McMahon Doesn't Understand Education

McMahon's particular brand of passionless functionary was on display Sunday morning for a dozen minutes with Dana Bash. The interview kicked around a few topics, and featured one moment that highlight's McMahon's lack of understanding. I've watched it so you don't have to: here are the topics of the day.

The cost of going back to school. Bash opened with the cost of supplying a child for school. $175 for school supplies! "Packing a school lunch is up more than 10%," said Bash. "What do you say to parents" struggling with the costs and economic strains? 

Good soldier and millionaire McMahon sticks with the party line of denial. There may be some price "upticks," but "the general economy is strong" and doing so well. Also, parents have a lot to look forward to because the administration has done work "to make sure that parents are more in charge of the education that is going on in the states" etc etc. So McMahon offers parents denial followed by changing the subject. Which leads directly to the department's hot new talking point--

Sex stuff. Expect to hear repeats of the statistic that one in ten students will have been sexually molested in school. McMahon manages to suggest that faculty are the main problem here and the administration is really working on that. She singles out California as place that shuffles teachers. Bash interrupts to ask if McMahon just pulled that stat out of her butt and McMahon says no the department did a study, based on some data-- "the general education statistics that were afforded to us." It should be pointed out that the California issue is a real thing, as reported by KQED and ProPublica, and the whole subject deserves attention (though this administration may not be the folks to do it). She says they have "really been cracking down on that as well" though how, exactly, is unclear. But it's two minutes into the interview and you already forgot that this started with a question about the high cost of sending a kid to school.

But God bless her, Bash did not forget and responded that sure some economic indicators are better "but the affordability crisis is real." McMahon offers a kind of half nod which could be a grudging acknowledgement of the point or a simple "Well, played, Dana."

AI in the classroom. Bash notes that McMahon issued guidance saying schools should evaluate AI tools based on evidence of effectiveness and learning outcomes. But, notes Bash, the tools haven't been around long enough for any such evidence to have been collected, yet Google and OpenAI are already shoving tools toward students.  "Are you concerned that students are effectively becoming sort of guinea pigs for chatbots?"

McMahon (who has learned the difference between AI and A1) goes with the talking point that says we should watch out for screen time but make our caution based on good screens and bad screens. This launches her tale of going to Austin to see Alpha School in action. She was, of course, impressed.

The first couple of hours every day, students really have on headphones, they're in front of their computers, they're getting their subjects fed to them

Yup, that's how education works-- you just pour the knowledge into the brains of young humans and voila!! Instant smartitude. McMahon talks about "teachers" at Alpha School monitoring what's going on, but Alpha School doesn't use actual certified teachers for the job of "coach." McMahon says the beauty of the 2Hour Learning model is that "a student almost has a one-on-one tutor." They do not. AI is not a tutor for so very many reasons, not the least of which is that the AI cannot analyze where the student went wrong and guide them past that bump in the learning road. She describes how the teacher can see if the child is behind and therefore "repeat information" or see the child is ahead and speed things up-- all of which is what the magical AI is supposed to be doing, so I'm pretty sure McMahon comprehends zero parts of this whole set-up.

McMahon says with AI we should look at "who's going to get it, how long are students going to be exposed to it, what is the outcome," and that would be great for Alpha School, which carefully selects its students. We know, by comparing Alpha School outcomes with the outcomes of Unbound, their bargain cyber-charters that don't cream students, that their outcomes suck (see this invaluable Dan Meyer post).

McMahon agrees that AI products should be checked for effectiveness (not that she imagines a role for her department in doing so, because the MAGA concept of federal oversight is that there should be none and let the chips fall on those who deserve to be chip-burdened, so who exactly is checking these program for effectiveness or doing the pulling out is important, but not clear here). Anyway, she thinks Alpha School is so shiny, she supports "AI with guardrails," and again-- who is putting up these guardrails? 

Bash asks if she thinks Alpha School is a proper model and she says, "Well, the PR pitch I received was convincing." I'm paraphrasing. She does note that it seemed effective at these schools for these students and she's not saying it would work everywhere, which is smart because we already know it doesn't.

AI opt out. Bash asks if parents should be able to opt out of AI, and the TL:DR answer is, "Yes." The school should make its case.

AI versus human. Bash kind of fumbles this question, but the upshot is "Is the swellness of AI tutoring outweighed by the loss of human interaction with teachers?" Even with a coach there, it's not the same as learning from a human being. Are you concerned about that. The TL:DR answer is, "No, that's not our problem." But she'll also allow that human vs. AI instruction requires a balance, as with any other new tool. Nothing can replace human interaction, both between students and teacher and between student and student. She's not wrong. 

School phone bans. Does McMahon think they're a good idea. "Bell to bell no cell," she says. She's a fan. Then she's back to screen time balance, recreational vs. tutoring. This is a good a place as any to mention that McMahon was born in 1948.

CTE and College. Bash gets CTE education, but wonders if pushing career tracks in elementary school is a bit much. Of course, in MAGA world, where Certain People are destined for meat widget status and might as well get started early (see: every state that has weakened child labor laws). McMahon's quote here has some real layers:

I think what we can do is look at students. What are their interests? How do we direct them down a pathway that they're going to have an interest, you know, in school and I believe that children need a well-rounded education, but I think we have focused for too long for just that four year that path to a four year university and sometimes we ignore what the actual skill sets of those students are. 

Note the idea that we are supposed to direct students down a pathway rather than, say, letting them choose a path on their own. Note also the notion that students' "skill sets" should determine their paths. I don't disagree that we have over-emphasized college, but the whiff of one of those systems where we sort students into future career paths early on, regardless of what the students themselves want-- well, that's a very stinky whiff. 

McMahon cites middle school partnerships with community colleges, and Bash says, well, maybe that's debatable, but elementary school??!! Maybe get some critical thinking taught and leave specific trades till later. Nah, do both at once, says McMahon. But then she flips back to "we can't direct that from DC." Because each community and its school might "need" different things. This seems really close to the notion that poor communities need to teach students to be meat widgets, and wealthy communities don't. Certainly there is nothing in her formulation of education about providing opportunities or, ironically, actual choices for students. But she's right back to "and that's why we really want to return education to the states, because we shouldn't have to make sure students all have equal opportunities no matter their zip code." Okay, I added that last part.

Higher ed free speech. Bash brings up the letter McMahon sent to universities calling for more open admission and more free speech. Bash wants to know if the Trump administration will back that up with cuts of federal funds. McMahon's reply starts with "Well, we're certainly always going to monitor what our universities are doing" which is both creepy and also contrary to sending education back to the states, but she then cites an "incredible positive response" and argues that she's all about open debate by folks on both sides of the aisle. She cites Ron DeSantis saying that Florida is all about those open two-sided debates in higher ed, so clearly that's totally working. 

Look, it's a foundational belief of MAGA that the dirty Lefties captured institutions, including higher education, and that to set the country aright, those institutions must be recaptured. Chris Rufo has talked about it repeatedly; somebody has a whole book coming out about it. That's the project. Anything else is a smokescreen. McMahon's call for a "collision of ideas" can't be taken seriously.

That's pretty much it. McMahon mostly snoozed her way through the interview. As usual, McMahon strikes me as someone who is perfect for the task of doing away with her job because it's a job that doesn't seem to interest her very much at all. Honestly, I'm not sure why she's here. Betsy DeVos wanted to bring kingdom rule, but McMahon is old and wealthy and seems like she's out of effs to give. She may want to watch the world burn, but I imagine she would not stick around long to bask in the glow.

You can watch it all if you want, but don't bother to make popcorn.

ICYMI: Busted Modem Edition (8/23)

It has been a real experience for most of this week, with the home internet appearing and disappearing in 5-10 minute intervals. I am waiting patiently for the Institute's provider to send new hardware, but in the meantime, getting work done in little microburst has been an adventure and a reminder the degree to which internet connectivity is now a basic utility and while not exactly a necessity, it certainly ties one's feet together to have it only limited capacity. Just reminder to maybe give your wi-fi connection a little hug and tell it how much you appreciate it today.

And now the week's reading list.

August 21, 2026

Heather Cox Richardson, America's favorite on-line historian (and a Mainer, to boot) took a look at the history of school vouchers this week. 

We’ve Replaced School Security With the Creepiest Possible System

At Slate, so there's a paywall to contend with, but Nicholas Stewart takes a look at the horrifying state of school surveillance and "security."

FWISD put cameras in classrooms at struggling schools. Why?

And speaking of horrifying, intrusive surveillance, Fort Worth has stuck cameras in classrooms. Jacob Sanchez at Fort Worth Report has the whole awful story.

Controversial group that opened ‘Colorado’s first public Christian school’ will close after 13 years

Ann Schimke at Chalkbeat has the story behind the now-defunct group that launched Riverstone, a Christian charter school.

Parental Rights Bills Forgot Children Have Rights, Too

Bruce Lesley takes a dive into the legal questions surrounding the rights of parents-- and when the invocation of those rights imposes on the rights of children.

At “Quasi-Public” Private Schools, 100% of Students Get Tuition Vouchers. There’s Almost No Accountability.

Megan O'Matz at ProPublica looks at the schools that crop up to take advantage of voucher money in an unregulated marketplace.

Setting the Record Straight on ‘Parent-Led’ Groups Attacking Public Schools

Maurice Cunningham and Jeff Bryant team up for a look at those grass roots parent groups that are just big slabs of billionaire-serving astroturf.

Let's Try to Not Become Huge Dopes

John Warner reacts to a write who has proudly announced that he handles his summer reading list by having AI whip up some summaries.

Google Turns On Gemini A.I. for Students Using Its Classroom App

This should be a New York Times gift article, and if you have Google in your classroom, you need to know-- they've aimed AI straight at your students.

Data Centers are a Public Education Issue

Jennifer Berkshire looks at the overlap between public education support and data center opposition.

Some Thoughts about National Board Certification

Nancy Flanagan is a National Board Certified Teacher and she has some thoughts about what it takes-- and what politicians could leave alone.

Everybody Should Be Somebody’s Baby: How Americans Fail Early Learners

Nancy Bailey argues that we have a way to go if we really want to invest in the littles.

Fraught Trump Era Will Intensify Challenge for Teachers to Protect Students’ Rights and Serve Their Needs

Jan Resseger looks into the legal protections for students' rights, with some help from Derek Black

A College Just Cut Theatre Opportunities and Its Students Still Don’t Know Why

In Florida. But at least they still have a big expensive Innovation Hub. Chris Peterson reports for the On Stage Blog.

“Follow the Science” — Right Up Until It Asks an Inconvenient Question

TC Weber, as usual, covers a variety of topics, some very Memphis-related. But I don't want you to miss this section, so here's the excerpt, and maybe go read the whole post:

The other day, I was listening to a couple of young sports-talk radio hosts discuss how they learned about the football players of their generation.

They learned through the Madden video game.

Madden lists players and their skill sets. It assigns an overall rating, then breaks a player down into categories like speed, strength, awareness, agility, throwing power, and tackling. Those ratings are useful for playing the game, and they can be a good starting point for learning about players.

The fallacy comes when you decide the statistics truly define the player. Some players are better than their Madden ratings. Others seem unable to earn theirs when the real game is on the line. A player can possess every measurable tool and still fail to recognize what is happening in front of him.

My son, a high school quarterback, often talks about the difference between straight-line speed and football speed. The two are very different. Plenty of people can run a great 40-yard dash but somehow look slow on the field. They hesitate, take a poor angle, or need too much time to process what they see.

Football coaches quickly recognize the difference.

They understand that a number without context is only a number.

The same holds true when looking at student data. Test scores, attendance rates, discipline reports, grades, and growth measures can all provide insight. None should be treated as the be-all and end-all.

Like those coaches, teachers are best positioned to interpret what the data means. If you spend all day with a child, you develop context. You know whether a score reflects ability, anxiety, hunger, exhaustion, growth, boredom, or a rough morning at home.

That knowledge is not a rejection of data. It is what makes data useful.

Unfortunately, both science and data are routinely manipulated to serve unrelated goals—goals that do not necessarily benefit children.

Jose Felicianoi had some extraordinary talent beyond signing a few pop songs. Here he is on the Ed Sullivan Show in 1966 playing the daylights out of that guitar.

"AI Companies Do Not Care At All About Writing."

You may not have been paying close attention to the noise surrounding the news that Anthropic has tweaked its text-extruding LLM Claude so that it will now extrude text strings with "watermarks."  But the whole business is worth a moment of your attention.

First, we need to know what the "watermark" is, because it's not what you think it is. It's not some sort of sort-of-visible marking that anyone with eyeballs can spot. Claude will not extrude text that has "Claude" printed on it in large-but-transparentish print. Nor will there be invisible text or a special note in the metadata.

No, as Anthropic explained, the "watermark" will actually be a change in how the program strings words together. And as Jason Koebler points out at 404 (headlined with the quote in this post's title), it demonstrates the degree to which Anthropic has no real respect for or interest in the actual work of writing. Just in case you had imagined otherwise.

The watermark is not visible to readers. No hidden characters, no additional text. Just a "nudge" in the selection of the next probable word. Here's part of their explanation. 

Large language models like Claude work by generating one word at a time. Each time the model decides on the next word, it chooses among a list of potential candidates, ultimately selecting the most sensible or likely based on the preceding text. Take the sentence “The weather today was cold and…”. The next word is very unlikely to be “sugary.” But it is quite likely to be “overcast” or “grey.” Under most circumstances, it doesn’t matter much to the reader which of these latter two words the model ultimately chooses—the meaning of the sentence is largely the same either way. In cases like this, the choice is settled by a random number.

Watermarking uses low-stakes choices like these—which occur many times over a piece of generated text—to leave a pattern in Claude’s responses. That pattern is undetectable to the reader, but is detectable to anyone who has a key that encodes it.

Emphasis mine.

But "overcast" and "grey" are different words, with different meanings. Koebler points to an essay by John Gruber of Daring Fireball, and another by journalism academic Jeff Jarvis, in which he claims Anthropic “devalues writing” which confirm that, yes, word choice does matter. In making this choice, “Anthropic declares words fungible, language random, choice meaningless,” Jarvis writes.

But Koehler rightly sees an even more troubling foundational issue here.   

It does not matter to me, necessarily, whether the output of Claude’s garbage AI text is one way or is a slightly different way. But it does matter to me that AI data scientists at huge tech companies think that word choice doesn’t matter, or that it is possible to statistically use synonyms wherever without fucking with the meaning of a sentence.

Anthropic's post talks about writing as if it's a random generation of words or numbers. It is, in one Anthropic example, just a random roll of the dice.  

What Anthropic makes abundantly clear is that the question of how human writing happens, the company isn't even on their radar. They are working on an entirely different problem-- how to get a pair of dice to generate a sentence that more-or-less mimics strings of words in their training data. It is pointless to discuss chatbots as if they are just not far enough down the path to qualify as real writing tools because they are not even on that path. Anthropic wants AI-generated code to be exactly correct, but with words, one is pretty much as good as a bunch other.

The "watermark," visible only to Anthropic-created software, is meant to comply with the letter of the European Union's AI Act if not the actual spirit (See, Anthropic? Sometimes the exact wording matters!). And programmers have already figured out how to avoid it. 

It all reminds me of the great Mark Twain quote: The difference between the almost right word and the right word is really a large matter - 'tis the difference between the lightning-bug and the lightning.

But mostly it's the umpteenth reminder that AI LLMs don't write in any human sense of the word, nor do their corporate overlords actually aspire for them to write in any human sense of the word.                                            

ICYMI: Breathless Edition (8/15)

I swear-- I'll be back up to speed soon. But in the meantime, I wouldn't dream of leaving you without the week's reading recommendations. 

Facebook Billionaires Walk Out On Impoverished Students

If you haven't yet heard the story of Zuckerberg dumping yet another education-flavored project, Thomas Utican has it for you.

OMB and Russell Vought Receive 497,000 Comments on Controversial New Universal Grants Guidance

Jan Resseger reports that the Trump administration is getting some pushback on their latest hairbrained idea.

Humans understand what AI cannot

Helen Keller, AI, and teaching. From Ben Riley.

Despite their rhetoric, Private Schools aren't dramatically boosting teacher salaries with their unconstitutional, taxpayer funded windfall

Ohio's taxpayer-funded vouchers were supposedly going to boost private school teacher pay. Stephen Dyer has some actual facts to show that doesn't seem to be happening.

Does Alpha School Work for Regular Kids?

Short answer: no. Dan Meyer has a longer answer involving Alpha's sub-business called Unbound.

Tennessee School Privatization Group Seeks to Build Propaganda Machine

Somebody in Tennessee is hiring, and Andy Spears has some details. Anybody want to be a privatization PR shill?

"Outsourcing Discrimination"

It's not enough that religious schools want taxpayer funding-- they also want to leave their discriminatory practices in place. Josh Cowen explains the problem and looks at one possible solution.

Supporting Teacher Growth Through Trusting Relationships

Randi Brown writes for edutopia about a hot new concept-- maybe if admins treated teachers like human beings...

Improvisational theatre, meditation, and games support anxious teens

I taught theater, including improv, so this bit of research reported by Jonathan Kantowitz caught my eye. 

(Not) Everything Changes

"This changes everything!" Audrey Watters reminds us that this is pretty much never true in education.

Just a photo this week. This is Sabbaday Falls in the White Mountains, a sort of mini-Flume right off the Kancamagus Highway. It takes a long time for water to cut through rock like this, but nature is patient. May we be the same.

More Excuses for Screens in Schools

At first glanece, the recent Matt Barnum interview with Richard Culatta, the CEO of ISTE, might seem to feature the head of that tech-pushing giant backpedaling (or maybe even backpeddling) on the big tech push that has drawn such backlash lately. But let's look at what he says again:

On the backlash:

You know, in some ways I’m surprised it’s taken this long. I was watching how we were managing technology in the wake of COVID, and we were not doing it very thoughtfully. When you start handing out devices very quickly without preparing teachers, without carefully selecting the tools, without monitoring them for quality, stuff starts to go off the rails.

 On bad tech in schools:

People very quickly want to focus on the tools, on the screens, and it just doesn’t line up with what we see. It’s almost entirely about how the technology is used. In some cases, we have kids just clicking next through PowerPoint, and that’s terrible learning. That’s just the equivalent of a worksheet on a screen.

So I think we just need to have a moment where we go back and say ‘we did things wrong.’ Unfortunately, what we’re hearing are far less effective strategies. I mean, our friends in L.A. are doing the worst possible approach to trying to course correct.

He's referring to recent policy decisions in LAUSD calling for limits on screen time.  Which Culatta thinks is a bad idea. 

But is he saying here that we made a mistake putting all those screens in front of youthful eyeballs? 

He is not. He is, in fact, using one of the most popular dodges in the annals of bad education policy ideas, fully recognizable to anyone who was teaching during the Common Core backlash.

Our product is awesome! You're just implementing it wrong.

Culatta admits that somebody, somehow, might have overpromised with ed tech, but, hey now-- let's not get crazy:

I don’t think it was oversold. It was oversimplified, and so this idea that you could just put some software in front of a kid with no need for a teacher anymore — I mean, we’d hear stuff like that. What happens is when there are big sweeping statements like ‘oh technology will solve everything’ and then it doesn’t — of course it doesn’t — then people think technology is garbage, and we should ban it.

Yes, it was absolutely oversold. Hell, it's still being oversold. And not in a "we'd hear stuff" from who-onows-where way, but in a pushy deiberate ed tech company marketing way. We've got entire schools (looking at you, Alpha School) selling themselves as "No teacher needed-- magical AI ed tech will do it all, and in only two hours a day."

Notice that he also skips right over the question of whether there is something fundamentally problematic about ed screens. It is true that not all tech packages are created equal, that software (like paper books) come in both well-designed and stunningly crappy varieties. But it is also true that we haven't dealt nearly enough with the ways in which parking a student in front of a screen turns a process that rests of social and human dimensions into a process that is isolating and humanity-deprived. I don't care if you have the best damned software in the world-- I still don't want my child spending a huge chunk of his school day staring into the electronic abyss.

Screens are inevitable. Screens are good. You just have to make sure you do screens the right way. This practice is as old as a Studebaker dealership-- it's called assuming the sale, and it gets the customer to talk about how they're going to buy your product rather than question whether or not they ought to. Ed tech just layers on "Well, if it's not working, that's because you're using it wrong." None of this is particularly helpful right now. I get that, to  edit a phrase, there's no point in hoping someone will ask questions when his livelihood depends on not asking those questions. But somebody has to ask them, and we all have to pay better attention to the answers we get.

ICYMI: Lakeside Edition (8/9)

The Institute continues its remote operation this week, so output is down a bit. We are conducting some deliberate field tests of enforced boredom, a parenting technique in which one refuses to provide one's offspring with constat entertainment, thereby forcing them to create their own activities. This actually works pretty well for the Board of Directors, which is encouraging. 

But I've still got a reading list for you. Make the best of it.

Science of Reading Mandates: Who’s Listening to The Experts?

Nancy Bailey breaks down the spread of Science of Reading and offers up a handy list of actual experts who deserve some attention while this wave is rolling through.

Trump’s Dept. of Ed. Rescinds Longstanding Formal Federal Rules Protecting Black, Brown, and Native American Students’ Civil Rights

Jan Resseger looks at the end of "disparate impact" policies-- basically, it now only counts as racism if someone annunces that they are introducing a policy for racist reasons.

The Trump team gives Head Start the DOGE treatment

Checker Finn may be a long time reformster, but he has also turned out to be a fairly reliable measure of what actual conservatives think of MAGA policies like gutting Head Start.

Florida AG’s threat to Catholic schools ‘clear violation’ of the First Amendment, law scholar says

The violation in question is not allowing religious exemption from vaccine requirements, because religious freedom means the state gets to tell you how to practice your religion.

The Silly Season Comes to School

TC Weber looks at some beginning of year shenanigans, and even if you aren't in Memphis, you're going to recognize some of them.

An alphabet without an F: AI slop seeps into Teachers Pay Teachers curriculum marketplace

Can't say I was ever a huge fan of Teachers Pay Teachers, but now Lily Altavena at Chalkbeat reports it's one more place crowded with AI inaccurate slop.

Art Made Us Human

From history professor Steven Mintz, one more answer to why AI is bad for us and some excellent historical context for the importance of art.

Why the Democrats Probably Won't Save the Humanities

Cultural Knowledge explains why the Dems are not going to rescue the humanities. Famliar problems with a slightly different framing.

Texas Republican Platform: Leaving Children Uninsured, Underserved, Unheard, and Unprotected

Bruce Lesley finds the Texas GOP platform less than great for children.

Give Them an Inch...

Jess Piper looks at the Heritage Foundation's desire to get rid of women's sports (because they make women all uppity)

The Phonics Gambit: The Zombie Reading Policy that Fails but Won't Die

Paul Thomas has the numbers for yet another phonics-forward policy that doesn't actually seem to work.

Primary schools to be told to identify children at risk of future unemployment

This is from the UK, but it can certainly serve as a cautionary tale for the US.

I love a good cross-genre cover.

ICYMI: Down East Edition (8/2)

The Board of Directors, CMO, and I are currently operating from the Maine field office, an annual adventure completre with woods, water, a little ocean, and other rebalancing team building exercises designed to increase our synergistic effciiencies with extreme fidelity and also fried clams and devil dogs. But there is still reading to be done.

Ridiculous Headlines about Public Education

Nancy Flanagan takes us on a stroll through the latest is silly education headlines.

The Best Correspondent’s Dinner Message That Should Not Go Unnoticed!

Nancy Bailey caught a widely ignored speech at the correspondent's dinner from Weijia Jiang, Emmy Award-winning television journalist. 

The Alpha School Debate

Natalie Wexler has mined a considerable number of materials related to Alpha School. None of it makes them seem less snake oily, but specifics are always nice.

Who Is Watching Nevada's classroom technology?

Kelsey Penrose writes for Carson Now about the parents pushing back against ed tech in Nevada.

Arizona judge strikes down GOP ballot measure threatening teachers unions' existence

The Arizona GOP keeps trying like hell to keep the public from having any say about taxpayer=funded vouchers, but the latest attempt to screw with the voters has been struck down by a judge.

Most Adults Don't Want Standardized Testing and Neither Do Kids: So, Why Do We Still Run Schools Around It?

Bruce Lesley has done plenty of homework on this answer to the decades-old question.

How a years-long rise in teacher turnover reshaped American classrooms

Matt Barnum at Chalkbeat has been looking at the data about teacher turnover, and he's drawn some conclusions.

Three Things I Would Encourage Every Teacher To Do Going Into This School Year

Marcus Luther offers some year-launching advice for teachers. It's a good list.

Your Reading is Out of Control

Rachael Gabrield presents an altern ative view of the current handwringing over the student reading crisis.

Anthropic Launched Claude for Teachers. We Blocked It for Our District.

Want one more post slamming the advent of Claude for Teachers? This one from Joe Phillips is excellent.

At Forbes.com last week, I wrote about to make a writing classroom AI-resistant, and about a study showing the school sports are more available to some than to others.

Turn this one up.

ICYMI: 170th Anniversary Edition (7/26)

I have played trombone in our town band since I was in eighth grade. It is a special kind of treat to sit on that bandstand in the park, playing with a group of amateur musicians for members of the community. This week we celebrate 170 years of musical service to the community. We were founded in 1856, and without accomplishing any particular world-shattering achievements, we have kept on playing for all those years, and I think that's pretty cool (I've researched and written an entire book about it if you're interested in this kind of thing). This afternoon I'll kick off our week with a talk about the history at our local music museum-- also a cool thing. My small town has its share of cool things. 

Here's the reading list for the week. Remember to share the things that speak to you. In this age, everyone can be an amplifier.

What Actually Makes a Classroom Work Has Nothing to Do With What You Teach

I have some quibbles with this post from The Rea; Classroom (I'd absolutely add "know what the hell you're talking about" to list, which absolutely has to do with what you teach) but she still has some good points to make in this list.

In home state, Moms for Liberty shows lackluster influence in school board races

Trinity Webster Ross reports for the Florida Trib on the waning influence of everyone's favorite culture panickers.

Big kids, big problems

Men Yell At Me is usually more political and cranky, but this post about parenting teens is beautiful and on point.

Gifted and Talented Education Issues

Thomas Ultican unpacks some of the problems still plaguing gifted and talented education.

Boys Should Go to Music Camp

Retired music teacher Nancy Flanagan is right on the mark here. 

Sally the Robot Was Coming to a New York School. Then the Plug Was Pulled.

Looks like the AI teacherbot might not be coming to Salamanca after all. From New York Times (if I did this right, a gift link, maybe?)

Why Is Claude for Teachers

Anthropic is making its bid for a slice of the education pie, and Ben Riley correctly questions why this is even a thing.

Who Is Ed-Tech For?

Audrey Watters is likewise skeptical about this newest iteration of edutech and puts it in the context of other bad edutech ideas as only she can.

Why Educators and School Leaders Should Be Skeptical with Anthropic's Free AI Access Offer and How to Protect Their Schools

Yeah, Anthropic has stirred up an ocean of skepticism. John Robinson reminds us that there is nothing free-- just the hope that you'll be so hooked that you'll be willing to pay later.

Big tech pitches AI for teacher burnout. Educators call it a Band-Aid

Devin Pavlou at San rounds out the mini-list of Claude-doubting. Come for this quote from Martina Meijer: 

“We’re training their models for free, and they’re telling us it’s a gift,” Meijer said. “No, no, no — our labor, our experience, our intellectual work — that is a gift. And I don’t give that gift to corporations. I give that gift to children.”

By One Dishonest Measure

Gary Rubinstein puts his number crunching skills to work dismantling claims about how many students are "trapped in failing schools."

Why we can't have nice things

Jeff Waid has some thoughts about why teacher well-being is so often administration talk and not action.

A Fairy Tale Reform

Larry Cuban shares the tale of a reform attempt from the 1930s, a study that was swallowed by the war, but deserves just a little bit of attention.

Ohio Legislature Ensures that Public School Funding Will Remain Inadequate and Grossly Inequitable

Jan Resseger suspects that the Ohio legislature doesn't actually care about public education. 

Put to the Test

Ted Dintersmith is an interesting animal, a rich guy who has dabbled in education but seems to have done so with actual interest in learning stuff rather than imposing his own genius ideas. Here he draws some conclusions about the Big Standardized Test as a central feature of education.

Meta is testing an AI bedtime story app for people with no imagination

I love a story that wears its attitude on its sleeve. Amanda Siberling at TechCrunch looks at Zuckerberg's latest boneheaded idea:

The good news about StoryKit is that it could be a lot worse. Meta regularly ships boneheaded ideas like Instagram deepfake generators and “pervert glasses.” Comparatively, is it so bad to doom children to soulless bedtime stories? Should we have expected anything better from the company that promised us a utopian world of virtual reality work meetings?

Short, worthwhile read.

Your Cookware Got Worse On Purpose

I discovered a new-to-me newsletter this week (thanks, Joanna) called "Worse on Purpose" and this post is a fine introduction. 

When a brand changes hands this many times, the name becomes the product and the pan becomes a cost to be managed beneath it: thinner steel here, an offshored handle there, a warranty rewritten by lawyers instead of engineers, and so on…

Yes, this website is about markets and products and consumers and enshittifcation, which are not obviously education issues, except that in a country where people are trying so hard to turn education into a market commodity, we really need to pay attention to how the marketplace actually works these days.

At Forbes.com this week, I look at the latest chapter in the Maine lawsuit-fest that is still trying to establish a religious school's right to discriminate as it wishes while demanding taxpayer dollars to fund its discrimination. Also, maybe states considering federal vouchers should also consider some regulatory guardrails to go with them. 

The band has a theme song; here we are playing it at the beginning of our 150th anniversary concert (for which we invited back former players). Not exactly perfect video quality from our local cable access station, but you get the idea.

Subscribe and get all the stuff, for free.

ICYMI: Canadian Smokehouse Edition (7/19)

We didn't get it as bad as places like Detroit, but we've been at a good, solid 200+ for a couple of days, and if that number doesn't mean anything to you, congratulations on being Not Downwind of the Canadian forest fires. What a fun summer. My town band canceled a concert for air quality issues, which is the first time that has happened in 170 years. 

It's been a busy time, but I still have a list for you. Remember to share.

Barns, Go-Karts, and Strip Malls: the Wild West of Private Schools that Collect Taxpayer Dollars

This Private School Had Students Scrub Floors and Attack a Fellow Classmate. The State Still Funds It.

How To Research Private Schools Like an Investigative Reporter

If you read just one piece on the list this week, let it be these. ProPublica took a look at the world of taxpayer-funded vouchers and the schools that profit from them. It's thorough, alarming, and hugely informative. Outstanding work from the team.

"Venmo government," administered by ClassWallet

Want to know more about ClassWallet, one of the companies cashing in on voucher administration? Steve Nuzum has the story.

Linda McMahon & How the Pledge of Allegiance Represents a Worse America

Jed Bookout at Frazzled explains how the administration's patriotism push is bad news for the country and education. 

She's So Sure

Audrey Watters with another explanation of what AI does not and can not do. 

Tennessee, Exemplar for Meritocratic Rot

James Horn breaks down some numbers to show that Tennessee is using testing to reinforce inequity in the name of merit.

Teachers save time with AI. Their students may pay the price

I have my doubts about the time saving, but Jill Barshay at Hechinger gets the rest right. 

Counter-Narratives: Mississippi Reading Reform

Paul Thomas explains some different, better ways to understand the narrative of the Mississippi reading miracle.

Found Him in the Front Hallway

At EduHonesty, a look through old discipline referral forms provides some insights into the sort of issues that disrupt a classroom.

Dismantling the Department of Education: Ten Bills That Ask Zero Questions About What Happens to Kids

Bruce Lesley takes a look at those ten bills being used to dismantle the Department of Education, and what they don't say about the students.

Dangers Are Embedded in Federal Waiver Proposal Being Advanced by Ohio Department of Education and the Workforce

Jan Resseger looks at a proposed waiver that would allow Ohio to turn federal money into block grants, part of a troubling trend.

Dear Alpha School: I Hope You’re Right

I'm still baffled by the continued fawning coverage of Alpha School, but this week Robert Pondiscio provided a useful critique from the reformy side of the aisle.

Let's try something a little more soothing this week. Huntertones are proof that you can still start a band in college and keep it going into your alleged adulthood. 

If you sign up, you can get all my stuff in your inbox without any effort. And it's free, now and forever.

Communication Communication Communication

We've been having a couple of weeks of medical adventures here with my 92-year-old mother, and it has reminded me of some of the things we get wrong in public education.

Here is Northwestern PA, most medical care comes one way or another through the folks of Unimaginable Piles of Money Collected. There are advantages to dealing with such an institutional behemoth, most notably a digitized medical record that is up-to-date and available to the patient and the family. It is routine for my sister to see and share test results before the doctor can make it around to the room to talk to us about them, and this is invaluable in terms of coming up with useful questions to ask. 

Hospitals deal with people who are extremely vulnerable, and that makes communication important. Our hospital quality check folks who sometimes amble into the room to ask questions about how well your health care professionals are communicating with you (best question asked-- "Do you know what you are waiting for?")

But this time we went through some real communications whiplash. We knew what they were doing, what they expected, what the goals were-- and then one morning we were moving--rapidly--in a whole other direction. Not because of any new change in the patient's condition; just in how the hospital was responding to it. No real communication about the what or why, catching both us and the facility on the other end of these choices flatfooted. It was an odd moment-- for about 24 hours, while nothing really changed for Mom, it still felt like we were handling an emergency situation.

It sucks enormously to be in a vulnerable medical situation and have nothing communicated to you beyond "We know what we're doing, so just sit there and trust us." It's frustrating and alarming, and if you have a family member who's good at interrogating the functionaries involved, you may make some progress.

The education world should take all of this to heart.

While it may not be a life and death situation, it feels hugely vulnerable to hand your child over to the care of others-- especially if you don't know those others personally. And it surely doesn't help if the school's answer to "What are you going to do with my child" is a hand wave and vague, "You know, school stuff." 

Many districts have an administration-level policy that opposes communication. Not that they phrase it quite that way, but the basic principle is "If we tell people about this, I will get phone calls, so let's just not tell them." This trick never works. Years ago my district contemplated closing an elementary school and decided to deal with the anticipated fallout by keeping the whole business quiet as long as possible. All they got for their trouble was members of the public who were angry about the proposed closure AND the lack of communication.

And it doesn't count as communicating if what you are really trying to do is use a carefully crafted line of baloney to "manage" the public. That is the opposite of communication, and its shiftiness is not hidden if you wrap it in shiny AI slop.

After roughly 100 very lonely parent open house evenings, I absolutely get that attempting communication from the school side can feel like shouting into the void. And we have made progresses-- the pressure to keep that digital gradebook up to date may be annoying some days, but from the parent side, it is a huge blessing. Digital gradebooks, e-mail, even those damned learning platforms-- it is easier than ever for parents to hunt down the information they want.

But none of that means that school districts, school buildings, and classroom teachers cannot do better at communicating to parents. Asking parents to add yet another app to their phones doesn't count. Information passed through channels that are already available and easy does count. For districts and buildings, this may mean spending some money. It is astonishing to me how many school websites do NOT have current information, but I know why it happens--because website maintenance has been assigned to someone who is expected to do updating work in spare minutes between the demands of their actual real job. I know how much time it takes to keep a website current; many school administrators have not a clue.

It is easy, living the dailiness inside the bubble, to imagine that the whole world is awash in the information of what's going on, what people are doing, what is the Usual Stuff of the school. When I passed out of that bubble at retirement, even I was surprised at how little information makes it outside of that bubble. (I wrote to my old district's leadership and board about the issue. "Do you want to do the job," they snarked back. No, because one, I'm retired and two, it needs to be done by someone inside the bubble.)

If you are a district administrator, a building administrator, or a classroom teacher, and you are not reaching outside the bubble at least once a week, you aren't doing enough. Talking to your students doesn't count-- they are inside the bubble with you. For the love of God, do not have an AI agent do it, because the resulting bloated bland and boring product is just noise. You have to let people know what you are doing.

Yes, I know-- lord, I know-- that you don't have time for this. But I am telling you that you can't afford not to take the time. It is how you build trust and support and partnership in your community. It is how you reduce the total amount of unnecessary fear and uncertainty and anxiety in your community (and really, these days, we all need less of that). Will you sometimes get pushback? But the correct response to pushback is to A) examine your premises and practices, B) make your case, and C) listen to the cause of the pushback and decide if it might be worth considering.

If we were better at this in education, reformsters over the last forty years would have heard a lot more, "I don't know what you're going on about. I know what my school does and your claim that they are a disasterific mess are just wrong!"

It's a big ask. It's one more damned thing. But right now I'm living through the difference between navigating with clear complete communication and being left to fumble through opaque and spotty communication, and the difference just feels really huge and the world, including the education portions of it, would be a much better place with less of the latter and more of the former. Inside the bubble, it may not feel like a big deal, but outside the bubble, it's huge. 

NY: District Will Install Teacherbot For the Fall. Yikes.

It is, of course, a rural district, a district located on the Seneca Nation reservation in Western NY.  The Salamanca City Central School District enrolls roughly 1400 students K-12, roughly a third of whom are Native American. 

And they're getting a "humanoid robot" teacher. 

There are so many red flags flying around this story. Take this description from Melissa Manno at New York Focus who talked to Andrew Siguel, CEO of Toronto-based Realbotix (more about them in a bit):

The female robot, named Sally, will have a “lifelike appearance” with silicone skin and long brown hair, Kiguel said in an interview with New York Focus. It will be stationary in a seated position but have a wide range of upper-body movements and facial expressions.

The "female" robot? Robots do not have gender, as far as I know. Students will use a unique id code to announce themselves to the bot, so the bot can id with whom it is speaking. Place your bets now on how many nanoseconds until students decide there is fun to be had by switching id codes. 

The robot will be tied into the school's tech curriculum, which was developed by Steve Sozniak "to prepare students for high-demand tech jobs," and I sure hope they aren't referring to all those coding jobs that are now being handed over to AI.

But hey-- nothing like waving jobs and technology at rural, marginalized districts (the district has roughly 79% low-income students) in an attempt to get them to sign up to be some tech bro's guinea pig.

And it won't just help students, who might, for instance, "upload photos of homework for feedback, ask the avatar to generate lessons on topics that interest them, or receive real-time translations in over 100 languages." You know. Cheat. But teachers benefit, too-

If a teacher loses their place during a lesson or needs a prompt on what comes next, Kiguel said, they can ask the robot for guidance because it has been loaded with the district’s curriculum.

Good lord in heaven. How the hell does a teacher "lose their place" in a lesson, unless it's in a district that is so tightly scripted that teachers are required to memorize the script? Maybe she turned two pages at once? And what the heck does it do to student respect for the teacher if they get to watch the teacher be redirected and corrected by a bot??  

Teacherbot will cost $57,590, but it will not come with some of the advanced features of Realbotix's other products, and if you're thinking "What features" or "How do this company think it's ready to make a roboteacher, anyway," well, hold onto your hat.

Realbotix is already in the humanoid robot business. Specifically, the humanoid sex robot business. 

Realbotix used to be Tokens.com, a crypto company (which let you rent real estate in Zuckerberg's Metaverse) that bought Simulcra, the company behind RealDoll, in 2024, into That was merged with RealBotix with the intent to expand above and beyond the sex robot biz into AI and other robots. That move was funded in part by investor Arthur Hayes, a crypto-bro with legal problems of his own (to add to the confusion, Bed Bath and Beyond just bought the Tokens.com domain). Realbotix also wants you to know that they make companion robots, intended to fight the loneliness epidemic (but not, apparently, with sex). 

The "how did this even happen" part is its own little story. Manna reports that Salamanca's superintendent Mark Beehler says that the "partnership with Realbotix began after a former colleague met an investor at a dinner and discussed the possibility of bringing the company’s robots into the education sector." 

The company provided a demo of the teacherbot "counseling" a child who has been bullied, with basically, "I'm sorry that happened to you. You should go tell a trusted adult." 

And you may be wondering about the wisdom of getting teaching support from AI and its tendency to just make shit up. Realbotix thinks it has that whole "hallucination" thing under control. 

To avoid AI-generated inaccuracies, Beehler said Realbotix trained the robot and avatar to say, “I don’t know,” instead of generating fabricated or misleading responses known as “AI hallucinations.”

That seems both unlikely and inadequate.

Look, I would not be particularly concerned if my child's teacher was a former sex worker, but I would sure as hell be concerned if it weren't even human. And I would be doubly concerned if that non-human was given a bunch of synthetic humanoid features designed to trick my children into thinking of it as a person rather than a plagiarism-fueled next-token-predicting machine. 

It would also be super if all these Frankenstein wannabe's stopped unleashing their ideas on poor, rural families who lack the clout to push back. Behhler says he'll assess the success of this nightmare fuel through "qualitative feedback" from teachers and students. And Ryan Schaaf of Notre Dame told Manna he's optimistic, but that it will require "thoughtful implementation" (yikes) and lots of teacher monitoring and guiding student interaction with the bot (in other words, another new tech making more work). Here's hoping this doesn't waste a whole year of student's learning.                                   

ICYMI: Under Water Edition (7/12)

It has been a week. Maybe we'll talk about it some other time. But I still have a reading list for you.

I Asked My Students About AI Again

Marcus Luther talked to his students about AI. Maybe that tidal wave isn't coming.

The Real Cost of Fifty Years of Policy:

Greg Wyman puts the last several decades of education reform in context.

What Schools Can’t Do

David Larabee reprints a speech from 2009, and it is taking perhaps a broader view than classroom practice, but boy dose some of this really hit. Like:

we pass off on schools social problems that we are unwilling to accomplish through the political process, where the capability for success actually resides. Instead of addressing these problems directly through political action, we foist them off on schools and then blame them for continually falling short of the desired goal.

And also:

Reformers are loath to give up their aims in the service of making the reform acceptable to teachers, so they tend to plow ahead in search of ways to get around the obstacles. If they can’t make change in cooperation with teachers, then they will have to so in spite of them. They see a crying need to fix a problem through school reform, and they have developed a theory for how to do this, which looks just great on paper. Standing in the state capital or the university, they are far from the practical realities of the classroom, and they tend to be impatient with demands that they should respect the complexity of the settings in which they are trying to intervene.

There's plenty more where that came from.

AI: The Trust-Breaker

Matt Brady examines the effects of AI use on the trust necessary for schools to work.

Where's the Science?: Not in Think Tank Reports or Reading Legislation

Nobody has critiqued the Science of Reading movement more relentlessly that Paul Thomas. Here's his reaction to a new "report" from the National Council pn Teacher Quality.

‘Wasteful and extravagant’: Here’s what Utah auditors found digging into the first year of school voucher spending

Utah's new Arizona-style voucher program seems riddled with Arizona-style abuse and fraud. Reported by Carmen Nesbitt for the Salt Lake Tribune.

The GOP-created university civics centers aren't popular. They want to require attendance.

Ohio set up university centers to combat liberal bias, but students weren't interested, so now the GOP, champions of the free market, will just force everyone to attend. Morgan Trau reports for News 5 Cleveland.

Let AI Burn

If you like your anti-AI arguments brutal and uncompromising, Ed Zitron is your guy.

Looping. It’s Not New. It’s Not a Panacea.

Nancy Flanagan on the recycling of old education ideas.

Arizona students with disabilities fuel rapid growth in billion-dollar ESA voucher program

What do you suppose would happen if you set up your taxpayer-funded vouchers system to incentivize a diagnosis of special needs? Craig Harris reports for 12 News.

Families hoard ESA funds as Arizona public schools face low funding, records show

Arizona's taxpayer-funded vouchers are also piling up big money stockpiles for some parents. Craig Harris again.

Teachers in Michigan school district can pick from 32 phrases or face legal review over classroom posters

How stupid can the attempts to police teacher posters get? Pretty stupid. Lily Altavena at Chalkbeat.

Big Changes to Federal Grants Are Coming: What They Could Mean for Schools

Much of the boring routine funding from the feds is about to be disrupted. Marl Lieberman at EdWeek reports.

“One Big Beautiful Bill” Has Already Begun Damaging Children’s Well-Being: It Will Only Get Worse

Jan Resseger looks at the worst side-effects of that thing.

AI Data Centers: Greed Rather Than Need.

The indispensable Mercedes Schneider looks at the threats coming from data centers.

Teens Arrested for Breaking Into High School With a Homemade Plasma Cannon

Are you worried that Kids These Days just aren't as ambitious or creative as they used to be? This is a story for you. Luis Prida at Vice covers a North Carolina story.

This week at Forbes.com, I took a look at how Arizona is one step closer to imposing actual accountability on its taxpayer-funded voucher program. 

A video artifact-- a medley from the cast of the then-current musical Hair, on Ed Sullivan. Asks your parents (or grandparents) what's going on here. 

A New Bot-enhanced Assessment Approach

I have spent plenty of time over the years tracking the fortunes of a high-capacity clown car of computer software that promises to grade those student essays. Labeling the variously inadequate programs AI just adds a new level of marketability to this unholy monstrosity, a piece of Schrodinger's software that is simultaneously totally as great as humans and also just about to be perfected within the next two years (going on twenty years).

I just came across a new model that promises speed, efficiency, validity and reliability.  Welcome to No More Marking.  Or maybe don't welcome it.

The company serves all the English-speaking world after spawning in the UK, headed up by Daisy Christdoulou. And her Clever Idea is called "Comparative Judgement."

The idea is deceptively and seductively simple. It's hard, goes the argument, to make absolute judgments. If someone walks into your room, can you judge whether they are tall or not? But comparative judgements are easier for human brains-- if two persons walk into your room, you can tell pretty quickly which one is taller.

So what if, instead of reading a student essay and trying to decide whether it was a 94 or 88 or 91 or whatever, you looked at two essays and decided which one was better. Wouldn't that be quick and simple? And if you had multiple teachers working through the same essays in the same way, wouldn't you have tons of data?

This sounds not bad until the first five seconds you spend thinking about it. Oh, but then...

If I used this technique on student height, I could probably generate a pretty good arrangement of students from tallest to shortest. But I still wouldn't know squat about how tall they actually were. Any kind of non-generalized collection of students (a kindergarten class, a group of pro basketball players) would give me particularly unhelpful results. And if the students are very similar in height, suddenly the judgment isn't so easy, and the results are nearly meaningless.

Part of their solution is a "powerful statistical model" involving some fancy maths that generate raw scores that are turned into other scores. Is the result valid? Well, the site tells us "Human Comparative Judgement is the gold standard of human decision-making. It is supported by an extensive research literature." So, you know, there you go. The other part of the solution appears to be a large sample size.

This is also another one of those tech labor transfer systems, because before any of this can start, someone has to feed all of the essays into the computer program. That can include scanning handwritten copies. You'll have to be sitting at a screen to use this. And of course results don't come back until at least one other human scorer runs through the essays, but while you're waiting, perhaps you can go ahead and be a second reader for someone else's essay stack. Are we saving time yet?

The company insists you are. 30 essays would take you two hours the traditional way with a rubric, but with human comparative judgement, you can cut that to an hour. Why are you so much faster reading every essay without a rubric? I don't know.

Don't worry, because we can save time another way, and you knew this was coming. What if some--or even all-- of the "readers" were AI programs? The company suggests going 90/10-- 90% AI and 10% human. 100/0 is of course an option.

Sigh. Okay, the premise of the whole CJ biz is that it's easier and faster for a human to judge which essay is better than it is to evaluate an essay. But that's human beings. It's not clear if the AI in the loop is doing comparative judgements or just offering the usual crappy robograding assessments; the language hints that it's the former, but it's not really clear. If it's the latter, that's bad news because bots are bad at assessing writing, but trying to figure out which of two essays is "better" seems like a whole other level of judgment that AI is not equipped to perform.

If you want to give students the impression that their teacher actually read the work she assigned to them, then you voice-deliver some comments and the AI will spruce that up and attach it. 

For the American market, the company offers three national writing assessments. You can throw in a multiple-choice grammar test. The company says they are also teamed up with The Writing Revolution, which isn't encouraging.

The company insists that they are valid and reliable and, hey, the program lets you see where the humans and the AIO disagreed. Christodoulou has a substack, but after digging through the company website I was too grumpy to dig any more. Okay, I looked at one post that made the argument that if an AI comes up with results similar to a human, it must be valid. I've heard this a zillion times, and to me it is an indictment of the degree to which human teachers have been herded into mechanical rubric-centered assessment. All you're telling me is that robots are pretty good at imitating humans who have been trained to imitate robots. 

Christodoulou asks some good questions (will knowing they're writing for an AI affect how students write), and she clearly knows that some buzzy items like Bloom's 2 sigma study is bunk. Christodoulou also acknowledges elsewhere that students really care about what their teachers think, and the simple "final product" of a grade is not enough. They've been at this model for a decade or so, so I'm going to assume good intentions. But the site doesn't offer any insights into what standards or training the AI is programmed with, nor the question of how the company deals with the inevitable AI bias and lying about what it has "read." 

CJ is an interesting approach, or at least more interesting than the typical "AI so smart grade your essays quick just like human teacher" pitch. But I remain unconvinced. 

ICYMI: Another Tech Sunday Edition (7/5)

Now that we've cleaned up after the Fourth, it's time for yet another tech Sunday with community theater. This time I'm pit conducting for a production of Disney's The Little Mermaid. Like many of the staged versions of Disney films, it has way more music and a tweaked story that corrects some of the ick from the original film, which was in fact awesome but still, the whole "give up your life for some cute guy you saw once" was kind of off, along with the helpless damsel ending. Anyway, community theater is always fun, so this should be a delightful week, kicking off today with orchestra practice.

Hope things are cooling down. My old high school was supposed to be marching in the Philadelphia parade for the Fourth, and it was canceled for heat. Fortunately-ish, my friend and former colleague the band director got the word a bit before he was supposed to be loading students on the bus. May we all enjoy better weather soon. 

Here's some reading.

Beware the Reading Proficiency Numbers Game: Florida Edition

Paul Thomas encourages us to look a little more closely at some of the goals of the SoR crowd.

Massachusetts Should Reject Trump's K-12 Privateering Scheme

After DFER chief Jorge Alorza published a piece encouraging Massachusetts to sign up for federal vouchers, Maurice Cunningham and I teamed up to write a rebuttal. 

 

What School and District Leaders Need to Know Before They Invest in AI

I spotted this a bit late, but Stephen Aguilar published a piece at The 74 that provides a good checklist of things for districts to think about before unleashing AI.

AI Can’t Fix the Student-Motivation Problem

Bots aren't great teachers! Surprise! Jenny Anderson and Mike Goldstein of the Center for Teen Flourishing lay out the details.

How Good Teachers Get Broken

Matt Brady offers some explanation, with details you may recognize from your district. Note: he also explains how to do better.

Financial Nonsense

Audrey Watters talks about leaving the free stage of AI, and what it will mean to districts and companies.

Keeping SCORE

After some thoughts about the Fourth, TC Weber takes a closer look at SCORE, the very influential reformster group with an awful lot of say in Tennessee education

Children Are Increasing in the South: Their Champions Aren't

If you thought there was a terrible national fertility crisis, surprise-- not in the South. But Bruce Lesley points out that means we're getting the most children in the part of the country least prepared to help them.

This week at Forbes.com, I looked at new report from the Shanker Institute that underlines what teachers already know-- they need more time to implement your latest genius improvement program.

If you need a little chaser from your holiday music and explosions, the Muppets have you covered.

ICYMI: Penny Carnival Edition (6/27)

 Last night I marched (well, rode) in an Independence Day parade, something I have done for fifty-some years. Friday was the big penny carnival in town, for which the board of directrors is almost, but not yet, too old to really be entertained. This week I'll play in a special concert as part of my city's week-ish long celebration of the Fourth. I'll host the annual cookout in my backyard, followed by some trad jazz jamming. I like this holiday, regardless of what's going on elsewhere, because the government is not the country any more than a set of headlights drive the car. 

Here's the reading list for the week.

Tennessee increases private-school voucher vendor contract by $356M

There is a pile of money to be made by the groups that administer voucher dollars, and in Tennessee that pile is about to become mountainous. Sam Stockard reports for Tennessee Lookout.

Catholic Diocese of Cleveland misleads public about EdChoice

Stephen Dyer keeps trying to explain the realities of funding in Ohio, which becomes more of an uphill climb when certain parties keep pushing out inaccurate information.

School Voucher Advocate is Largest Single Donor in Tennessee Gov's Race

Jeff Yass is putting some of his fortune behind Marsha Blackburn's race for Tennessee governor. Andy Spears reports.

LA Lawsuit Challenges Shifting MFP Dollars to Teacher Stipends

Louisiana's teacher stipend-based sideway raise is the center of legal maneuvering. The indispensable Mercedes Schneider explains.

TN school to pay $10K, rescind suspension over social media post

A Tennessee private school tried to punish a senior for coming out as gay; she took them to court and now they have to pay. Angela Latham reports.

Legal experts speak out on idea of NV religious public charter schools

Including NPE's Carol Burris. The National Education Policy Center published a brief explaining how states could help draw a line between church and state.

Trends in Local Teacher Supply Since the COVID-19 Pandemic: Evidence from Teacher Job Applications

The trends uncovered by this working paper are downward, all across the board.

We Can’t Give Up on Teacher Diversity

Sharif El-Mekki does cite the untrustworthy National Council on Teacher Quality here, but his call for more Black male teachers still makes sense. In Education Week.

Bernadette Wilson and Right-Wing Candidates Proudly Embrace Anti-Public School Agenda

In Alaska, Mathew Beck reports, Moms for Liberty still draw plenty of obeisance from GOP candidates. The details are not encouraging.

Understanding NAEP: A Reader

Paul Thomas provides some useful sources for unraveling the data from NAEP. 

How to Get Students to School? Stop Driving them Out!

Nancy Bailey has some thoughts about the general panic over "chronic absenteeism." Maybe schools could stop doing some of these counter-productive things.

Broken Ribs, Broken Narratives, and Why I Still Don’t Trust the Test

TC Weber fell down and hurt himself, but his stay in the health care system gave him a chance to think about things like the Big Standardized Test, and he's ready to share those thoughts.

Like I said, Testing is Bullshit

Jeff Waid also has thoughts about the BS Test, stirred up by Ross Wiener's NYT op ed. 

Comparison of Florida’s Major K-12 (Publicly Funded) Education Options

Sue Kingery Woltanski offers a handy chart for comparing the major publicly funded education options in Florida. Nice and clear. 

Your tax dollars funding fast cars and tuition breaks for millionaires

Stephen Dyer points out that taxpayers are now helping private schools turn a profit (and buy cool cars).

How to talk about "AI" without adding to the anthropomorphization

Emily Bendar and Nanna Inie give some practical advice about how to talk about AI without contributing to the impression that it is a living, thinking entity.

The United States Is the Only World Cup Nation Without Maternity Leave

Liz Plank reminds us that there is one respect in which the US lags all other World Cup competitors.

This week at the Bucks County Beacon I looked at the proposed reform bill for the state's long-time voucher program. 

This selection doesn't really require an explanation.