reforms continue to make a difference for students.鈥�

Michelle Rhee鈥檚 legacy

When Toch and others refer to 鈥渢he reforms,鈥� they are largely describing a package of policies that began in 2007, when Mayor Adrian Fenty overhauled school governance in what was then one of the lowest-performing urban districts in the country.

Virtually overnight, the governance of DCPS was transferred to Fenty himself, who also wielded substantial influence over a rapidly growing charter school sector. His hand-picked schools chancellor, Michelle Rhee, soon rolled out a new evaluation system known as IMPACT, which ranked teachers based on their students鈥� test scores; top performers received hefty raises, while .

The groundswell seemed to crest in November 2008, with Rhee posing for in Time magazine and president-elect Barack Obama embracing a similar suite of K鈥�12 recommendations in his national agenda. But Washingtonians grew weary of the pace of change, including the that received failing grades, and turned the mayor out of office.

But his successor, a reform critic who challenged Fenty , surprised many by opting away from a course correction. After another 鈥� particularly alienating to some parents in the wake of a 鈥� voters again soured on their leadership, selecting Muriel Bowser as the city鈥檚 mayor and reelecting her twice.

Part of Bowser鈥檚 success may lie in the public鈥檚 in local schools. While the tumult over the initial reforms quickly stirred anger, subsequent data on student learning has proven highly favorable.

Findings from the National Assessment of Educational Progress (a federal exam commonly known as the Nation鈥檚 Report Card) show that D.C. fourth and eighth graders comparable to virtually any other major city between 2003 and 2019. A 2021 by the research group Mathematica estimated that Washington鈥檚 ascent through the 2010s was comparable to the massive leap made by New Orleans schools in the wake of the district鈥檚 post-Katrina restructuring.

While the pandemic pushed achievement downward for a time, local testing from the past few years shows that year-over-year academic progress since the COVID nadir preceding the public health emergency. The Education Scorecard, a data project led by scholars at Dartmouth, Harvard, and Stanford, that DCPS schools saw the fastest recovery of those in any city between 2022 and 2025.

Chelsea Coffin, and education policy specialist for the D.C. Policy Center, called the latest round of state assessments 鈥渁 very good sign for D.C. students.鈥�

鈥淲hat we saw last school year were really large gains 鈥� even compared to what D.C. had been posting pre-pandemic 鈥� in both math and English, across almost all wards and most major subgroups,鈥� Coffin said. 鈥淒.C. has a long way to go in terms of all students being on grade-level, but this new forward momentum is really exciting.鈥�

David Grosso, a former city councilor who chaired the body鈥檚 education committee between 2015 and 2020, said in an interview that the stream of good news has mostly quieted the consternation that greeted Fenty and Rhee鈥檚 dramatic shakeup.

At the time of his election, Grosso recalled, 鈥減eople were clamoring for success right off the bat. After five years of reform, they were asking, ‘Why aren’t our schools all better?’ The challenge was to explain to people that when you have 100 years of bad schools, you can’t turn it around in five years.鈥�

Teacher evaluations under fire

But dissatisfaction has lingered among detractors of the reform regime, none more energetic than the Washington Teachers Union. 

Pointing to the District鈥檚 , which have exceeded 20 percent in some years, the WTU鈥檚 leaders lay the blame with IMPACT. Fuchs dismissed the evaluation system as 鈥渁 tool of control,鈥� saying that it mandated an overreliance on testing and made teachers fear for their livelihoods. 

鈥淎ny time they find the union finding a quote-unquote ‘loophole,’ so people could keep their jobs, they cut it off,鈥� Fuchs remarked. 鈥淎nything that gives teachers a little bit of power or wiggle room, they cut it off.鈥�

Indeed, refinements to IMPACT have been ongoing since its debut. led to over 20 instructors being ranked lower than they deserved in 2013, denying bonus payments to several and resulting in one mistaken termination. More recently, DCPS officials intended, in part, to combat perceptions that evaluations . 

Echoing some of these complaints, Lewis George has declared that she will end IMPACT if elected. In circulated by WTU, she claimed the system 鈥渦ndermines educators鈥� expertise and students鈥� joy of learning.鈥� While committing to retain mayoral control, she has also suggested that she will transform Washington鈥檚 office of the superintendent into an independent agency 鈥� an idea that could lead to less direct oversight over student data and standards, .

Ongoing resistance from the union and its allies may help to illustrate the somewhat muted response to D.C.鈥檚 positive trajectory. While states like Mississippi and Louisiana have emerged as widely cited examples of educational success in deeply conservative locales, Democrats are less likely to harp on the consistent growth attained in the single bluest jurisdiction in the country. Toch said the critiques of progressives and unionized workers now make the story an awkward fit with the party鈥檚 national profile.

Still, he added, it would be a profound mistake to walk away from teacher ratings, even if IMPACT could potentially benefit from tweaks. The data organized through the rubric provided the 鈥渇oundation鈥� for many other workforce improvements realized in recent years, including the opening of new leadership opportunities for teachers receiving good ratings.

鈥淚t’s discouraging to hear someone even consider abandoning it,鈥� Toch said. 鈥淗ow would you do pay-for-performance? How would you create a career ladder if you couldn’t distinguish between good teachers and bad teachers? That’s the problem we had in the District in the past, and it still exists in much of the country.鈥�

Whether Lewis George or McDuffie ultimately claims the Democratic nomination, the next mayor will have to navigate structural challenges that go beyond old battles around reform. The city faces mounting budgetary shortfalls that threaten its ability to spend at the level to which both charter and district schools have become accustomed.

Funding for school renovations and new academic programs will likely need to wait until the District鈥檚 financial picture adapts to a post-COVID, post-Trump reality in which both businesses and the federal government have shrunk their local presence. Even the pay incentives provided through IMPACT add to the fiscal pressure.

Bisi Oydele is the CEO of Education Forward D.C., a reform-friendly advocacy group. While stressing the need to pursue retrenchment equally, among both DCPS and charter providers, he acknowledged that educators and families might have to prepare for leaner times.

鈥淵ou can track the CFO revenue projections, and they’re not great,鈥� Oyedele said. 鈥淒.C. spends about $2 billion on education per year, and that is obviously tied to revenues and economic forecasts.鈥�

Grosso also noted the long set of issues that the mayor and city council will confront through the end of the decade, including the likely need for schools to tighten their belts and the immediate task of finding a replacement for outgoing Chancellor Lewis Ferebee, who announced his resignation last month. 

Amid that flurry of contingencies, he cautioned policymakers against pursuing 鈥渞eform for reform鈥檚 sake.鈥� While he had previously pursued some major policy changes through the Council 鈥� including one resembling Lewis George鈥檚 notion of making the superintendency more autonomous 鈥� such moves needed to be carefully studied before action was taken, he concluded.

鈥淚f I didn’t learn anything else in all the years I was making education policy, at least I learned this: If you make massive changes鈥� and you don’t have a real understanding of what the outcome will be, then you shouldn’t make the change.鈥�

Correction: An earlier version of this article incorrectly identified the first female mayor of Washington, D.C.

Mississippi continues to outperform most of the nation in education, according to a new report, but health outcomes for children remain dismal. 

The , published annually by the Annie E. Casey Foundation, shows the state鈥檚 education ranking has held steady at 16th nationwide. Unchanged since last year, this ranking on education is Mississippi鈥檚 highest score ever, according to the foundation鈥檚 rubric.

In other measures, though, Mississippi still struggles.

The report puts Mississippi at 49th for economic well-being, 50th for health and 49th for family and community. 

鈥淲hen we think about children and families where the household head lacks a diploma, that鈥檚 tied to a chance of children living in poverty in that house,鈥� said Ashley Parker Sheils, executive director of Children鈥檚 Foundation of Mississippi. 鈥淓very one of these indicators is an opportunity for us to work together to do better for the children of our state.鈥�

Despite progress in categories that measure economic well-being and outcomes for families and communities, those rankings fell this year for Mississippi. States are ranked relative to each other. Other states also saw improvements, so Mississippi鈥檚 rankings fell slightly in those categories. The results put Mississippi at 50th in the country for overall child well-being compared to 48th last year. 

For the first time since the foundation began maintaining these child-centric data rankings in 1990, states received a comprehensive score in the Data Book, tracking a number of indicators from 2019 to 2024. Across the country, state education scores were the lowest of the four categories 鈥� education, health, economic well-being and family and community.

Louisiana and Mississippi were the only states to make progress in education during the five-year period, according to the KIDS COUNT data. The Data Book attributes the state鈥檚 success to investing in teacher training, strengthening early education infrastructure and passing the 2013 Literacy-Based Promotion Act. Experts say that helped raise reading proficiency among the state鈥檚 youngest students. 

鈥淢ississippi鈥檚 continued progress is the result of effective work by our educators, supportive families throughout the years and strong policies,鈥� said Lance Evans, state superintendent of education, in a press release about the KIDS COUNT data. 鈥淲e are proud of this milestone and remain committed to building on it for Mississippi students.鈥�

Chronic absenteeism, however, remains an issue across the country and in Mississippi. The Data Book notes that chronic absenteeism, defined as missing 10% of the school year or 18 school days, among Mississippi students is 27.6% 鈥� more than double what was reported immediately prior to the pandemic.

State leaders have increasingly expressed concern about the chronic absenteeism rates in Mississippi. Absenteeism is directly tied to student achievement, and small schools in high-poverty districts are especially impacted.

Despite the state鈥檚 performance in education, Mississippi is still dead last in child health outcomes and had one of the sharpest drops in child health outcomes since 2019, according to the report.

Sheils said the findings were bittersweet. Her organization helps produce a  for the data each year, which provides county-specific information for local communities.

鈥淵ou see the numbers and you have that moment of, 鈥楽hould we just pack up and go home?鈥� 鈥� she said. 鈥淭here鈥檚 definitely disappointment 鈥� We must improve and do better for our children.鈥�

Ohio lawmakers have passed a bill that would require schools to teach students to graduate high school, get a job, and get married 鈥� in that order 鈥� before having a baby. They call this order of events the success sequence.

聽passed 58-36 during Wednesday鈥檚 House session and the Ohio Senate concurred with the changes made to the bill later that night before going on summer break.

Ohio Republican state Reps. Haraz Ghanbari, Gayle Manning, and Jason Stephens joined Ohio House Democrats in voting against the bill.

State Sen. Kristina Roegner, R-Hudson, introduced the bill, which originally began as legislation that would allow Ohio to join the Interstate Compact for School Psychologists, which allows licensed professionals to provide services across state lines.

The bill passed the Ohio Senate unanimously in November.

The Ohio House Education Committee made changes to the bill, including adding the success sequence.

鈥淵oung people are statistically far less likely to live in poverty when they complete high school, work full time, and marry before having children,鈥� said Ohio Rep. Sarah Fowler-Arthur, R-Ashtabula.

鈥淭his gives young people tools to make informed decisions about education, work, family, and their future stability.鈥�

The Heritage Foundation 鈥� the right-wing think tank that published 鈥� provides model legislation for the success sequence.

The bill requires the Ohio Department of Education and Workforce to have a curriculum list for the success sequence for grades 6-12 and this would be a graduation requirement.

Following these sequences of events means people are 鈥渙verwhelmingly less likely to live in poverty in adulthood,鈥� the says.

However, a found those who finish high school, work full time, and get married are less likely to experience poverty, but the order did not matter much.

鈥淚 feel like some of us must have missed the basic statistical lesson that correlation is not causation,鈥� said state Rep. Beryl Brown Piccolantonio, D-Gahanna.

鈥淚t completely misses the fact that there are so many other explanations for why so many people struggle in life so much. 鈥� Teaching that graduation, then work, then marriage, and then kids equals success also leaves out all of the unique ways that people live in our state.鈥�

, a standalone success sequence bill,

State Rep. Sean Brennan, D-Parma, shared the story of his mom who graduated high school, got a job, got married, and eventually gave up her job to raise her two children.

鈥淗er path did not follow a fairytale outcome,鈥� Brennan said. 鈥淪he suffered horrible abuse from her husband, lost everything when he left. She鈥檚 forced to work two low-paid, non-union jobs, supplemented by public assistance to keep clothes on her kids鈥� backs, food on the table.鈥�

She later died of breast cancer.

鈥淭he so-called success sequence did not save my mother,鈥� Brennan said. 鈥淚t didn鈥檛 shield her from poverty or systemic societal problems. 鈥� Just because some individuals who follow a certain pathway avoid poverty, it doesn鈥檛 mean those steps cause success for everyone.鈥�

Brennan also said teaching the success sequence is one more burden on teachers.

鈥淭hey鈥檙e already stretched thin, and this part of this bill adds another requirement,鈥� he said.

is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Ohio Capital Journal maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor David Dewitt for questions: info@ohiocapitaljournal.com.

After the birth of her son, Rex, in 2019, Jasmin Almendarez realized childcare costs in central Texas were so high that returning to work no longer made economic sense. 

鈥淚 didn鈥檛 want to spend that much time away, pay all of that, and then get minimal time for my first baby.鈥� But by the time Rex was 3, she noticed signs of a speech delay, so she decided it would be best to send him to an early learning program to increase his interactions with peers. She began researching local options and reached out to Pre-K 4 SA, a preschool not far from her home in San Antonio. 

She visited the program, which was in a brand new building with a spacious outdoor play area. The staff was friendly, she said, and meals were included. She didn鈥檛 think such an in-demand location would have an opening for Rex, but they did 鈥� and she was surprised to learn that he could attend at no cost to her. 

Pre-K 4 SA is a citywide early childhood education initiative that operates multiple preschools across San Antonio. Rex, like 80% of children enrolled in the program, qualified for a full scholarship.

After one year, Almendarez said she noticed improvements in his speech. Rex learned his letters and how to count, and even how to swim. When her second son, Raiden, turned 3, she enrolled him as well. Now, pregnant with her third child, she hopes to enroll the baby in the Pre-K 4 SA pilot program for infants and toddlers. She also hopes to put her degree in early childhood education to use and be hired as a teacher in the program. 

Like Almendarez, Mariana Rios was hesitant to send her daughter Emma to preschool. Her husband鈥檚 family is Salvadoran and believed young children should stay home with a parent or relative. But Rios and her husband were intrigued by the quality of education that Pre-K 4 SA offered and decided to enroll Emma in 2023. Because of the sliding-scale cost model, Emma鈥檚 tuition was only $128 per month. 

When Emma began kindergarten after two years at the preschool, Rios recalled her teacher saying she could spot the kids who had attended Pre-K 4 SA based on their exemplary behavioral and social skills. Her mother-in-law, once a vocal skeptic of preschool, now encourages other family members to talk to Rios about the benefits of the program.

From modest backing to broad support for early childhood 

Emma, Rex and Raiden are just three of more than 23,000 children who have gone through Pre-K 4 SA since the program began in 2013. The first two locations opened their doors to 4-year-olds shortly after San Antonio voters in 2012 to add a 鈪�-cent city sales tax to fund early childhood programs. One-eight of a cent was the maximum increase the city could make, according to Texas law, which caps sales tax at .听

The sales tax revenue, which has steadily grown, has come to serve as a dedicated revenue source for the program鈥檚 five locations. At the time of its proposal, the tax was estimated to . In 2025, it brought in , the bulk of Pre-K 4 SA鈥檚 $61.2 million annual revenue. 

The path to building a designated funding source for early childhood education was complicated. The idea for Pre-K 4 SA came from then-Mayor Juli谩n Castro, who created a , featuring prominent local business leaders, to address some of the issues plaguing San Antonio. Those included the city鈥檚 , its and . The city was also facing a : Young people were moving to Austin for college and then staying there. 

The task force came up with a plan to improve San Antonio: , and allocate a specified revenue source to do so. 

In March 2012, in his State of the City address, Castro to put a sales tax increase directed to Pre-K 4 SA on the ballot, but he wasn鈥檛 sure how it would go since any change to the sales tax .

In November 2012, many community members were unconvinced that 4-year-olds belonged in schools, said Sarah Baray, CEO of Pre-K 4 SA. 鈥淭here were a lot of questions about whether the city belonged in education at all.鈥� The plan faced opposition from some residents in the business community, from higher-income residents and even from leaders in local school districts, who viewed the city鈥檚 plan to establish pre-K centers as competition for their own publicly funded pre-K programs. 

鈥淭exas is a state that doesn鈥檛 like to pay taxes,鈥� said Baray. Ultimately a sales tax was the path of least resistance. 

鈥淧roperty taxes tend to be highly visible and directly tied to household finances,鈥� said Larrisa Wilkinson, deputy CEO of Pre-K 4 SA. 鈥淪ales taxes, although regressive, are smaller costs spread across many people in everyday purchases, so they鈥檙e less noticeable and less likely to trigger strong pushback,鈥� she said. 

The 2012 measure passed with . Within a year, Pre-K 4 SA opened two centers. A year later,

By 2020, when the sales tax was up for renewal, the initiative had been underway for seven years and had . By that time, there was evidence of success. conducted by University of Texas at San Antonio found that by third grade, Pre-K 4 SA students had higher math and reading scores as compared to their peers. The most pronounced effects were for children from low-income families and those with limited English proficiency. A cost-benefit of Pre-K 4 SA found that families enrolled in its extended-day program earned an average of $240 more per week than families who did not participate. For many families in San Antonio, a city with one of the , those funds can make the difference between living in financial security or hovering close to the poverty line. 

These data points made going back to the community and asking for support easier the second time, said Paul Chapman, who had been the chief communications officer at the time and now serves as chief operating officer at Pre-K 4 SA. 鈥淲e could communicate to the community the status of what they have invested in and how we are doing.鈥� In 2020, the ballot measure .

Along the way, the program continued to grow, adding a fifth center in 2019, which opened in partnership with a local school district.

As part of its mission to improve the quality of childcare, the program also provides shared services, training and education for more than 90 childcare providers in San Antonio. In 2025, Pre-K 4 SA spent over of its annual revenue on grants for external childcare providers in San Antonio, which has helped neutralize some of their earlier opposition that had viewed the program as a competitor. 

While sales tax revenue can vary year to year, it has provided enough stability to continue expanding. One of its locations, South Education Center, opened a new building in August 2025, as part of a with HOLT Group, a large, local manufacturing company. HOLT paid to build the center, which expanded capacity to serve more families, and the intention is that Pre-K 4 SA will buy it back over time, said Tonda Brown, Pre-K 4 SA鈥檚 chief of schools.

Astonishing teacher retention in a field with high turnover

Pre-K 4 SA has made deep investments in its workforce: All teachers and support staff are city employees with benefits including health insurance, paid time off and a retirement plan. 

The average pay for the program鈥檚 lead teachers is between $71,743 and $90,396, well over the of $65,000, and some lead teachers with extensive experience make over $100,000, Brown said. (Nationally, preschool teachers have of $32,000, according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.) 

In April 2026, 324 teachers were offered a contract to return in 2026-27, Brown said. All but two submitted a letter of intent to return 鈥� an astonishing feat in the U.S. early care and education sector, which struggles with .

鈥淲hat makes San Antonio different is quality,鈥� Wilkinson said. 鈥淣o program nationally does the comprehensive work that Pre-K 4 SA does,鈥� she added, referring to the combination of direct services, family engagement and professional learning opportunities. In her experience, she said, many states and localities prioritize access to early care and education over quality. 鈥淚f you do not have a quality program, what is the point? Mediocre programs can have negative impacts,鈥� she said. 

As widespread budget cuts have strained the early care and education sector, some states and localities have been exploring how best to invest in early childhood programs. While some efforts have yielded progress 鈥� , and broadening 鈥� many have relied on a temporary windfall, such as federal relief aid or a one-time budget surplus. That can create long-term expectations for providers and families that become difficult to sustain once the funding expires.

San Antonio bucked that trend by identifying that a sales tax could offer a dedicated, protected revenue source to provide more stability and consistency for childcare programs.

鈥淔unding innovation is happening on the local level,鈥� Wilkinson said. 鈥淐ommunities are saying 鈥榳e want this, we need this, we are not going to be able to rely on state funding on its own.鈥� 鈥�

The sales tax used to fund early childhood in San Antonio will be up for a vote again in 2028, and Baray said she is 鈥渃autiously optimistic鈥� for its passage. Baray has witnessed a shift in mindsets about 4-year-olds in preschool, with more families, like Rios鈥�, realizing how beneficial such programs can be for young learners. It helps, Chapman said, that family engagement, especially in the Hispanic community, was such a large part of their program.

鈥淚t didn’t negate the role of family in early education. It brought it in,鈥� said Chapman. 鈥淥ur goal is that Pre-K 4 SA earns that place of inevitability in the mind of the community that we serve.鈥�

Correction: An earlier version of this story misstated the ages served when the program launched and the opening date of the fifth center.

In the midst of all the noise, one thing is clear: Americans, across party lines, want in public education. But most do not want it dismantled. Their top priorities are straightforward: teach students real-world skills, keep schools safe and make learning more engaging. Parents want more say in their children’s education, and they want schools to prepare young people to be active, participating citizens.

Anaheim Union High School District in California offers a for changing districts and communities, not just individual schools: reimagining what counts as knowledge, redesigning how educators are utilized and rethinking the boundaries of learning in high school, college and the workplace. The district serves 26,000 students in 20 junior and senior high schools, more than 80% of them high-needs. Its journey shows the pedagogical and political power of building shared purpose around deeper, more personalized learning tied to real-world skills.

The district made three big moves. It built the Anaheim Collaborative, a partnership that brings together colleges, social and health agencies, businesses and local organizations. It invested in community schooling that brings parent and student voice into teaching and learning. And it placed a premium on learning academic content through the 5Cs: collaboration, creativity, critical thinking, communication and compassion.

Anaheim began by loosening the grip of test-based curriculum and investing in teachers, many in hybrid roles, to lead bold innovations with their students. For example, biology teacher Sabina Giakoumis led the development of the Magnolia Agriculture Community Center, which fueled interdisciplinary teaching and service learning as students applied math and science to address Anaheim’s food deserts and develop entrepreneurial skills. Jason Collar, a social studies teacher, leveraged a Minecraft elective to engage students in solving neighborhood problems and soon established an e-sports career pathway in partnership with Fullerton College.

With the , the district offers an early glimpse of how AI can customize learning with whole-child supports, such as an AI-driven tutor that can help guide students’ thinking, and measure academic and so-called soft skills. Its Cambridge Virtual Academy has broken from the factory model of schooling by organizing teachers into interdisciplinary teams, blending live instruction with flexible independent study, and using peer mentoring and AI tools to strengthen relationships among teachers and students. Since the school opened in 2021, full-time enrollment has grown from 100 to 315 students.

District graduation rates have significantly since 2016, from 86% to 94%, and Anaheim Orange County counterparts serving fewer high-needs students in college admission and persistence rates. It is also California鈥檚 first Democracy District, integrating civic learning across schools and disciplines.

But Anaheim also teaches a humbling lesson: What got the district this far will not get it all the way to system transformation. Too many of its middle and high schools still operate with traditional bell schedules and isolated classrooms. Too few teachers have the time to learn from colleagues. The district’s collective bargaining agreement and salary schedule remain rooted in an archaic, one-teacher/one-classroom model that discourages educators from pushing one another to improve and sharing responsibility for student success. And the district office still needs a clearer mechanism to identify and spread teaching talent across schools.

These are not criticisms. They are mile markers on the roadmap to transformation. Drawing on the lessons learned, three major steps stand out.

First, build a community infrastructure for deeper, purposeful, real-world learning. Districts should formalize partnerships among colleges, health and social service agencies, nonprofits, business and industry into advisory boards and learning exchanges. They should establish a shared data system that combines traditional metrics with measures of student voice and parent engagement, civic participation and readiness for careers in the age of AI.

Second, redesign time, staffing and the job of teaching around shared accountability for results. Teaching teams, not isolated educators, must become the default unit of secondary school redesign. These teams should include academic teachers, career and technical educators, counselors, community school staff, college faculty and industry or community mentors who share responsibility for a common group of students. This will require new ways of thinking about human capital, including joint appointments and boundary-spanning roles for educators who work across schools, colleges, workplaces and community organizations.

Third, leverage AI to spur human-connected learning. Used poorly, AI will deepen the factory model: more screen time and more depersonalization. Used well, it can help teachers and students see what traditional schooling and current metrics miss: how young people are thinking, collaborating and creating. Districts should focus AI investments on helping students and teachers apply and reflect on what they are learning.

Not possible?

It is already happening across the country, albeit in bits and pieces. A window for transformation is opening. Growing in career education, apprenticeships and credentials suggests the field is ready to transcend political divides. The is leading a national effort in red and blue states to rethink the high school experience, coupled with efforts to overhaul what counts for college and career readiness. and the are working with innovative school districts to develop talent pipelines at scale.

Public education has a good future if educators, parents, students and business leaders work together locally to make the big changes Americans, Democrats and Republicans alike, say they want 鈥� and that every student deserves in this rapidly changing world.

A researcher at , a nonprofit focused on human connection in the age of AI, Lee asked: Why not?

In a word, the girl said: Instagram.

鈥淚f you try to dance at prom, you’re going to look stupid at some point,鈥� Lee recalled her saying. Eventually someone will pull out a phone and you鈥檒l end up on someone鈥檚 feed, seen by 鈥渢he entire school鈥� with mortifying results. Better just to play it safe. 

鈥淓verybody just goes to prom to look cute,鈥� the girl explained, 鈥渢ake a picture for the 鈥榞ram, eat and leave.鈥�

For Lee, who has spent years studying human belonging, that exchange unlocked an important, if unspoken, part of why AI holds such appeal. 鈥淲e’ve created this set of conditions where young people don’t feel like they have permission to be their real, unfiltered selves,鈥� she said in an interview. So they turn to AI, which is programmed to affirm them at every step.

from Lee and her colleagues offer this insight among others, painting a detailed portrait of how young people use AI and why. They surveyed 2,383 people ages 13 to 24 across the U.S. and found that for nearly half of them, AI has already reshaped their relationships in ways that are largely flying under the radar of parents, teachers and policymakers.

Among the findings:

• Just 15% of young people are in relationships with 鈥減ersonified AI鈥� characters 鈥� but for about 45%, AI is already reshaping their real-life relationships;
• 53% of young people say they set clear boundaries with AI, using it alongside 鈥� not instead of 鈥� human support;
• 61% say parents rarely or never talk to them about AI, and 53% say the same about teachers;
• Youth from low-income households are three times less likely as others to engage with AI, but they report greater feeling: 21% feel lonely often or all the time, compared to 6% of high-income youth; 57% feel like a burden to others, compared to 42%; and only 34% feel a strong sense of belonging at school, compared to 62%.

For the study, researchers sorted respondents into four broad clusters. About 28% rarely or never use AI, often out of ethical reasons or just disinterest. The largest group, 39%, uses AI primarily as a practical tool. They turn to chatbots such as Claude, ChatGPT and Google鈥檚 Gemini for homework and research, while keeping clear boundaries between AI and their emotional lives. 

Another 18% use AI for personal and relational support, such as venting about a tough day, seeking relationship advice and processing emotions. And 15% engage with AI characters and personas in more intimate, companion-like ways.

Within the four groups, researchers found nine variations that challenge the conventional wisdom around AI use. For instance, among those who use AI for emotional support were two very different groups. Rithm calls them 鈥淪ocial Processors鈥� and 鈥淧rivate Processors.鈥� While they may look similar from the outside 鈥� both say they have lots of friends and use AI to work through their emotions 鈥� surveys found that the Social Processors use AI as just one tool among many. The Private Processors, by contrast, use it as a substitute for real human interactions because they feel they can’t bring problems to those around them.

That data point could hold the key to understanding problematic AI use, Lee and her colleagues said, challenging the idea that lonely teens with small social circles are most at risk of unhealthy AI dependence. The data suggest something else altogether, said Kashyap Rajesh, a rising junior at Cornell University who consulted on the report.

鈥淭he driver of risky AI use is not necessarily isolation,鈥� he said. 鈥淚t’s feeling like a burden [to others] 鈥� and that came through in the research.鈥� 

The number of friends a young person has, the size of their social circle, how busy they are, whether they鈥檝e got family nearby and even their feelings of loneliness barely predict whether they鈥檒l fall into dependent AI use, he said. 鈥淲hat actually predicts it is specific feelings: Feeling like a burden to others, feeling like you can’t be your real self, feeling like there’s no one to turn to.鈥�

Julia Freeland Fisher, a researcher at the Clayton Christensen Institute who advised on the study, said that finding should help start a different kind of conversation around AI. 鈥淏urdening one another is building reciprocity, which is how we maintain the social contract, how we maintain social cohesion,鈥� she said. That young people are increasingly bypassing this step should be alarming, she said.

鈥淎I companions wouldn’t be nearly so disruptive to human connection if we had a sturdier social fabric,鈥� said Fisher. 鈥淚t’s the weakness of our social fabric that makes these [findings] so worrisome, not necessarily the technology itself.鈥�

鈥業t just keeps feeling easier than the alternative鈥�

For Lee, the finding on being a burden reframes so much of our understanding about young people鈥檚 relationship to AI. Virtually every survey respondent reported a specific 鈥渞elational rupture鈥� or crisis that made them turn to the technology. 

One young woman’s first question to a chatbot was, “I didn’t get asked to Homecoming 鈥� am I unlovable?” Another: “I got into a huge fight with my best friend, and I don’t want to tell anybody else because I don’t want them to take sides, so I needed to ask AI.”

“Story after story after story,” Lee recalled, “of a very singular, acute, discrete moment when they really had a moment of need and needed somewhere to put it.”

Rajesh, the Cornell student, said the data reveal a steady shift in which perhaps millions of young people are quietly moving from letting AI help with homework to asking it to mediate their emotional lives.

鈥淭hey start off using it to help them write an essay, or help them prepare for their interview, or to study for an exam,鈥� he said. 鈥淎nd they’re like, ‘OK, damn, this is really good, this is really helpful.’ And eventually their interactions escalate.鈥�

The drift happens gradually, he said. AI helps draft an email or respond to a text. Next it鈥檚 helping to navigate a social situation. Before long it鈥檚 processing a breakup.

Rajesh, who鈥檚 studying information science and AI policy, said his own AI use crept up on him: He went from studying with Claude to creating personalized AI study guides to wondering if even attending class mattered. 

鈥淚 found that how many times I go to class and how actively I’m paying attention in class is actually not the biggest indicator of my understanding of the content or exam performance,鈥� he said. 鈥淚t’s actually just how much time I spend with Claude dissecting the lecture slides and building study guides that work for me.鈥�

The report notes that because even productivity-focused platforms like ChatGPT, Gemini and Claude are engineered to interact with warmth and reassurance, what starts out as homework help or playful experimentation can evolve into a substitute for human interaction.

What adults get wrong

Alongside the findings on AI use, researchers found that how adults talk about AI is also potentially problematic: Their conversations are almost always about academic integrity 鈥� cheating, plagiarism, source citation 鈥� and rarely about relationships.

Rajesh said adults should be asking directly whether young people are using AI to process emotions, to rehearse hard conversations and to get support when they鈥檙e struggling. 鈥淭hose are questions that signal to a young person that the adult knows this dimension exists and isn’t going to freak out about it 鈥� which is, I think, the prerequisite for any honest conversation happening at all.鈥�

Michelle Culver, the Rithm Project鈥檚 founder and a co-author of the report, said young people tell researchers that when the topic is AI use, they’re 鈥渘avigating it alone.鈥� She suggested that adults approach the topic with 鈥渃uriosity鈥� rather than 鈥渏udgment or shaming.鈥� That could help both sides gain insight into each others鈥� struggles in the face of a technology that鈥檚 constantly challenging their reality.

In the same way that educators are worried that young people aren’t engaging in the 鈥減roductive struggle鈥� of learning academic content, Culver said, 鈥淲e similarly worry that young people might offload the relational work to AI and become ill-equipped to handle the very messy human friction of real relationships.鈥�