My point though, is less about high level content and rigor and more about making students are about a single high stakes exam, there aren’t well articulated, tangible benefits to them trying super hard.

As a former high social studies teacher it was really the opposite for me (taught AP and state tested subjects). The exams were disconnected from deeper learning and tended to push for broad coverage of content. Student saw scores well after the class was finished, didn’t help them grow or change.

Worth contemplating that these standardized tests hold more meaning for ed researchers and policy folks than they do for individual students,
data allows for measure of academic progress, but offers little value students. Did the regents ever tell you anything important about what you learned in HS?

We also don’t give kids enough credit. As a parent of a 6th grader with no phone, I explained why I don’t think she should have one until she can drive. Based on the research I shared and her lived experience with friends who stop interacting the same way when they get a phone, she’s fully on board

THIS! on top of the complexity of growing school choice, navigating which schools provide bussing, and districts trying to planning and pay for more expensive and complex transportation systems for students attending all over the district instead of their neighborhood a school

Oops, didn’t see the lower part of the thread!

Love this! Is there a link to the findings of the “study group”?