Latest news with #NationalAssessmentofEducationalProgress
USA Today
a day ago
- General
- USA Today
School cell phone bans are a distraction. The real crisis isn't in your kid's hand.
Banning phones won't turn back the clock on childhood. It will just widen the gap between the kids who have and the kids who don't. Dear parents, every August, we buy the pencils, we pack the lunches and we tell ourselves we're ready. But as another school year begins, I want to ask you to take a breath – and look past the headlines. Because if you believe what you're hearing, the biggest threat to our kids' future is in their pockets. Banning phones in schools, they say, will cure anxiety, raise test scores, restore childhood. I understand the instinct – I'm a father myself. But I've also been a teacher, a principal, a senior education advisor to former New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio who oversaw the country's largest school system – and now the president of an education company. And I'm telling you: this is a distraction. Of course we don't want kids using their phones throughout the school day without purpose and intentionality. But the real crisis isn't in your kid's hand. It's in their reading scores. Right now, one third of American eighth graders can't read at the National Assessment of Educational Progress "basic" testing benchmark. In some districts, the numbers are even worse. This isn't a new problem – it's just one we keep refusing to face head-on. Instead, we reach for easy fixes, fueled by nostalgia and fear. But banning phones won't turn back the clock on childhood. It will just widen the gap between the kids who have and the kids who don't. Opinion: My 4-year-old asked for a smartphone. Here's what I did next as a parent. Here's what I've seen in the classroom: when you take away cell phones, you don't create equity – you erase it. In underfunded schools, smartphones are calculators, translators, research tools and sometimes the only reliable internet connection a student has. For multilingual learners, for kids without Wi-Fi at home, that device is a lifeline. When we ban it, we're not protecting them – we're pulling up the ladder. Not all screens are created equal Let's be honest. The anxious generation isn't our kids – it's us. We're the ones struggling to navigate a changing world, grasping for control. But our children don't need us to fear the future. They need us to prepare them for it. That means leaning into digital literacy, not running from it. It means investing in the tools and teaching that help kids learn how to use technology wisely. And it means addressing the root of the problem – not the symptom – by giving every child access to the kind of reading instruction, books and support they need to thrive. Your Turn: Tablets, screen time aren't 'parenting hacks.' They're killing kids' attention spans. | Opinion Forum I believe in meeting kids where they are – because that's where real learning begins. Not all screens are created equal, and the goal isn't to eliminate technology but to use it wisely. There's a big difference between passive consumption and purposeful practice. Research shows that just 15 to 20 minutes a day of focused, high-quality reading can drive real progress – especially when it's supported by tools that are engaging, accessible and grounded in how kids actually learn. That's the idea behind many of the resources we build at Mrs Wordsmith, a company of which I'm president and where we use cell phones and other nontraditional approaches to teach students how to read. This school year, don't let the conversation get hijacked. Ask your school leaders the hard questions, such as how are you teaching reading? How are you using technology to support learning? And what are you doing to ensure every child has the skills and knowledge to thrive in school and beyond? Our kids deserve better than blanket bans and wishful thinking. They deserve an education built for the world they're actually going to live in. Brandon Cardet-Hernandez is a member of the Boston School Committee and the president of Mrs Wordsmith. You can read diverse opinions from our USA TODAY columnists and other writers on the Opinion front page, on X, formerly Twitter, @usatodayopinion and in our Opinion newsletter.
USA Today
2 days ago
- Business
- USA Today
Trump sharpens the axe for the Education Department. Swing away, Mr. President.
Despite the Department of Education's massive budget, students in the U.S. far too often lag behind peers in other industrialized countries. The largest employer in the United States isn't a Fortune 100 company like Alphabet, Amazon or Apple. It's the federal government − and that's a problem. Thankfully, President Donald Trump continues to slash bureaucratic bloat. On July 11, the administration sent layoff notices to more than 1,300 State Department workers, and three days later, the Supreme Court allowed Trump to move forward with plans to gut the Department of Education. That's bad news for government employees, but great for taxpayers, especially given the Education Department's expense − $268 billion in the last fiscal year − and its lack of effectiveness. Despite the department's massive budget, students in the U.S. far too often lag behind peers in other industrialized countries. In 2022, for example, American high school students scored behind teens from 25 other countries on an international math test. And we're losing ground. Math and reading scores on the National Assessment of Educational Progress continue to decline. Part of the drop can be attributed to pandemic-related learning loss, but reading scores in the U.S. began to decline in 2019 − before Americans had even heard of COVID-19. But how will pulling the federal government out of K-12 education help? It's important to note that more than 90% of public school funding comes from state and local governments along with foundations and other private sources. Much of the federal education budget is used to feed the bureaucracy, which generates rules and regulations that local administrators and teachers must obey. If all of that bureaucratic oversight consistently produced better results, there might be a case for keeping it. But the data clearly shows it doesn't. Removing federal bureaucrats from our schools should give states and local school districts more flexibility to set education policy, and that should improve choices for parents like me. Returning more control to the states also should improve efficiency and enable schools to better meet students' needs. Opinion: Our schools are struggling because teachers unions don't put kids first Government efficiency is vital for the American people Trump isn't cutting jobs only at the Education Department, of course. The State Department layoffs follow reductions at other federal agencies this spring. The cuts are driven by necessity: our national debt is now more than $37 trillion and the annual budget deficit will top $1 trillion again this year. So, I was surprised to see news reports paint the laid off State Department workers as heroic. Cameras caught teary goodbyes and applause for well-liked employees. I don't recall the same concern when President Joe Biden halted construction of the Keystone Pipeline, which cost 1,500 workers their jobs and eliminated plans to create thousands more. Opinion: PBS, NPR push liberal propaganda. Trump is right to cut their funding. Companies often restructure. So should the federal government. While job loss is certainly scary, and I don't wish it on anyone, federal job cuts should be put in the context of the overall jobs market. Microsoft announced this month it would eliminate 9,000 jobs, not because the company is failing but because it's retooling as the market changes. Other companies, including Intel and Meta, have announced plans to restructure this year as the emergence of artificial intelligence and other technology changes how Americans work. The federal government should be as flexible as our top companies in adapting to a changing world. Yet, progressives have criticized the Trump administration's efforts to restructure the federal bureaucracy as cruel. The president's job, however, isn't to employ as many bureaucrats as possible. It's to deliver effective services as efficiently as possible to taxpayers. Dismantling ineffective and inefficient bureaucracies like the Education Department is a long overdue step toward achieving that goal. Nicole Russell is a columnist at USA TODAY and a mother of four who lives in Texas. Contact her at nrussell@ and follow her on X, formerly Twitter: @russell_nm. Sign up for her weekly newsletter, The Right Track, here.
Boston Globe
2 days ago
- Politics
- Boston Globe
New Hampshire is expanding school choice. Will Massachusetts follow?
Advertisement This surge in school choice is part of a broader national trend. Enrollment in such programs has more than doubled since 2020 — from roughly 540,000 to more than Massachusetts, home to some of the nation's strongest private, parochial, charter, and vocational-technical schools, is increasingly being left behind, politically unwilling and legally constrained from offering families access to private options. The catalyst for this wave of private options was the US Supreme Court's 2020 decision in Espinoza v. Montana Department of Revenue. The court Advertisement Her story resonated nationwide, particularly during the pandemic. The move to online learning by public schools, union resistance to returning students to the classroom, and a seeming disregard for students' mental health and learning loss drove many families toward private and homeschool options. Even in Massachusetts, Massachusetts may remain among the top-performing states nationally, but that status masks a troubling decline. On the National Assessment of Educational Progress (the nation's report card), average eighth-grade The pandemic and student distraction due to cellphones are partially to blame, but the decline is Clearly there is a hunger for options other than traditional public school. Advertisement New Hampshire's latest choice expansion is relevant to Massachusetts because, in addition to the two states' cultural and demographic similarities, they post nearly identical academic performance. On the 2024 NAEP, New Hampshire eighth-graders scored averages of 280 in As student performance declines, Massachusetts lawmakers remain committed to a top-down, monopolistic education system. They refuse to consider private school choice, hiding behind 19th-century anti-Catholic amendments in the state constitution that prohibit public funds from flowing to religious schools, even indirectly. At the same time, lawmakers have stood by as the pillars of the Commonwealth's landmark 1993 education reforms — strong academic standards, accountability through testing, and choice through charter schools — have steadily eroded. New Hampshire is taking a more pragmatic approach: It is steadily expanding school choice with thoughtful fiscal safeguards and a clear focus on helping the students most in need. As a result, many more New Hampshire parents will now be able to narrow class- and race-based achievement gaps — whether through public or private schools, the small learning groups called The recently passed 'One Big Beautiful Bill,' President Trump's massive tax and spending plan, enacts the first national school choice program, offering scholarships funded through tax credits to all but the wealthiest families. Starting in 2027, taxpayers nationwide will be able to redirect up to $1,700 in federal taxes to approved scholarship organizations. Advertisement The program could benefit many of the 120,000 families in Massachusetts paying a private school tuition, or using homeschool and microschool options, which grew enormously during the pandemic. Expanding its appeal further, the program benefits families paying for after-school supplemental learning, including tutoring. The catch? States must opt in. For now, Massachusetts officials say they are For the dozens of states with school choice programs, including New Hampshire, the pathway forward is clear: Private school choice has broad public support and expands equality of educational opportunity. What will Massachusetts do?
Time of India
16-07-2025
- Politics
- Time of India
How massive US Education Department cuts are threatening the Nation's Report Card and core federal programs
US Education Department layoffs leave key student testing and research functions at risk. (The New York Times) The US Supreme Court has allowed the Department of Education to move forward with laying off more than 1,300 employees, a decision that is already affecting key federal education functions. The move is part of President Donald Trump's broader plan to dismantle the department, an effort long supported by some conservatives. The cuts reduce the department's total workforce by nearly half, following the resignation or separation of an additional 600 employees earlier this year. Among the most severely impacted areas is the Nation's Report Card — officially known as the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) — which is a congressionally mandated program used to assess student performance across states. According to the Washington Post, nearly all staff in the division overseeing NAEP were laid off, leaving only three employees to manage the work that was previously handled by approximately 30. Impact on student testing and national data collection NAEP, administered by the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), is the only federal assessment that provides comparable data on student achievement across states. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Discover Why These Off-Plan Dubai Apartments Sell Fast? Binghatti Developers FZE Read More Undo It is one of the key responsibilities of the Department of Education. The significant staff reductions are already impacting operations. According to the Washington Post, the department missed its deadline for releasing the 2024 science test results and preparations for the 2026 assessment are now at risk due to insufficient staffing. The National Assessment Governing Board, which oversees NAEP, approved a reduced testing schedule in April. The revised plan preserves only the congressionally mandated math and reading tests and eliminates 19 other assessments that were scheduled for 2028 to 2032. The board reportedly tried to retain the most essential exams while signaling which ones should be protected from future cuts, according to a source cited by the Washington Post. Other federal education offices affected The layoffs have also heavily impacted the Institute for Education Sciences (IES), the Office for Civil Rights (OCR), the Office of English Language Acquisition, and the Federal Student Aid office. The IES, the department's main research and data division, lost around 90 percent of its staff. Mark Schneider, who led the IES from 2018 to 2024, told the Washington Post that the department has yet to provide a clear plan for continuing its responsibilities, stating, "We have so many more questions than we have answers. " A summary of key impacts from the layoffs, as reported by the Washington Post, is shown below: Impact of US Education Department layoffs Category Details Total layoffs approved 1,300 employees Additional separations ~600 (via separation packages) Overall workforce reduction Nearly 50% Effective separation date August 1 (as reported by the Washington Post) NAEP staff reduction From ~30 to 3 employees IES staff reduction ~90% cut NAEP missed deadline 2024 science test results (not released on time) Planned testing cuts (2028–2032) 19 assessments eliminated Programs/agencies affected NAEP, IES, NCES, OCR, Office of English Language Acquisition, Student Aid Budget cut to NAEP $48 million reduction (as reported by the Washington Post) Estimated NAEP savings (5 years) $185 million (according to Education Dept., per Washington Post) Governing Board action Prioritized mandated math and reading assessments; cut optional subjects Key quote (Mark Schneider) "We have so many more questions than we have answers." (via Washington Post) Trump statement "Major Victory to Parents and Students..." (via Truth Social, quoted by WP) According to the Washington Post, department spokesperson Madi Biedermann stated that the agency is working with Congress and state leaders to ensure all required functions continue and that the Trump administration is committed to "sunsetting" the department responsibly. Supreme Court decision and ongoing legal challenge The Supreme Court's decision allowed the layoffs to proceed while litigation continues in a lower court. The American Federation of Government Employees Local 252 said the affected staff had remained on paid leave since a federal court issued a preliminary injunction in May. After the Supreme Court ruling, the department notified employees that their official separation date is August 1, as reported by the Washington Post. President Trump described the court's decision as a victory for families, stating on Truth Social that the ruling was a "Major Victory to Parents and Students across the Country," according to the Washington Post. Critics, however, argue the cuts have left the future of several core federal education functions uncertain. TOI Education is on WhatsApp now. Follow us here . Ready to navigate global policies? Secure your overseas future. Get expert guidance now!
Miami Herald
08-07-2025
- Politics
- Miami Herald
Another Education Department delay: Release of NAEP science scores
The repercussions from the decimation of staff at the Education Department keep coming. Last week, the fallout led to a delay in releasing results from a national science test. The National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) is best known for tests that track reading and math achievement but includes other subjects too. In early 2024, when the main reading and math tests were administered, there was also a science section for eighth graders. The board that oversees NAEP had announced at its May meeting that it planned to release the science results in June. But that month has since come and gone. Why the delay? There is no commissioner of education statistics to sign off on the score report, a requirement beforeit is released, according to five current and former officials who are familiar with the release of NAEP scores, but asked to remain anonymous because they were not authorized to speak to the press or feared retaliation. Related: Our free weekly newsletter alerts you to what research says about schools and classrooms. Peggy Carr, a former Biden administration appointee, was dismissed as the commissioner of the National Center for Education Statistics in February, two years before the end of her six-year term set by Congress. Chris Chapman was named acting commissioner, but then he was fired in March, along with half the employees at the Education Department. The role has remained vacant since. A spokesman for the National Assessment Governing Board, which oversees NAEP, said the science scores will be released later this summer, but denied that the lack of a commissioner is the obstacle. "The report building is proceeding so the naming of a commissioner is not a bureaucratic hold up to its progress," Stephaan Harris said by email. The delay matters. Education policymakers have been keen to learn if science achievement had held steady after the pandemic or tumbled along with reading and math. (Those reading and math scores were released in January.) The Trump administration has vowed to dismantle the Education Department and did not respond to an emailed question about when a new commissioner would be appointed. Related: Chaos and confusion as the statistics arm of the Education Department is reduced to a skeletal staff of 3 Researchers hang onto data Keeping up with administration policy can be head spinning these days. Education researchers were notified in March that they would have to relinquish federal data they were using for their studies. (The department shares restricted datasets, which can include personally identifiable information about students, with approved researchers.) But researchers learned on June 30 that the department had changed its mind and decided not to terminate this remote access. Lawyers who are suing the Trump administration on behalf of education researchers heralded this about-face as a "big win." Researchers can now finish projects in progress. Still, researchers don't have a way of publishing or presenting papers that use this data. Since the mass firings in mid-March, there is no one remaining inside the Education Department to review their papers for any inadvertent disclosure of student data, a required step before public release. And there is no process at the moment for researchers to request data access for future studies. "While ED's change-of-heart regarding remote access is welcome," said Adam Pulver of Public Citizen Litigation Group, "other vital services provided by the Institute of Education Sciences have been senselessly, illogically halted without consideration of the impact on the nation's educational researchers and the education community more broadly. We will continue to press ahead with our case as to the other arbitrarily canceled programs." Pulver is the lead attorney for one of three suits fighting the Education Department's termination of research and statistics activities. Judges in the District of Columbia and Maryland have denied researchers a preliminary injunction to restore the research and data cuts. But the Maryland case is now fast-tracked and the court has asked the Trump administration to produce an administrative record of its decision making process by July 11. (See this previous story for more background on the court cases.) Related: Education researchers sue Trump administration, testing executive power Some NSF grants restored in California Just as the Education Department is quietly restarting some activities that DOGE killed, so is the National Science Foundation (NSF). The federal science agency posted on its website that it reinstated 114 awards to 45 institutions as of June 30. NSF said it was doing so to comply with a federal court order to reinstate awards to all University of California researchers. It was unclear how many of these research projects concerned education, one of the major areas that NSF funds. Researchers and universities outside the University of California system are hoping for the same reversal. In June, the largest professional organization of education researchers, the American Educational Research Association, joined forces with a large coalition of organizations and institutions in filing a legal challenge to the mass termination of grants by the NSF. Education grants were especially hard hit in a series of cuts in April and May. Democracy Forward, a public interest law firm, is spearheading this case. Contact staff writer Jill Barshay at 212-678-3595, jillbarshay.35 on Signal, or barshay@ This story about delaying the NAEP science score report was written by Jill Barshay and produced by The Hechinger Report, a nonprofit, independent news organization focused on inequality and innovation in education. Sign up for Proof Points and other Hechinger newsletters. The post Another Education Department delay: Release of NAEP science scores appeared first on The Hechinger Report.
