Eduwonk

ICYMI – Laura LoGerfo, Kymyona Burke, Carol Jago and I talked NAEP on a LinkedIn Live earlier this week. I took a look at how the new federal education tax credits are playing in Virginia.

Next Friday Ed Week and HMH hosting a discussion about teaching and learning in the AI-era. Jack Lynch will moderate a conversation with Jean-Claude Brizard, Francie Alexander, and me.

New WonkyFolk. Jed and I talk with Colorado’s Parker Baxter who has evaluated reforms in Denver for a while. Denver is a weird mix of substantial gains and then also a surprising amount of indifference – not only from critics but from within the reform community.

You can listen on Spotify or on Apple, or wherever you get podcasts.

Let’s Read.

If you’re reading this, I suspect I don’t have to tell you about the importance of literacy to life success. As I noted in a pre-pandemic column for The 74,

But if we’re being honest, we’ve gotten reading wrong for a long time, in a lot of different ways. The Science of Reading isn’t all new; in some cases, it’s half-century-old research that struggled to gain traction in an education sector dominated by romantic ideas and adult politics. For a while, we coded reading instruction methods as Republican or Democratic. We still debate how much content and knowledge matter—even though they matter a lot to literacy. (James Traub’s new book is important on this point, as well as more generally.)

Politically, right now, Democrats have a predicate problem. You often have to embrace the predicate of an argument to drive a point home politically. For instance:

Yes, crime and disorder are a problem, but sending the National Guard into American cities is not the way to solve it.

Yes, immigration at the southern border was too unchecked, but what ICE is doing now violates our laws and customs and is profoundly un-American.

Yes, sports and safe private spaces for women are special cases, but transgender people in the United States should be able to live free from discrimination and harassment.

Yes, parents should have choices about where they send their kids to school, but we also need real accountability for all schools receiving public money.

The problem is obvious. The italicized parts of those statements are party-splitters for Democrats right now. They get you labeled racist, xenophobic, transphobic, or—in our part of the world—a “privatizer,” which for education activists might even be worse than any of the other labels.

Want Eduwonk.com in your inbox via Substack?   Sign up for free here.

But here’s one that is not a party-splitter:

We need to make sure reading is taught according to the best available evidence and do far more to support teachers and schools in helping students become effective readers.

No italics.

In fact, the part of that statement that is a party-splitter is the part about resources. And it doesn’t split the Dems; it splits the Rs.

Democrats have more or less handed the reading issue to Republicans. The party killed George Bush’s billion-dollar reading program—which was Science of Reading—in a fit of political pique. And then, unless you believe that proximity to the Gulf of Mexico is linked to reading achievement, Democrats largely stood idly by as a set of Republican governors got serious about evidence-based instruction, high-quality materials, and support for teachers. Jared Polis (CO) has a good education story to tell. Gretchen Whitmer (MI) does too, to some extent, though she seems disinclined to run. Wes Moore brought the state chief who led Mississippi’s reading gains to Maryland, but he’s hamstrung by a budget mess. But most Democratic governors had better hope attention is focused elsewhere. Most Republicans, too—though some can lay claim to impressive work around reading and instructional materials, or at least hop into that slipstream.

Enter Rahm Emanuel. The former Democratic congressman, mayor, and White House chief of staff is out there, loudly talking about reading. And why not? The issue is sitting in plain sight. The Democratic play is obvious. And the lane is open.

By setting an ambitious goal on reading achievement, Democrats can get on the right side of the outcomes and achievement debate. Every kid should be reading early. We should support adolescent literacy for students who are still struggling, especially post-pandemic. We should pay more attention to reading and students with disabilities. It’s a big idea, it’s attainable, and it resonates—especially with parents of kids with special needs, boys, struggling readers, and parents more generally. And by getting on the right side of the resources argument—we need to support schools and teachers in doing this—Democrats can differentiate. Bonus: It doesn’t make you sound weird to the average parent and create a negative frame in the way that championing things like “equity grading” or deemphasizing math does.

I’m not suggesting this is the only issue Democrats should run on in 2028. Trump is handing Democrats big openings on civil liberties, foreign policy, and—of course—prices and affordability. Nor am I suggesting a national election will turn on education. That’s unlikely. But as we’ve discussed before, education issues can help frame a candidate’s larger case: Bill Clinton and charters as a “New” Democrat; George Bush and compassionate conservatism, signaling he wasn’t Newt Gingrich; Obama and education reform. Or, conversely, the devastating effect of the “they’re for they/them, and I’m for you” line of attack.

Set a bold goal for national literacy and then get to work. The politics and the policy line up. Bill Clinton once noted that if you do good policy, good politics will follow. It’s advice that still applies, even in these upside-down political times.

Want Eduwonk.com in your inbox via Substack?   Sign up for free here.

Coming attractions:

Tomorrow, Wednesday, join Bellwether at 12p ET for a LinkedIn Live conversation with insiders from NAGB and outside experts to discuss what’s happening on NAEP, why 12th-grade NAEP matters more than you might think, and why learning recovery still must be a front and center issue.

I’m doing a fireside chat at UVA the afternoon of January 26th in Bavarro Hall, would be great to see you there if you’re in the Charlottesville area. On the 30th I’m doing an Education Week webinar with HMH CEO Jack Lynch where we will discuss whether run prevention will be enough for the Red Sox to make the playoffs this year. (…it’s about AI and an interesting line-up, Jean-Claude Brizzard and Francine Alexander, I hope you can join).

ICYMI – a few things to watch in 2026. MLK on our rendezvous with chaos.

Breaking: Already under reelection pressure, well-regarded Senator Bill Cassidy (R) who chairs the senate committee that handles education officially has a Trump-endorsed primary challenger. This will impact education politics and policy.

Want Eduwonk.com in your inbox via Substack?   Sign up for free here.

Wadin’ through the waste stormy winter

Let’s start with the high note. I came of age in the Mary Sue Terry and Douglas Wilder era of Virginia politics. Robert Frye, the first Black school board chair in Fairfax County, lived a few houses down from me. That first might not seem like a big deal now, but it was at the time. Abigail Spanberger becoming governor of Virginia this past weekend is another important—albeit, in my view, long overdue—first. It’s good to see. She’s going to have her hands full, though. Her pick for State Superintendent of Public Instruction, Jenna Conway, is a fantastic choice, serious talent.

Earlier this month, on his way out the door at the end of this term (Virginia governors only serve one), outgoing Virginia Governor Glenn Youngkin (R) announced that Virginia would participate in the new K-12 education tax credit program included in last year’s tax bill—the “OB3,” or whatever you want to call it bill. On the one hand, the Virginia announcement was a little premature. The regulations for the new program (which we just talked about) aren’t done, and there are potential moving parts. On the other hand, Youngkin is a private citizen again, and he was in a hurry at the end of his term.

People predictably fell apart.

Let’s stipulate we probably won’t see the same reaction if Colorado Governor Jared Polis (D), who also said his state will participate, ends up as the Democratic nominee in 2028. Or if other blue state governors get int. Former Obama Secretary of Education Arne Duncan and former Democratic mayor Jorge Elorza have urged Blue states to participate. I’m not saying it’s a great policy you should embrace. I am suggesting you evaluate it on its merits rather than let partisanship rot your brain. There is a lot going on here around it.

Here’s a quick primer on the program with a very good set of FAQs and information about the basic structure if you want to learn more.

Premature Chadulation: You should always read Chad Aldeman, and he has a take on this Virginia move. But I think he’s too early. We don’t know exactly what the program looks like yet! And the Youngkin submission might be binding under some interpretations. It might not. It’s messy!

So let’s talk about the politics for a minute, because they’re interesting. These scholarships are cleverly designed, so what’s happening in Virginia has relevance elsewhere (and I’m not just saying that to encourage you to keep reading). I should note Iowa is also already in.

For Youngkin, the politics are straightforward. He gets a school choice talking point and a feather in his cap with the base. A knock on him on the political right is that he didn’t do enough on school choice while in office. I don’t think that’s entirely fair. Virginia’s constitution limits most kinds of school choice. A powerful entrenched education establishment, regulatory capture, and somewhat self-satisfied education culture limit things even more*. The votes were never there in the state legislature. He could only do so much.

Youngkin did open partnership lab schools around the state (I was involved in that effort), where public school districts (we call them divisions) and colleges and universities open public schools around specific focus areas. There are now schools focused on shipbuilding, health trades, data work, and aerospace, for instance. That’s a pretty middle-of-the-road idea that would barely occasion mention in a state like Colorado, or even New York or Massachusetts. And still, the fight over it was hammer and tongs the whole way. Regardless, fair or not, some folks on the right think Youngkin disappointed them on this front.

So getting Virginia into this new program early is all upside for Youngkin. He can say he worked to expand choice until his very last days in office. Whether as a legacy item or for a possible future run for public office, that’s a good talking point!

But Virginia has a new governor as of this weekend: Abigail Spanberger (D). She won in a romp in November in an election that didn’t have a lot to do with education. The conventional wisdom says Youngkin’s move puts her in a box. I think that’s wrong. I’m sure this wasn’t Youngkin’s intent, but the move arguably gives Spanberger optionality where she didn’t have it. Politicians love optionality.

Want Eduwonk.com in your inbox via Substack?   Sign up for free here.

And her politics are more complicated.

If the decision on whether to participate had simply fallen to Spanberger, she would have faced cross-pressures between the teachers unions and education establishment, they loathe this program, and the prospect of explaining why Virginia would leave a lot of federal education money on the table. That’s an unappealing choice for Democratic governors and a real wedge. Again, like it or not, this is a clever program.

In Virginia, there are many wealthy taxpayers who can participate in the education tax credit program and claim the tax credit. National estimates range from 120 million to almost 140 million taxpayers. Virginia has plenty of those high earners. It will be awkward to explain why they are giving for tax credits to support education initiatives in other states.

Youngkin also created a political headache for Spanberger by listing a tentatively approved set of scholarship-granting organizations in Virginia. So this isn’t just abstract money flowing to other states. It will be easy to communicate what’s being left on the table for kids right here in Virginia. And just like national Dems went into overdrive to scuff up Youngkin wherever they could and dim his chances as a rising political star, national Rs will now try to do the same thing to Spanberger and this will be a target. I’d expect ads if she elects to forgo this program.

Beyond Virginia, keep an eye on how these politics evolve nationwide as the scholarships move from abstract idea to actual education initiatives in specific places.

For Spanberger, simply opting out could become a 2028 liability, depending on how the program plays out. When some Democratic governors opt in, those who opt out will need a better explanation than “Trump sucks.” One lesson Democrats still haven’t absorbed on education: people are deeply pragmatic when it comes to their own kids. Governors who opt out had better point to an education policy agenda so robust around genuine school improvement that it offsets the politics. “We didn’t do X because we are doing Y” can work—but only if Y isn’t the same old weak soup. There is an argument to be made around accountability.

In any event, this no longer presents a simple opt-in-or-opt-out argument in Virginia, because Youngkin just handed Spanberger several process-based options to push back. She could challenge the federal government on whether Virginia’s action was even legal, given that the regulations aren’t in place. People disagree about how binding these commitments are before the rules are finalized. It’s messy, and a lawsuit is possible.

She could also argue within Virginia that the timing was premature because the regulations aren’t final, and muddy the issue that way as Chad suggests. She could argue for pulling back once the regulations are final. The program puts the decision with governors, but legislatures could still get involved. The Attorney General could decide to get involved. A lot of plays.

Conversely, she could say the decision wasn’t hers, that Virginia is now obligated, and simply move forward. She could agree that Virginia is bound for 2027 and revisit the issue for 2028—when the political mood around the program may look different for any number of reasons, including other Trump administration actions or high-profile problems as the program is implemented. This could turn into an intramural squabble rather than blue on red.

I don’t know what she’ll do. But I do know this move expanded her options a lot more than it tied her hands. And as Democrats try to find their way with this program, that’s worth watching.

*You’d think a state with Virgina’s politics and demographics (and avowed commitment to equity) and where more than half of Black students, low-income, and Hispanic students are below basic on the NAEP at key milestones, so functionally unprepared for work, college, or the military, that there would be a fierce urgency to improve. You’d be wrong!

Want Eduwonk.com in your inbox via Substack?   Sign up for free here.

Modern man is presently having a rendezvous with chaos, not merely because of human badness, but also because of human stupidity. If Western civilization continues to degenerate until it, like twenty-four of its predecessors, falls hopelessly into a bottomless void, the cause will be not only its undeniable sinfulness, but also its appalling blindness. And if American democracy gradually disintegrates it will be due as much to a lack of insight as to a lack of commitment to right.

– MLK, Love in Action. 1963.

Predictions are hard, but here’s some of what I’m watching this year.

First, ICYMI – 2026 Eduwonk In and Out list here. Holiday books list here if you still want reading ideas. Bonus one that didn’t make the list, still reading, is Hotshot: A Life on Fire. If you enjoyed books like Educated or Welcome to the Goddamn Ice Cube, both on the 2018 list, then you might like this.

2026 Eduwonk word of the year: Variance. Expect variance across the board, high variance. In education we’re embracing variance with ideas like ESAs or more flexibility for states around federal dollars and rules. That will work out well in some places, not so well in others. You might not like RFK’s vaccine policies, but the new food pyramid is pretty good and a rebuke to industry food lobbying many thought they’d never see. Expect high variance across the board at such a transitory time.

The 2026 midterms won’t be about education. Midterms generally are a referendum on the incumbent and, more recently, structural issues around polarization and redistricting. But expect education to emerge in the 2028 national conversation among Democrats. Smart Dems know the party’s interest-group-driven approach is a liability; expect new ideas. Rahm Emanuel is an early mover here, but keep an eye out for others.

A country can have a low birthrate, low rates of immigration, but it can’t have both and remain economically robust (personally, I’m for rejecting the choice and embracing both family-encouraging policies and robust managed immigration). But the current approach we’re taking by default and active choice has all sorts of economic implications. It also matters for schools. Fewer kids along with more parents frustrated and choosing alternatives to the public schools and pre-existing financial pressure = Not great! Expect more attention to consolidation, closures, and tough decisions that matter to the future of the public education sector (this will also affect the for-and non-profit sectors in education as well, contact me if you want to learn more about BW’s M&A work).

Want Eduwonk.com in your inbox via Substack?   Sign up for free here.

Ed tech will continue to emerge as a flashpoint. The debate about AI, technology, and kids is not going to break cleanly left/right or red/blue. Australia’s play—a social media ban for young people—is being watched and proposed here.

Bill Gates thinks AI will supplant teachers. I wouldn’t bet on it. That prediction is likely to join the pile of similar ones by everyone from Thomas Edison to Hyman Rickover and Steve Jobs. The realization that AI might matter more to administration, management, and support than to actual instruction seems to be growing. Watch that space. The use cases—special education paperwork, assistants for teachers, efficiency and data—are compelling. More compelling than the idea that Sam Altman will just teach the kids. One proof point for this? Ed tech 1.0 and how it impacted the sector in ways outside the classroom.

You can check out BW’s work on AI here.

Civics will be a 2026 flashpoint. It’s A250, and President Trump plans to celebrate it as the founders almost certainly envisioned, with MMA fights and other neo-Roman gladiatorial spectacles, nationalism, divisive and coercive issues, and the like…. Civics is pretty divisive in K–12 schools, with too many folks who think schools aren’t doing their job if they don’t produce little proto-revolutionaries or, conversely, reflexive nationalists.

WCAG. Based on my surveying of industry leaders and state officials, you probably haven’t heard of WCAG. You will. It’s a set of regulations around web accessibility for people with vision needs. Sensible stuff to ensure access, and that matters in public sector activities—including education—where broad access is essential. New rules go into effect this spring. States are all over the place on compliance. How the new regulations will be enforced is something of an open question as well. On the one hand, the division at the Department of Justice that oversees it is now mostly a ghost town, and remaining staff are focused elsewhere (and at the White House the Trump team is trying to get rid of ASL interpreters, so this is not exactly a pro-accommodations crowd). There is also, however, the possibility of frivolous lawsuits that could discredit the new regulations. Colorado offers an example of a productive enforcement model. Sleeper issue to keep an eye on.

Trump tuition scholarships. The Trump tuition scholarships that were included in last year’s tax bill are a devilishly clever policy that will have the dual effect of supporting more school choice while splitting Democrats. It’s a dollar for dollar $1700 tax credit regardless of whether the state where you live participates. If Democrat-led states, which often have more affluent taxpayers, opt in, then leaders there piss off teachers’ unions and other adult groups. If they don’t participate, then they have to explain why they are leaving what could be a lot of money on the table. Already, Dem governors are staking out different positions, and there is a testy debate behind the scenes about the best path forward. And the policy isn’t even finalized yet! Regs come later this year. At issue is how broad usage of the funds will be and how much scholarship-granting organizations could fund public school-facing activities.

Here’s the thing: This is more like casino gambling than an education policy in terms of policy diffusion. You have a lot of governors who don’t love gambling, but like their citizens putting tax dollars in the coffers of neighboring states even less. Former Pennsylvania Governor Ed Rendell notably gave voice to this sentiment. The tax credit policy seems likely to spread because it will be hard to stay out over time (just as we’ve seen with gambling), especially if the regs allow programs that benefit public school students.

Did you think the religious charter school issue was dead after the Supreme Court deadlocked 4–4? Nope. The stakes are too high. Keep an eye on this TN case, and there will be more.

It’ll be a challenging year. Wishing you well.

Want Eduwonk.com in your inbox via Substack?   Sign up for free here.

It’s that time. The Eduwonk In and Out list. 2025 version here. Other past ones here.

ICYMI – the holiday book list, books that are good all year long, is here.

Happy New Year.

Out	In
Savage Inequalities	Right to exit
Vladimir Lenin	Vladimir Kogan
Cromnibus	Appropriations bills
Trad math	Trad wives
Cohesion	Variability
Bold philanthropic initiatives	Epstein reveals
The old guard	Lindsay Fryer
Conferences	Convenings
Lobbying	Influence
Reading wars	Natalie Wexler
Accreditation	Accreditation
PBR	PBA
Pell	Workforce Pell
AI as student tutor	AI as systems support
Covid outbreaks	Measles outbreaks
Heritage	The Dispatch
Coercive left-wing DEI	Coercive right-wing DEI
A1	A250
Higher Ed Act Reauthorization	Reconciliation implementation
Mediocrity	Kelsey Piper
NCLB Revisionism	NCLB Revisionism Revisionism
Unlimited borrowing	Loan limits
America First Policy Institute	ExcelInED
Secondary/Postsecondary silos	Blurred space
ECE as a talking point	Sara Mead and Jenna Conway
Education atrophy	Education abundance
Reactionary higher ed	Colleen Campbell
Transgender sports restrictions are transphobia	Transgender sports restrictions are mainstream Democratic policy
Program administration	Interagency Agreements
College	Early-college high school
McKenzie Scott	Annenberg
Vagueness	Silence
Vibes	Chad Aldeman
University governance	United States Department of Justice
Department of Education	Department of Labor
Earnings	Earnings tests
Mike Petrilli’s Twitter	MIke Petrilli’s Substack
Finland	England
Science of Reading	Science of Math
Policy by press release	Policy by pressure

Want Eduwonk.com in your inbox via Substack?   Sign up for free here.

In Eduwonk today, new WonkyFolk, some VA news, 2025 holiday books. This is probably the last post of the year. There was some noise about a possible big announcement from the administration before Christmas but sounds less likely. So thank you for reading, see you in early January.

Jed and I did a holiday–themed WonkyFolk, but he’s a grinch. Seriously. He showed up with an Elf on the Shelf. We covered a lot of ground, 2025 reactions, tech and cell phones, Rod Paige, and why education conversations are so stunted.

You can listen or read here, and see the notes, or wherever you get podcasts.

Or watch here:

New Dominion?

On Tuesday Virginia’s non-partisan legislative analysis body, JLARC, released its look at the new school accountability system. Important to policymaking in VA. Not going to belabor that here, it’s the holidays. But, some quick reax here and here.

Holiday books.

Which brings us to….it’s that time of year again. Here are some books I read in 2024 that stuck with me — useful, provocative, or just enjoyable. No themes except worth your time and good for a gift. Not too late to shop for Christmas. Past years here for more ideas.

First, on education:

The Future of Tutoring — Liz Cohen

Cohen takes what was, at least until Trump stormed back on the scene and AI exploded, the biggest intervention/fad/issue in education and actually explains what works, what doesn’t, and why. If you want to cut through the hype, the vendor fog, and evolving definitions of what “high-dosage” means, then this book is the best tutor around. Sorry. Liz is a policy person, but the book feels like a school book.

No Adult Left Behind — Vlad Kogan

Kogan is one of the sharpest analysts of how schools really operate in terms of education politics (spoiler, adult interests often trump what might help kids as you might have inferred from the title). He’s an academic but he writes in English. And with a clarity you don’t often see in the space. Probably the most straight ahead book on education politics since Joe Williams. (Deep cut). Kogan breaks down the incentives that shape school governance, politics, and decision-making.

Leveled Reading, Leveled Lives — Timothy Shanahan

Reading is power. There is a reason that throughout history when someone wanted to control others they went after literacy. Down the street from where I live is the grave of a guy who was hunted by Confederates for years, and ultimately murdered, for teaching Black Americans to read up to and during the Civil War. It’s a sober reminder of why this matters. But as is our way in this sector, we’ve created Republican and Democratic ways to teach reading. We’ve ignored decades of research. We even argue sometimes about how important it is. As a result, we’ve sentenced millions of Americans to diminished lives. The Science of Reading is the latest, encouraging, effort to get that right. Shanahan lays out why the complaints about reading, and what kids are reading in schools are not a side show but must be a central education issue.

Want Eduwonk.com in your inbox via Substack?   Sign up for free here.

More general books:

The Barn — Wright Thompson

Did you like Pappyland? This is not Pappyland. It’s a deep dive on the murder of Emmett Till from the same writer. The Barn includes a lot of new information and specifics that even if you’re familiar with this atrocity beyond the broad contours will probably be new to you. We wasted a lot of time and energy on flaky DEI books over the past decade, read a book like this instead.

John & Paul: A Love Story in Songs — Ian Leslie

My wife and I decided to see Ringo Starr and Paul McCartney in the same calendar year this year. We succeeded. I’m not an obsessive Beatles fan, but their genius and influence is undeniable. Leslie looks at Lennon and McCartney not as icons but as human beings in relationship with each other. It’s hard to think of a new angle on the Beatles, but he finds one: The songs they wrote to each other, that’s the conversation. So read this one for two reasons. First, it’s lovely. You might even find the room getting dusty at points. Second, anyone who has worked in close professional partnerships will learn from and reflect on the tale. A bonus? You learn the intimate history of some of the greatest songs in the songbook.

The Uncool — Cameron Crowe

I think two of the best books on 80s youth culture were Cameron Crowe’s Fast Times and Patricia Hersch’s A Tribe Apart. Here, Crowe tells his life story. Is this an unsparing take on things. Of course not, that was never Crowe’s thing. He partied with the bands. He wasn’t merciless. But it’s brain candy, a fun-well written read, with great stories, and some insights. This is for the music or movie lover in your life.

American Vikings — Martyn Whitlock

OK, for a guy who says I’m not a Viking guy I do recommend Viking books from time to time. A few years ago it was the fantastic The Long Ships. And I will say that seeing actual Viking ruins in Iceland fascinated me. This year for the beach I read American Vikings, a look at the evidence of Viking exploration in North America and how they show up today. The history of Vikings in North America turns out to be more interesting — and more contested and more present — than you might think on first glance.

Why Nothing Works  — Marc Dunkelman

The past few weeks have seen an upsurge in Dunkelman discourse. It’s an important book and argument. I suggested this book along with two others earlier this year as valuable markers of where we are and how we got here. Whether you agree in whole, part, or not at all, this is an important book and contribution to the discourse about how we go forward.

That Book Is Dangerous — Adam Szetela

Book banning is one of those issues that most people aren’t really against. They’re against banning of stuff they like, less concerned with stuff they don’t. Today’s conservatives are for free speech except around issues of race, gender, and so forth. Today’s left is against book banning and censorship except around some issues of gender, race, and so forth. Because it’s about power not first principles. Szetela looks at this in the context of publishing. It’s an echo of Diane Ravitch’s 2003 Language Police.

The Genius Myth — Helen Lewis

Helen Lewis is a fantastic writer on almost any topic. Here she looks at “genius” through a historical ens (you get a Beatles cameo here, too). What really makes what we think of as genius possible? And why can’t we accept what Lewis calls its, “random, unpredictable nature?”

I Wish Someone Had Told Me…  — Dana Perino.

I’m not a huge fan of self-help books, though I did recommend Mark Manson’s Subtle Art a few years ago. This one, though, might be good for a young person in your life. It’s pretty straightforward, you could read it on an airplane. It’s a lot of people’s take on how to be successful in work and life around some key issues as well as her experience. Given the randomness of social capital it’s not a bad primer for young people moving into professional life.

The 5 Types of Wealth — Sahil Bloom

OK, maybe I do read more self-help books than I think? This book isn’t about how money won’t make you happy – it’s about how it’s not the only thing that will and it’s not enough. Another quick read, and another good one for young people.

Want Eduwonk.com in your inbox via Substack?   Sign up for free here.

ICYMI – I wrote about Virginia ed politics here. About this week’s interagency agreements here. Nat Malkus, Rick Hess, and I discuss the goings on here on The Report Card.

I was at a gathering recently, and a Silicon Valley person who had transitioned into education was talking about how he approaches personnel decisions—basically using data: replacing lowest-performers each year. Essentially, the idea is that it’s a coin flip, but if your selection process is genuinely reliable, the odds will be in your favor.

A more traditional education person in the conversation had a host of questions—about support, counseling, and various other things.

The exchange was fascinating to watch because they were talking past each other and quite literally didn’t understand one another or what was being said. It was a real Mars–Venus culture clash.

We have to figure out how to talk the same language because we’re staring down a serious problem. The past few days have seen a flurry of articles from writers who are not traditional characters on the education beat. And they point up a culture clash that isn’t R and D, left or right—it’s more about who thinks we have a serious problem and who thinks the erosion of standards isn’t a big deal, or is acceptable in service of other goals.

What these three recent stories have in common is stark takes calling attention to an issue that doesn’t get enough attention: it’s not only poor, Black, or Hispanic students struggling in schools. Subpar learning is widespread.

Andrew Rice wrote about the situation in tony Montclair, New Jersey, for New York Magazine.

At The Argument Kelsey Piper dug into the UCSD math issue, which is hardly only a problem at UCSD or in California.

She followed it up with a look at what this is actually about and why, despite howls of protest from people who are OK with the status quo, no one is saying everyone will be an engineer, we’re talking about pretty low-level skills that can be universal. And what no one seems to be talking about is the skilled part of skilled trades, you have to be able to do math to be successful if you chose to do something besides college. Actually more. Technical jobs require more math than sociology.

Want Eduwonk.com in your inbox via Substack?   Sign up for free here.

This is the kind of math we’re talking about at the 8th-grade level. If you’re not able to do this you’re going to struggle in the skilled trades or higher education.

Where does it all lead? Rose Horowitch dug into that for The Atlantic.

All three articles are worth reading, and all three point up a real problem whether you approach it from the vantage point of personal agency, freedom, and choice—or American competitiveness.

The only thing missing? Political traction to address it in too many places. As Tom Kane notes in the New York Magazine article:

What’s stunning is just how much professionals tolerate—and, in some cases, contribute to—obfuscation as a matter of course. We’ve discredited measurement, transparency, and the idea that performance matters, and we’ve baked it into the political price.

Perhaps that’s why political traction for such an obvious, and real, problem is so elusive?

*That’s a misquote. The actual statement from the damaged Apollo 13 was, “we’ve had a problem.” You can listen here.

Friday Fish Porn

Here’s Bellwether’s managing partner Rebecca Goldberg with a nice one in the Roaring Fork Valley of Colorado (from a few weeks ago when it was warmer, if you missed the context clues). Good time to point you toward Bellwether’s new strategic plan for the next several years, learn more here.

This picture is part of this one of a kind archive with hundreds of pictures of education types and their relatives with fish from rivers, lakes, and streams all over the world. Send me yours.

Want Eduwonk.com in your inbox via Substack?   Sign up for free here.

New Report Card podcast. Rick Hess and I joined Nat Malkus to discuss what’s happening around higher education, the elections, and more in education. Rick and I agree that New York’s gifted program needs some work! (Recorded just before the announcement from ED this week, which I get to below).

“Restructuring” The Department of Education

I don’t have much in common with Donald Trump, but one thing we apparently share is a fondness for watches. We don’t have many of the same ones—his collection reportedly runs to Patek Philippe and Vacheron Constantin, classic and elite timepieces to be sure. Mine reflects my interests: watches with connections to space exploration or to family members. I treasure my stepfather’s early-gen Seiko from Vietnam more than I ever would a Rolex. I like microbrands that outpunch their weight in quality; Trump likes name brands that signal wealth. He has a gold Rolex day date, of course.

Where our tastes really diverge, though, is with the Trump watch. They are supposed to look impressive. I think the line is underwhelming, overpriced, and well, tacky. You can get a better watch for half the price—and good watches for less. I’d recommend this Seiko GMT instead, for example, if you want something better in the ballpark of that price point. But the Trump watch is like a lot of Trump things: a feat of marketing without much behind it. “It will have your friends asking, where did you get that?” the website boasts. Spoiler alert: watches are like college sweatshirts—only the fringes notice or care enough to even ask.

Anyway, all that brings us to yesterday’s announcement about the Department of Education and the administration’s gambit to delegate its responsibilities to other agencies. It’s all show with less behind it than you might think. That’s not to say it’s show without consequence, there are always consequences. If you buy that stupid watch, you’re still out $500. But this restructuring is farce, theater, and a missed opportunity. The event announcing it was rushed because there isn’t much to announce; key administration officials weren’t even in D.C. or around for it. There was little of the rollout you’d expect for something of real magnitude. For a reason.

Why? As Chad Aldeman points out, all that’s really happening is tasks being reassigned to different agencies. In some cases programs no one other than professionals had heard of 48 hours ago though to listen to some folks the republic now hinges on it. Some of this might not even be legal. Agencies have some power to delegate, but this might go too far in some cases—especially regarding specific statutory functions. The lawyers (I’m not one) and the courts will sort that out.

But it’s another in a long line of administration moves underscoring that you can’t really do this without Congress’s consent if you mean to really do it.

Want Eduwonk.com in your inbox via Substack?   Sign up for free here.

And look, you have to be deep into Bluesky territory to care whether the Department of Education or State handles international education and foreign language partnerships. Moving Title I to Labor, however, why?

That’s why this is a missed opportunity because, even in this hyper-partisan time, there’s probably some appetite for a proper government restructuring around education and training given its importance to American competitiveness. Sending some postsecondary and career training functions to the Department of Labor makes sense. There’s even an argument for merging the two agencies. Sending student aid to Treasury is another idea with merit. Conversely, moving IDEA to Health and Human Services is a lousy idea, in my view, but moving Head Start from HHS to Education might help with aspects of that program. Does anyone think we’re doing a good job or doing right by kids on Indian education? None of this would be any kind of miracle cure. Education, like all the other agencies, runs some programs well and others poorly.

Still, sending a proper bill to Congress—or even a proposal or principles to jump-start the legislative process (which his party controls) would be a way, though, to start a real conversation about reform here. It might go nowhere. It might just make lobbyists some money. Or it might lead to a reform bill. Only one way to find out: try. This isn’t trying. This is a stunt that’ll just get unwound down the road. It doesn’t remove red tape as proponents claim – it creates red tape. It’s also inefficient and doesn’t streamline—this adds complexity and layers. This time and effort could be spent on real reform. It’s performance art.

On the politics, my hunch, supported by some public opinion research, is average people actually care less than you think as long as the funding flows. And if you think people are going to get spun up about things like which agency handles foreign medical accreditation then I don’t know what to tell you. Schools losing money will get their attention; bureaucratic realignments—yawn. And the fuse on this stuff is slow as we’ve discussed in the past. Nonetheless, in political speech we’ll hear about it non-stop, in many cases from people who can’t otherwise be bothered to be serious about educational achievement in this country. The Trump folks, meanwhile, will say they checked this box and are returning education to the states (reader, they’re actually moving it across the National Mall).

But anything beyond appearances might not be Trump’s aim anyway. His maximalist style of politics means he can’t afford to lose, compromise, or appear weak. That’s why the Epstein vote was such a big deal for him. I’ll be surprised if there are revelatory things about Trump in the Epstein documents (though the blast radius could be substantial for others, including some in our sector). My hunch is we’d have heard specifics already if there were something really damning on him in there. Pee tape all over again (though perhaps there is some seemingly minor thing that could trigger a prenup issue, who knows).

In any event, the issue for him is that by crossing him, Republican members of Congress like Thomas Massie (KY) and Marjorie Taylor Greene (GA) showed that it can be done—successfully. The specific issue at hand, in this case the Epstein files, matters less than the dynamic of Trump showing he doesn’t lose, ever, and that crossing him is political suicide. That’s why he reversed himself earlier this week on releasing the files—to try to salvage a win. Think of it like a chess game, where a pawn, nominally a minor piece, suddenly comes under intense pressure on a particular square and takes on outsized importance.

The Department of Education’s abolition has that same quality. Trump’s all in on it, so he has to stay all in—no matter how farcical it is and continues to be. It’s also a great distraction. A lever he can pull again and again and get the reaction he wants.

Great use of time and effort…By the way, have you heard? Kids going to good colleges can’t do math.

Want Eduwonk.com in your inbox via Substack?   Sign up for free here.

Odds and Ends

On the American Variety Radio show I talked with Court Lewis about reading and literacy.

Rick Hess and I discussed the Des Moines superintendent debacle – immigration was in some ways the least of it.

Rick and I also discussed cell phone bans and technology and kids more generally.

Jed Wallace and I talked with Mike Kirst about his incredible career and, at 86, what he’s planning for his next professional chapter.

What’s the education forecast in Virginia? Cross-pressure. And why that matters nationally.

A lot of people are asking: What’s going to happen on education in Virginia? It’s a good question. And matters beyond Virgina’s borders. The commonwealth took several big steps forward on schools over the past few years — some initiated by the legislature (science of reading and assessment reform), and some by Governor Glenn Youngkin (innovative public lab schools across the commonwealth, more ambitious standards, transparency, and a real accountability system).

Enter Spanberger. A moderate Democrat, perhaps more by temperament than politics. She worked for the CIA before winning one of Virginia’s vanishingly few swing districts to serve in Congress (she was my member of Congress for a time before retiring to run for governor).

She enters office with the wind at her back. Virginia’s countercyclical off-year election cycle, Trump’s abysmal numbers in the state, a non-Trump on the ballot electorate, and the government shutdown all handed Spanberger a legit landslide. Even seasoned observers and Democratic leaders were surprised by how well the party did — picking up 13 House seats and giving the incoming governor a commanding 64–36 majority. The state senate, not on the ballot, remains closely divided, though Democrats now hold a tiebreaker with the lieutenant governor’s seat.

[There’s already early pushing and shoving — mostly about higher ed, UVA in particular. This 74 article by Kevin Mahnken is a good place to start on K–12, and Anne Hyslop’s just announced appointment as K–12 transition chair is a positive signal. Anne, a Bellwether alum, was one of the first to call out the problems with ESSA, has state experience, and helped design Virginia’s new accountability system. She discussed accountability and other issues recently on Bellwether’s LinkedIn Live along with Indiana’s Katie Jenner, state education leader Patricia Levesque, and longtime Senate aide David Cleary.]

When Glenn Youngkin took office in 2022, Virginia’s standards were among the lowest in the nation — that was too often reported as just his claim, but in fact it’s federal IES analysis. The state also had the largest pandemic learning loss of any state, plunging students back to 1990s achievement levels. Extended school shutdowns deep into 2021 were the prime cause, but years of lowered standards made the system brittle. Yet because this problem implicated school closures, effort to address it became almost hopelessly political. To Youngkin’s credit he championed an accountability system that now includes all students (English language learners were previously and inexplicably excluded) and transparently reports on school performance.

For Spanberger, who clearly has 2028 on her mind, that massive House margin is a mixed blessing on education. There will be a lot of pressure to undo the accountability reforms and roll back the clock to the happier of time of just telling everyone than more than 90% of schools in Virgina were doing ok even as Mississippi passed us by. Various special interest groups are hoping the Commonwealth’s flirtation with accountability and transparency is a passing thing.

Want Eduwonk.com in your inbox via Substack?   Sign up for free here.

So here’s the risk: Spanberger standing on a national debate stage and being asked why she lowered standards, dismantled accountability, closed public choice schools, or turned a clear system into a California-style maze that bewilders parents. Education won’t decide 2028, but it will be a marker of seriousness — a signal of whether Democrats learned from the unseriousness of 2024. (Check out Rahm Emanuel’s latest comments if you haven’t already, a clear signal of where politically attuned leaders think Democrats need to go.)

Happily for Spanberger, there’s a better path. Her national political interests line up with a strong agenda for students. Virginia’s unfinished education agenda gives her real opportunity to sail to her own horizon, rather than one various political interests map out for her. Three immediate issues:

1. School finance reform. Virginia’s system is outdated and inefficient, among the worst in the country. It works OK for wealthy suburban districts and varying degrees of badly for everyone else. Fixing it could be a national bipartisan calling card and a positive signal to rural voters.
2. School improvement capacity. The new accountability system identifies struggling schools, but the state still offers too little help. UVA’s successful school improvement center mostly works outside Virginia — truly no one is a prophet in their own land. The current state superintendent is refocusing resources and the SEA’s energy creatively, but more is needed. If Democrats won’t embrace choice, then they need to be really serious about improving schools. Like other places Virginia’s public schools are leaking students post-pandemic and various new options are emerging.
3. Assessment reform. Virginia’s assessments lag in quality, frustrate educators, and yield too little timely and actionable data. This issue is bipartisan, legislation has passed the generally acrimonious legislature, and it’s an issue ripe for progress.

So, the story Spanberger could tell: modernizing finance to serve rural Virginians, actually improving low-performing schools, expanding choice inside the public system, and creating better assessments — rejecting the false choice between testing and no testing. That’s the sharp, differentiated edge Democrats need in today’s increasingly choice-saturated era. Being pro-growth and pro-education reform go hand in glove.

Getting there will take fortitude. Her lieutenant governor led efforts to delay and resist accountability implementation and isn’t going to be accused of being a reformer. Many of those 64 Democrats want to rip out Youngkin’s reforms root and branch just because. They’d be wiser to build on his mental health and early learning work, expand lab schools, and pocket the civil-rights–oriented accountability system. Republicans, decimated in this election, may not see accountability as a priority; their focus during the campaign was more kulturkampf than learning.

Virginia remains far behind much of the country on education, though many in the state’s political culture still assume we’re ahead. The fact that Mississippi’s Black students outperform ours hasn’t registered among the comfortable set. Six in ten Black students below basic on NAEP, and about half of poor kids — that doesn’t resonate with leaders who prefer to call themselves “world class.”

Again, addressing these issues would align with Spanberger’s national ambitions. Heeding activist calls to roll back progress would please the loudest voices but hurt her long-term. She’s right-to-work — part of her brand — but that puts her under pressure from organized labor. Keeping momentum on education in Virgina will upset the teachers’ unions, too.

Can Spanberger fight a two-front war? Sure. But it’ll take a defter touch of centrism than just calling “defund the police” inane and politically toxic, which was obvious but still a political lift. So the question is whether she can play a long game under pressure — and make Virginia the test case for a new brand of Democratic education politics.

The opportunity is right there.

Friday Fish Porn

This is more of a PSA than fish porn. Grateful Dead wife sent me this picture, it’s of musician Susan Tedeschi with a big fish. Tedeschi was once part of a trivia question around here. The answer was Mark D’Alessio, one of this sector’s gems. I go to a lot of live music. If I can’t be outside, that’s the next best thing. In just the past few weeks I’ve seen some local acts, Sierra Hull, Ires DeMent, Paul McCartney, Jeff Tweedy, Tedeschi Trucks Band a couple of times, and Billy Strings (yes, my kids are away in college).

It’s those last two I really want to flag for you. TTB and Billy Strings are two of the best live acts out there and they’re both advancing and innovating with genuinely American styles of music. Want to hear Doc Watson played in an arena? Bobby “Blue” Bland covers from a 12-piece act? Then do yourself a favor and check them out when you have a chance. I can’t guarantee it will brighten your day, but you surely won’t be worse off for it. Billy Strings is on tour now and again this winter. TTB is winding down their year but will be at The Beacon Theater for a long run in March, and hopefully other theater shows where they really shine.

If you’ve sent me your fish porn or fish pics and I have not posted them, apologies, working through it. If you haven’t, send me yours to become part of this one of a kind archive with hundreds of pictures of education types and their relatives with fish from rivers, lakes, and streams all over the world.

Want Eduwonk.com in your inbox via Substack?   Sign up for free here.

This is a guest post by Anson Jackson, a Texas-based partner at Bellwether who leads academic advising work. Agree or disagree he’d welcome your feedback and engagement either way. Anson’s in a lot of schools, all around the country. (As with all content here, it’s the views of the author alone, Bellwether has never taken institutional positions and encourages a diversity of viewpoints across our team.)

Charters Have a Quality Problem. Collective Action is Part of the Solution. – By Anson Jackson

The party-splitting politics of President Trump’s new tax credit scholarship program are getting the attention of education advocates. Yet that is obscuring another story: public charter schools are also seeing a surge in support. The charter sector enjoyed steady growth over the past several decades, and charters are increasingly popular among parents. After years of flat funding, charters are one of the only education programs to see an increase in the president’s recent budget proposal. Despite this popularity, however, charters today aren’t consistently delivering the high-quality education students and families deserve. 

Parents should have options as to how to best educate their children, and excellent charter schools should be one of them. I’ve taught in and led public charter school networks, and my own children benefited from attending a charter school. A growing number of families seem to want the same, with nearly three fourths of parents saying they’d consider sending their child to a public charter school if one were available. 

In theory, charters allow more autonomy for schools — and more options for students — in exchange for increased accountability. In my work supporting and leading schools, I’ve seen a lot of innovative ideas that, if implemented well, would change students’ lives. But that promise falls apart if charter schools can’t deliver a high-quality education to all students. For the sector to succeed, persistently low-quality schools can’t be a part of the equation.  

To solve the sector’s growing quality problem, leaders must rethink how charter accountability works. Everyone who supports a charter school — from authorizers and funders to boards and charter support organizations — must take a more coordinated approach to improving school quality and giving parents and students a real choice. Here’s what that might look like.

Authorizers should be involved from day one

Many new charter leaders have incredible visions for teaching and learning, but lack experience in school operations. Others are strong entrepreneurs with expertise in other fields, but have limited school leadership experience. During the application period, charter leaders must identify the support and training they’ll need; in exchange, authorizers should ensure that leaders follow through with training and perform well in their roles. Authorizers can also help leaders uphold their promises, and address their own blindspots, by taking an active role in charter planning and design. That means reviewing charter design elements — like the instructional model, curriculum, and staffing practices — and offering timely, two-way feedback that helps leaders keep the school’s vision and mission central as it evolves.

Charters need longer pathways of support

Most charters close due to issues that come up not during the design and authorization phase, but during implementation. Ongoing collaboration among all stakeholders is crucial to ensuring a charter’s continued success.

In addition to providing support up front, authorizers must continue to set and hold a high bar for quality of training, and hold schools accountable if leaders aren’t following through. Other stakeholders — like charter incubators, funders, and support organizations — also play a role in helping charters maintain quality by providing support beyond year one. These stakeholders can help provide technical assistance, coaching, and curriculum implementation during the charter’s first year, and can tailor support for subsequent years based on the school’s performance and needs. This kind of adaptive partnership may be different than what charter leaders are used to, but it means they can address problems before they arise. 

Want Eduwonk.com in your inbox via Substack?   Sign up for free here.

Charters need systems to track progress

Too often, quality slips because a charter doesn’t have the right metrics or systems in place to track its success. In my work with charters, I’ve seen many schools struggle with financial issues in their second or third years that should have been addressed in year one. This doesn’t just hurt the school; it negatively impacts outcomes.

To solve problems like these, charter school leaders and boards need clear and sustainable systems  that track their schools’ financial, academic, and operational performances. Instead of remaining far removed from decision-making, authorizers must work in partnership with charter school leaders, boards, and community members to create strong, proactive systems of support and shared accountability that center student needs and anticipate challenges. These systems must be aligned with authorizer requirements and research-based measures of school quality, and include benchmarks of distress to allow leaders to act quickly to identify problems. Authorizers can also require this data to be submitted at regular intervals, regularly monitoring metrics to flag issues early. 

This type of intervention isn’t too much oversight; it’s actually putting students’ needs first. Charters need these proactive checks in place to make sure they can catch issues and address them before it’s too late.

The right board is critical to success

Charter schools are nonprofit organizations run by volunteer boards. While only authorizers can review, renew, and revoke charters, it’s up to the board of each charter school or network to make sure the school is fulfilling the promises in the charter in between authorizer review cycles. For this reason, authorizers deserve a role in building the right board. While this might sound controversial, boards without the right makeup of members to support and hold the charter leader accountable lessen a school’s chances of success. Authorizers can provide schools with a range of supports to ensure quality board makeup – ranging from indirect assistance, like providing a rubric for board quality, to a direct approach, like identifying potential board members with the right expertise. Regardless of the level of support, authorizers cannot take a hands-off approach.

Charters must embrace transparency

All parents and taxpayers deserve to know how public schools in their communities are performing. All public schools should be transparent, but because of charters’ autonomy, this is even more important in the charter sector. Families and community members need to understand how metrics do or don’t align with the school’s mission and have a consistent understanding of how their children are performing in school, the school’s financial status, and the makeup of the school’s leadership and staff. Withholding performance information from families, good or bad, is malpractice. 

Charter boards, support organizations, and funders should partner together to provide regular, accessible updates to their communities. This might mean reimagining the use of social media, community events, and how and when board meetings are conducted to ensure community members always have access to the information they need. Social media and other communications strategies offer opportunities for schools to increase transparency and communicate with parents and community members about school performance.

It’s a time of political pressure on the charter sector but there are also opportunities for positive change —  collective action among authorizers, charter boards, and leaders must be part of the solution. If the charter sector embraces this type of collaboration and support today, in the coming years, it can truly deliver on its promise to provide the high-quality outcomes that every student deserves. 

Want Eduwonk.com in your inbox via Substack?   Sign up for free here.