Opinion: An Open Letter to Linda McMahon
Dear Madam Secretary,
Congratulations and welcome to a place we once knew well. You face any number of tough challenges on behalf of American students, parents, educators and taxpayers, as well as the administration you serve, but your 'Department's Final Mission' speech shows that you're well prepared to meet them. We particularly admire your commitment to making American education 'the greatest in the world.'
But how will we — and you, and our fellow Americans — know how rapidly we're getting there? By now, you're probably aware that the single most important activity of the department you lead is the National Assessment of Educational Progress, known to some as NAEP and to many as the Nation's Report Card.
Get stories like this delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for The 74 Newsletter
Get stories like this delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for The 74 Newsletter
That's the primary gauge by which we know how American education is doing, both nationally and in the states to which you rightly seek to restore its control.
Almost four decades ago — during Ronald Reagan's second term — it was our job to modernize that key barometer of student achievement. Five years after A Nation at Risk told Americans that their education system was far from the world's greatest, state leaders — governors especially — craved better data on the performance of their students and schools. And they were right. At the time, they had no sure way of monitoring that performance.
Related
That was one of our challenges, back in the day. Advised by a blue-ribbon study group led by outgoing Tennessee governor (and future U.S. senator) Lamar Alexander, and with congressional cooperation spearheaded by the late Ted Kennedy, in 1988 we proposed what became a bipartisan transformation of an occasional government-sponsored test into a regular and systematic appraisal of student achievement in core academic subjects, administered by the National Center for Education Statistics (part of your Institute for Education Sciences) and overseen by an independent group of state and local leaders, plus educators and the general public. (One of your responsibilities is appointing several terrific people each year to terms on the 26-member National Assessment Governing Board.)
That 1988 overhaul made three big changes:
Creation of that independent board to ensure the data's integrity, accuracy and utility;
Inauguration of state-level reporting of student achievement in grades 4, 8 and 12, i.e. at the ends of elementary, middle and high school; and
Authorization for the board to set standards — known as achievement levels — by which to know whether that achievement is satisfactory.
Much else was happening in U.S. education at the time: School choice was gaining traction. States were setting their own academic standards and administering their own assessments. Graduation requirements were rising as the economy modernized and its human capital needs increased.
Related
As these and other reforms gathered speed, NAEP became the country's most trusted barometer of what was (and wasn't) working. You alluded to NAEP data during your confirmation hearing. President Donald Trump deploys it when referencing the shortcomings of U.S. schools. For example, his Jan. 29 executive order on school choice began this way: 'According to this year's National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 70% of 8th graders were below proficient in reading, and 72% were below proficient in math.'
Everybody relies on NAEP data, and its governing board's standards have become the criteria by which states gauge whether their own standards are rigorous enough. Just the other day, Gov. Glenn Youngkin's board of education used them to benchmark Virginia's tougher expectations for students and schools.
Reading and math were, and remain, at the heart of NAEP, but today it also tests civics, U.S. history, science and other core subjects — exactly as listed in your speech.
But NAEP is not perfect. It needs another careful modernization. It should make far better use of technology, including artificial intelligence. It should be nimbler and more efficient. The procedures by which its contractors are engaged need overhauling. (The Education Department's whole procurement process needs that, too — faster, more competitive, more efficient, less expensive!)
Yet NAEP also needs to do more. Today, for instance, it gives state leaders their results only in grades 4 and 8, not at the end of high school. It doesn't test civics and history nearly often enough, and never in 12th grade, even though most systematic study of those subjects occurs in high school. (It probably tests fourth- and eighth-grade reading and math too often — the result of a different federal law.)
Related
Doing more shouldn't cost any more. Within NAEP's current budget — approaching $200 million, a drop in the department's murky fiscal ocean — much more data should be gettable by making new contracts tighter and technology smarter, squeezing more analysis from NAEP's vast trove and having staffers put shoulders to the wheel. (Former IES director Mark Schneider has pointed the way.) But making this happen will take strong executive leadership, an agile, hardworking governing board and your own oversight. You may decide it's time for another blue-ribbon group to take a close look at NAEP and recommend how to modernize it again without losing its vital ability to monitor changes over time in student achievement.
Yes, this is all sort of wonky. NAEP results get used all the time, but it's far down in the bureaucracy and doesn't make much noise. Nobody in Congress (as far as we know) pays it much attention. Yet it remains — we believe — the single most important activity of your department. Which, frankly, is why it needs your watchful attention!
We wish you well in your new role. Please let us know if we can help in any way.
Sincerely,
William J. Bennett, U.S. Secretary of Education (1985-88)
Chester E. Finn Jr., Assistant Secretary for Research & Improvement and Counselor to the Secretary (1985-88)
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CBS News
13 minutes ago
- CBS News
Blue state governors to testify on "sanctuary policies" amid L.A. protests over immigration raids
Washington — Three Democratic governors are defending their responses to the migrant crisis and dispute claims of failing to cooperate with federal authorities, according to prepared remarks that will be delivered Thursday before a House oversight panel. New York Gov. Kathy Hochul, Illinois Gov. J.B. Pritzker and Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz are among the witnesses scheduled to testify before the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee on so-called "sanctuary policies". "Let me be clear: Sanctuary policies don't protect Americans. They protect criminal illegal aliens," Oversight Chair James Comer, a Kentucky Republican will say in his opening statement. The governors' appearances come as President Trump and California Governor Gavin Newsom remain embroiled in a legal and political standoff over the deployment of the National Guard troops and Marines to quell immigration protests in Los Angeles. Demonstrations have spread to other U.S. cities, including New York and Chicago following a series of deportation raids. "Minnesota is not a sanctuary state," Walz will tell lawmakers. "It is ridiculous to suggest that Minnesota — a state that is over 1,500 miles away from the Southern border and a thousand miles from lawmakers in Washington, D.C. who decide and implement border policy is somehow responsible for a failure of immigration enforcement." The former vice presidential candidate has drawn intense scrutiny not only over immigration policy but also for his handling of social justice protests that broke out in Minneapolis following the death of George Floyd in 2020. Trump administration officials have cited Walz' actions to justify the president's decision to federalize troops in California. While Walz does not appear to directly address the controversy in his testimony, he says he is "disappointed" in the federal government's overall approach. "As governor of Minnesota, it is incumbent on me to use the state's resources to help Minnesota families—not turn those resources over to the administration so they can stage another photo-op in tactical gear or accidentally deport more children without observing due process," Walz is set to say. Ahead of the hearing, the GOP-led panel released a video compilation of various news clips accusing the governors of "shielding" undocumented immigrants and "causing chaos" in their states. A memo from Hochul's office suggested the hearing could be "derailed by wild accusations" and "twisted characterizations" but noted the governor's position is "clear" when it comes to supporting strong borders and comprehensive immigration reform. "New York state cooperates with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) in criminal cases," Hochul says. "And our values as New Yorkers demand that we treat those who arrive here in search of a better life with dignity and reject policies that tear law-abiding families apart." Hochul also addresses the influx of more than 220,000 migrants to New York City since early 2022, many of whom were bussed from border states, calling it "an unprecedented humanitarian crisis." "We have responded to this crisis with both compassion and pragmatism," Hochul states."And as a result, we largely prevented what could have become an additional crisis — one of street homelessness and tent cities." Pritzker says Illinois also stepped up to the challenge, and blamed the lack of federal intervention and cooperation from border states for exacerbating the problem. "As governor, my responsibility is to ensure that all Illinoisans feel safe in their homes, their businesses, and their communities," Pritzker is prepared to say. "That is why my administration continued to make significant investments in public safety, even as our resources were strained because of the lack of federal support during the crisis — expanding our state police force and investing in efforts to reduce gun violence." Thursday's session follows a March hearing on sanctuary cities with four Democratic mayors: Eric Adams, of New York, Mike Johnston of Denver, Brandon Johnson of Chicago and Michelle Wu of Boston. Comer launched an investigation in January into "sanctuary jurisdictions", including states, counties or cities, to examine their impact on public safety and federal immigration enforcement. President Trump has vowed to crack down on localities that don't back his immigration agenda. Earlier this month, the Department of Homeland Security removed its list of sanctuary jurisdictions after several cities challenged the findings.
Associated Press
13 minutes ago
- Associated Press
Democratic governors will defend immigration policies before Republican-led House panel
WASHINGTON (AP) — As President Donald Trump spars with California's governor over immigration enforcement, Republicans in Congress are calling other Democratic governors to the Capitol on Thursday to question them over policies limiting cooperation with federal immigration authorities. The House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform posted a video ahead of the hearing highlighting crimes allegedly committed by immigrants in the U.S. illegally and pledging that 'sanctuary state governors will answer to the American people.' The hearing is to include testimony from Govs. JB Pritzker of Illinois, Tim Walz of Minnesota and Kathy Hochul of New York. There's no legal definition of a sanctuary jurisdiction, but the term generally refers to governments with policies limiting cooperation with federal immigration authorities. Courts previously have upheld the legality of such laws. But Trump's administration has sued Colorado, Illinois, New York and several cities — including Chicago and Rochester, New York — asserting their policies violate the U.S. Constitution or federal law. Illinois, Minnesota and New York also were among 14 states and hundreds of cities and counties recently listed by the Department of Homeland Security as 'sanctuary jurisdictions defying federal immigration law.' The list later was removed from the department's website after criticism that it errantly included some local governments that support Trump's immigration policies. As Trump steps up immigration enforcement, some Democratic-led states have intensified their resistance by strengthening state laws restricting cooperation with immigration agents. Following clashes between crowds of protesters and immigration agents in Los Angeles, Trump deployed the National Guard to protect federal buildings and agents, and California Gov. Gavin Newsom accused Trump of declaring 'a war' on the underpinnings of American democracy. The House Oversight Committee has long been a partisan battleground, and in recent months it has turned its focus to immigration policy. Thursday's hearing follows a similar one in March in which the Republican-led committee questioned the Democratic mayors of Chicago, Boston, Denver and New York about sanctuary policies. Heavily Democratic Chicago has been a sanctuary city for decades. In 2017, then-Illinois Gov. Bruce Rauner, a Republican, signed legislation creating statewide protections for immigrants. The Illinois Trust Act prohibits police from searching, arresting or detaining people solely because of their immigration status. But it allows local authorities to hold people for federal immigration authorities if there's a valid criminal warrant. Pritzker, who succeeded Rauner in 2019, said in remarks prepared for the House committee that violent criminals 'have no place on our streets, and if they are undocumented, I want them out of Illinois and out of our country.' 'But we will not divert our limited resources and officers to do the job of the federal government when it is not in the best interest of our state, our local communities, or the safety of our residents,' he said. Pritzker has been among Trump's most outspoken opponents and is considered a potential 2028 presidential candidate. He said Illinois has provided shelter and services to more than 50,000 immigrants who were sent there from other states. A Department of Justice lawsuit against New York challenges a 2019 law that allows immigrants illegally in the U.S. to receive New York driver's licenses and shields driver's license data from federal immigration authorities. That built upon a 2017 executive order by then-Gov. Andrew Cuomo that prohibited New York officials from inquiring about or disclosing a person's immigration status to federal authorities, unless required by law. Hochul's office said law enforcement officers still can cooperate with federal immigration authorities when people are convicted of or under investigation for crimes. Since Hochul took office in 2021, her office said, the state has transferred more than 1,300 incarcerated noncitizens to U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement at the completion of their state sentences. Minnesota doesn't have a statewide sanctuary law protecting immigrants in the U.S. illegally, though Minneapolis and St. Paul both restrict the extent to which police and city employees can cooperate with immigration enforcement. Some laws signed by Walz have secured benefits for people regardless of immigration status. But at least one of those is getting rolled back. The Minnesota Legislature, meeting in a special session, passed legislation Monday to repeal a 2023 law that allowed adults in the U.S. illegally to be covered under a state-run health care program for the working poor. Walz insisted on maintaining eligibility for children who aren't in the country legally, ___ Lieb reported from Jefferson City, Mo. Also contributing were Associated Press writers Anthony Izaguirre in Albany, N.Y.; Steve Karnowski in St. Paul, Minn.; and Sophia Tareen in Chicago.
Yahoo
15 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump Plan to Kill Dozens of NASA Missions Threatens US Space Supremacy
(Bloomberg) -- NASA's car-sized Perseverance rover has been roaming the surface of Mars for four years, drilling into the alien soil to collect dirt it places in tubes and leaves on the ground. Shuttered NY College Has Alumni Fighting Over Its Future Trump's Military Parade Has Washington Bracing for Tanks and Weaponry NYC Renters Brace for Price Hikes After Broker-Fee Ban NY Long Island Rail Service Resumes After Grand Central Fire Do World's Fairs Still Matter? Engineers designed Perseverance to be the first step in the agency's exploration of the Red Planet. In the future, more robotic spacecraft would arrive to sweep up the capsules and rocket them back to Earth, where scientists could look for signs that Mars once was, or is, a world with life. The wait for answers may be about to get longer. President Donald Trump's proposed 2026 budget for the US National Aeronautics and Space Administration would cancel the planned follow-on mission, potentially abandoning the tubes for decades to Martian dust storms. The White House is calling for a roughly 50% cut to NASA's science spending to $3.9 billion, part of an overall pullback that would deliver the lowest funding level in the agency's history and kill more more than 40 NASA science missions and projects, according to detailed plans released last month. The Trump administration has also left the agency without a permanent leader and without a vision for how America's civilian space policy is going to work with US allies and compete with China and other rivals. The cuts would follow a shift in how the American public thinks about space. NASA has long enjoyed a unique place in US culture, with its exploits celebrated by movies, theme parks and merchandise — but companies like Elon Musk's SpaceX have begun to capture more attention. For decades, NASA's scientific undertakings have provided critical groundwork for researchers seeking to understand the structure of the universe, study how planets form and hunt for evidence that life might exist beyond Earth. Pictures from NASA craft like the Hubble Space Telescope and the recently launched James Webb Space Telescope have inspired and delighted millions. Now, the agency's position at the vanguard of discovery is facing foreclosure. Among the other programs set to lose funding are a craft already on its way to rendezvous with an asteroid that's expected to pass close to Earth in 2029, and multiple efforts to map and explore the acidic clouds of Venus. Researchers worry that abandoning missions would mean investments made by earlier generations might be lost or forgotten. 'Once you launch and you're operating, then all those costs are behind you, and it's relatively inexpensive to just keep the missions going,' said Amanda Hendrix, the chief executive officer of the Planetary Science Institute, a nonprofit research organization. 'So I'm very concerned about these operating missions that are still producing excellent and really important science data.' The Trump administration's narrower vision for NASA comes as it is seeking to reduce waste and jobs in the US government. Critics have faulted NASA over sluggish management of key programs, spiraling costs and delays. Still, the administration is eager to pour more money into putting people in space. It wants to use $7 billion of the $18.8 billion it would allocate to NASA overall to ramp up efforts to return people to the moon, and invest $1 billion more in sending people to Mars. 'This is a NASA that would be primarily human spaceflight focused,' Casey Dreier, chief of space policy for The Planetary Society, a nonprofit that advocates for space science and exploration, said of the proposed changes. 'This is a NASA that would say, 'The universe is primarily the moon and Mars,' and basically step away from everything else.' There are signs that the administration's proposed cutbacks won't satisfy lawmakers who view space as vital to US interests. Senator Ted Cruz, the Texas Republican who leads a committee that oversees NASA, has proposed legislation that would would provide nearly $10 billion to the agency. 'American dominance in space is a national security imperative,' Cruz said in a statement to Bloomberg. 'The Commerce Committee's bill carefully invests in beating China to the Moon and Mars — while respecting every taxpayer dollar. It's rocket fuel for the commercial space companies and NASA that are working to keep America ahead of China in the Space Race.' As Trump's spending proposal moves through Congress, NASA has been left without a strong leader who can press its case after the president withdrew his nomination of billionaire commercial astronaut Jared Isaacman to run the agency. In a recent interview on the All-In Podcast, Isaacman appeared to suggest Trump pulled his nomination because of his close ties to Musk, who had a public falling out with the president. Trump threatened to cancel SpaceX's government contracts amid the row, but has since backed down. 'Stopping Jared from becoming confirmed is only going to hurt NASA's ability to push back on budget cuts,' Jim Muncy, a space consultant and lobbyist with PoliSpace, said before Isaacman's nomination was pulled. Spaceflight Shift For decades, NASA handled every step of launching rockets, probes and people into space, from developing, building and launching vehicles, to running missions. Only the government had the resources and the capacity to shoulder the risks without returning a profit. That all changed in recent years with the emergence of a vibrant US space industry dominated by wealthy entrepreneurs with a passion for spaceflight and the financial wherewithal to withstand repeated failure. Over time, NASA has ceded more design, development and production work to those companies. SpaceX is carrying cargo and astronauts to the International Space Station, and sending probes into deep space from a rented launchpad at NASA's Kennedy Space Center. After helping to spur the development of SpaceX hardware, NASA is now one of the company's biggest customers. 'This has kind of been the tension with the rise of commercial space,' said Mike French, a consultant for the Space Policy Group. 'NASA has gone from 'We're operating these things; we're building these things' to 'We've gotten really good at buying these things.'' During Trump's presidency, NASA's transformation into an incubator for private industry is likely to gain speed. Throughout its budget proposal, the White House calls for mimicking past programs that have leaned more on outsourcing to the private sector. 'With a leaner budget across all of government, we are all taking a closer look at how we work, where we invest, and how we adjust our methods to accomplish our mission,' NASA's acting administrator, Janet Petro, wrote in a message accompanying the plan. 'At NASA, that means placing a renewed emphasis on human spaceflight, increasing investments in a sustainable plan to return to the Moon for long-term human exploration and accelerating efforts to send American astronauts to Mars.' NASA declined to comment beyond Petro's statement. NASA contracts remain one of the most significant and steady sources of funding for the space industry, which has allowed the agency to set the direction for many businesses. But that balance of power is shifting, and cuts to NASA's funding could cause its leadership to fade. 'NASA would, in a sense, define access and define the culture of spaceflight and define the ambitions of spaceflight,' Dreier said. 'Now, they have competitors for that, and frankly, some of their competitors are laying out more ambitious programs.' Challenging Missions While NASA has evolved into a technical adviser and financial backer for space companies, pure science has remained part of its mission. NASA's transition to more commercial partnerships was started, in part, to free up money to spend on exotic, challenging missions with no obvious near-term commercial rewards. Pulling back is likely to have consequences. Trump's broader push to curtail funding for science — the administration has choked off money for medical, climate and other research — risks eroding an important source of American soft power. After the end of the Cold War-era space race, NASA became a vessel for international cooperation, proving countries with lofty goals can work together. Many of the NASA missions Trump has proposed canceling or pulling away from entailed collaboration with European allies. The prospect of reduced funding is also causing worry about agency talent. Already, NASA is competing with the private space industry for engineers. Shutting down missions could push agency scientists to seek other opportunities. 'Folks are very worried about what they're going to do now with their lives, and where they're going to go,' said Hendrix, the Planetary Science Institute's CEO. The long-term outlook for NASA is difficult to discern. In the coming years, it is expected to continue its Artemis moon program, and start a new program for human exploration of Mars, with commercial companies at the forefront. But the scientific ambitions that long helped define NASA appear likely to become more limited. 'If we elect to say we no longer want to understand our origins, or we no longer want to challenge ourselves to see if there's life out in the cosmos, that is the equivalent of turning our heads down and burying ourselves in our cell phones when we're standing at the edge of the Grand Canyon,' said The Planetary Society's Dreier. 'We miss something more profound and big and deep that we otherwise have no access to in our modern society.' New Grads Join Worst Entry-Level Job Market in Years American Mid: Hampton Inn's Good-Enough Formula for World Domination The Spying Scandal Rocking the World of HR Software The SEC Pinned Its Hack on a Few Hapless Day Traders. The Full Story Is Far More Troubling Cavs Owner Dan Gilbert Wants to Donate His Billions—and Walk Again ©2025 Bloomberg L.P.
