As assistant secretary of elementary and secondary education under George W. Bush, I had the privilege of helping to translate that research into policy. It was an optimistic time. We believed that if we could align classroom practice with what decades of research had taught us about reading development, we could dramatically improve children’s lives. 

Looking back, we were right about the science. But we were strikingly naïve about its implementation. 

Last week, New York released its latest state reading assessment results. The were discouraging. Reading proficiency had declined, particularly in grades 3 through 5, leading many to question whether — the evidence-based literacy program introduced in 2023 — was working at all.��

It’s a fair question. If all we have is a single set of state test scores, that conclusion is understandable. But state assessments capture only one moment in a much longer process of instructional change. To understand whether NYC Reads is making a difference, we have to look beyond a single test.

To answer that question, my team of researchers at New York University has spent the past three years in dozens of New York City classrooms, many in schools where reading achievement had remained stubbornly low for years. We weren’t looking for dramatic transformations. We wanted to understand whether the daily work of teaching and learning was beginning to change.  

At first, the changes revealed themselves in small ways. Children no longer looked immediately to the teacher when they came to an unfamiliar word. Instead, they looked back at the print. You could see them quietly sounding out the word, stretching the phonemes with their fingers, and trying again. During dictation, children held up their whiteboards proudly after spelling words they would not have attempted only months earlier. Teachers were no longer carrying the cognitive burden of every lesson; children were beginning to carry more of it themselves. 

The conversations had changed as well. Rather than asking children simply to recall a fact or identify a character, teachers pressed them to explain their thinking, justify an answer with evidence from the text, or connect a new idea to something they had learned the week before. Just as striking, children began asking their own questions — about insects, weather, communities or whatever topic they happened to be studying. 

Vocabulary was no longer treated as a list of words to memorize but as a way of making sense of increasingly complex ideas. Reading instruction felt less like a performance by the teacher and more like an intellectual partnership between teachers and children. 

But observations can be deceptive. Good researchers learn to distrust first impressions, no matter how encouraging they may seem. Were these classrooms simply more engaging? Were teachers becoming more skillful without children learning substantially more? Or were the changes we observed beginning to alter children’s reading trajectories in measurable ways?

We began looking beyond classroom observations to the children’s assessments. The first school we examined had struggled with reading achievement for years. Judging only by its reputation, few people would have expected dramatic progress. Yet the end-of-year assessments told a different story. Children who had entered kindergarten with little or no measurable word reading were now reading at levels that placed them well above national norms. One child finished the year at the 98th percentile in sight-word reading. Others reached the 90th and 86th percentiles. These were not isolated successes; they were signs that something within the school had begun to change. 

A second school served predominantly multilingual learners. Here the picture was equally revealing. Many children still required intensive support by the end of kindergarten, reminding us how much work remained. But alongside them were classmates reading comfortably within the core range, some reaching the mid-90th percentiles on foundational reading measures. The averages alone could never capture that story because they concealed what mattered most: the distribution itself was beginning to shift.  

The school-level findings were encouraging, but they raised an even larger question. Were these schools exceptional, or were they revealing a broader pattern? Three schools, no matter how compelling their stories, cannot answer that question. To find out, we widened the lens.

We analyzed districtwide reading data collected before the initiative began and compared it with data gathered during the first years of implementation, following the progress of nearly 4,000 students. Unlike an annual state assessment, which provides a snapshot of performance at a single point in time, these nationally normed screeners were designed to measure growth. They allowed us to ask a different question: Were children making meaningful progress as readers?

The results closely mirrored what we had been seeing in classrooms. Across successive cohorts, children continued to make steady gains in reading, with growth evident across grades and among most student groups. The progress was neither dramatic nor complete. Too many children were still struggling to read proficiently, and important differences remained among schools. But the pattern itself was remarkably consistent. 

Classroom observations, school-level assessments, and districtwide screening data were all pointing in the same direction. Independently, each offered only a partial picture. Together, they suggested that meaningful instructional change was beginning to take hold.

So, when I look at the state assessment, I don’t see a contradiction. I see a different measure answering a different question. It reminds us that New York still has a great deal of work to do, particularly in the upper elementary grades where reading becomes increasingly demanding. 

But I do not believe those results tell us we are on the wrong path. Rather, classroom observations, school-level assessments, districtwide growth data and state results lead me to a different conclusion: meaningful instructional change has begun.

Looking back, I think this is another lesson we failed to appreciate when the National Reading Panel was first released. We assumed that once the science was clear, progress would reveal itself quickly. We now know better. Educational change takes time. The important question is not whether the work is finished. The important question is whether it is moving in the right direction.

I believe that it is. Educational change appears first in classrooms, then in children, then in schools, and only later in statewide results. This is not the moment to abandon course. It is the moment not to blink.

This story was originally published by Chalkbeat. Sign up for their newsletters at

Reading scores sank in New York City last school year, with a nearly 14 percentage point decline among third graders, according to preliminary data released Friday.

Among students in grades 3-8, about half were proficient in reading, a decline of 6 percentage points. That nearly erases a the year before. Math scores were flat, with 57% of students considered proficient.

The declines in reading proficiency were most pronounced in grades 3-5. In addition to the dramatic decline in third grade, fourth grade scores fell nearly 6 percentage points, and fifth grade scores fell by 13 points. (You can find your school’s test results at the bottom of this story.)

The unusually steep drop in reading proficiency comes as the city is heading into its . All elementary schools are required to use approved curriculums that officials contend line up with the science of reading, a longstanding body of evidence about how children learn to read. A growing number of middle schools are in the process of adopting new reading curriculums, too.

City officials vowed to conduct an analysis of the sharp fluctuations in reading scores.

“School leaders across New York City are seeing dramatic swings in literacy proficiency reflected in this year’s state assessment results,” schools Chancellor Kamar Samuels said in a statement. “These results raise important questions and deserve careful, rigorous analysis so we can ensure we’re measuring what students are learning.”

City officials noted that the state test scores diverged from the city’s own periodic assessments, which generally showed improvements in reading.

The city’s teachers union has supported the elementary reading curriculum changes, but criticized the Education Department’s approach in response to the latest scores.

“We have to refocus on what we know works in literacy — a clear plan, a tailored science of reading curriculum, and meaningful professional development for educators,” Mary Vaccaro, the union’s vice president for education, said in a statement.

She said the Education Department “abandoned that approach” last year and “piled on additional programs, assessments, consultant’s recommendations and curriculum in the hopes that ‘more’ would equal better, and we lost ground.”

Mayor Zohran Mamdani has vowed to double down on the literacy and math curriculum overhauls launched by his predecessor. In May, he announced plans to , a move the union also criticized.

Test scores alone can’t prove whether a policy is working because many factors influence them. But city officials pointed to the dramatic 7 percentage point spike last year as .

The reading proficiency declines mirror a similar . Some testing experts told Chalkbeat this week that whipsawing scores are unusual and raise questions about whether there are irregularities in the exams.

Andrew Ho, a Harvard professor who serves on a panel of experts who are paid to advise New York on its state assessment system, said the state exams are carefully constructed.

“It’s uncommon but not unprecedented” to see test scores significantly shift up and down, Ho said.

Observers should consider them in the context of other data, including the city’s own assessments and the National Assessment of Educational Progress, widely considered the gold standard assessment. A new round of results on that federal exam, including for New York City, are expected next year.

Others worried that there was an unidentified problem with the tests. Emily Oster, a professor of economics at Brown University who has studied patterns in state assessment results, said the swings were reminiscent of COVID-era disruptions but without an obvious cause.

“It’s just so implausible that there would be these kind of swings, and that they would be concentrated in some grades and some subjects and not others,” she said. “It just feels like there’s a mistake.”

EdTrust-New York, an advocacy group, called for an independent audit of the last three years of state testing data. “NYSED never adequately investigated or explained last year’s dramatic gains, making this year’s reversal difficult to interpret,” the group said in a statement earlier this week.

A spokesperson for the state’s Education Department said that the state conducts two independent audits of its assessments each year and those reviews have not flagged any problems.

As in prior years, the test results show deep disparities between student groups.

Asian American students saw the largest declines in reading scores last year among racial groups, with proficiency rates dropping to about 67%, down nearly 8 percentage points. A similar share of white students were considered proficient in reading.

Meanwhile, nearly 42% of Black students were proficient, a decline of 5 percentage points. About 37% of Latino students were marked proficient, 6 percentage points lower than the prior year. Just under 22% of students with disabilities were proficient readers.

Students who are currently learning English, or were in the past, saw the largest reading dips. Their proficiency rates dipped nearly 10 percentage points to 62.1%.

Math scores were more stable. Almost 44% of Black and Latino students were proficient in the subject, up less than 1 percentage point respectively. White and Asian American students’ scores dipped by about a percentage point each, to 74% and nearly 80%, respectively.

Curious about school-level test results? Here is a searchable breakdown of math and English scores across all of the city’s public schools (charters are not included).

Chalkbeat is a nonprofit news site covering educational change in public schools.

Sign up for to get essential news about NYC’s public schools delivered to your inbox.

On June 26, Children’s Aid was preparing to continue summer sexual health and youth development programming in schools, foster care settings and community organizations across New York City.

By the end of the day, the federal funding behind that work was gone.

The Trump administration terminated Teen Pregnancy Prevention Program grants nationwide with immediate effect, stripping Children’s Aid of $936,700 a year with two years still remaining on its grant. 

Children’s Aid has worked in under-resourced New York communities for more than 170 years. Its health and wellness division operates two community clinics and six school-based health centers and provides medical, dental, behavioral health, nutrition, family planning and health care management services.

Children’s Aid also provided programming at the Administration for Children’s Services Children’s Center, where children may stay while waiting for placement in the foster care system.

The organization had no time to prepare its staff, community partners or the approximately 1,200 young people it served annually.

Several nonprofit groups and local governments have filed a lawsuit challenging the administration’s termination of Teen Pregnancy Prevention Program grants and its changes to the program’s evidence-based framework. Separately, 79 members of the Democratic Women’s Caucus and the broader House Democratic Caucus sent HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. a letter demanding that the canceled grants be restored.

In the meantime, Children’s Aid is grappling with what comes next.

The funding cut reaches across the predominantly Black and Latino communities in the Bronx, Harlem and Brooklyn, as well as Staten Island, where Children’s Aid brought medically accurate information and trusted adults directly to young people. Nine staff members were affected, including six full-time and three part-time employees.

“We received notification on June 26 that effective June 26 our funding would be terminated,” said Rhonda Braxton, vice president for health and wellness at Children’s Aid. “There was no advance notification, and there was no runway to really end the program.”

Across New York City, the administration’s decision eliminated $4.3 million in annual funding from three grantee organizations and disrupted services reaching more than 19,000 young people.

At Children’s Aid, the loss extends beyond one program. 

It threatens work in schools and community spaces, specialized programming for foster youth and the organization’s Just Ask Me peer education initiative. The grant supported a network of adults and youth leaders who taught consent, healthy relationships, communication, medical advocacy and informed decision-making.

The government did not simply remove money from a budget. It cut through years of relationships built in communities where young people already face the greatest barriers to care. The administration canceled 53 grants nationwide as part of a broader overhaul of the federal Teen Pregnancy Prevention Program. Its new funding criteria direct organizations to teach abstinence as the only certain method of preventing pregnancy and place increased emphasis on marriage, fertility and preparing young people for parenthood.

The standards make little reference to preventing sexually transmitted infections and offer virtually no recognition of lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender young people.

The administration has defended the new direction as an effort to steer federal dollars toward abstinence-focused education. That approach reflects a broader conservative argument that comprehensive sexual health programs treat teen sexual activity as unavoidable and diminish parents’ role in guiding their children.  

When 19th News requested comment, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services did not respond to the initial query.

But leaders at Children’s Aid do not describe their work as encouraging teenagers to have sex.

They described teaching young people how to recognize an unhealthy relationship. How to communicate. How to give or withhold consent. How to talk to a doctor. How to resist pressure from a friend or partner. How to make decisions that protect the future they want.

The organization had received federal teen pregnancy prevention funding since 2015. Through the grant, staff delivered evidence-based sexual health and youth development programs during the school day, after school and through community organizations.

Pascale Saintonge Austin, director of family planning and pregnancy prevention programs at Children’s Aid, said foster youth face distinct challenges that cannot be addressed by distributing generic health information. 

“We won’t be able to provide such a specific curriculum to them anymore that was tailored and made for them,” Saintonge Austin said.

The organization’s Just Ask Me peer health education program is also at risk. Known as JAM, the initiative trains high school students to co-facilitate programs, organize events, advocate for adolescent health and dispel misinformation among their peers.

The young people applied for the positions and were hired based on federal funding that the government withdrew without notice. Children’s Aid must now determine whether it can retain all of them beyond the end of summer.

“They love this work. They’re involved in this work,” Saintonge Austin said. “We will have to make some decisions toward the end of August or beginning of September about whether or not we can even keep all of the peers without some kind of intervention.”

Programs like the ones run by Children’s Aid have made a difference, federal lawmakers say, and Democratic members of Congress are demanding that Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. explain the terminations and restore the funding.

Rep. Judy Chu of California said in a statement to The 19th that the Teen Pregnancy Prevention Program has provided medically accurate, evidence-based information for more than 15 years and has helped young people prevent sexually transmitted infections, unintended pregnancies and unhealthy relationships.

“There is simply no justification for abruptly terminating $68 million from programs with a proven record of improving young people’s health,” Chu said. “The Trump administration’s decision is reckless, indefensible and directly undermines the purpose for which Congress provided these funds. That’s why my Democratic Women’s Caucus colleagues and I are demanding answers from Secretary Kennedy about why these grants were terminated and calling for this critical funding to be restored.”

Another lawmaker, Rep. Kelly Morrison of Minnesota, an OBGYN, described the decision as both a physician and lawmaker.

“The administration has unilaterally taken away helpful and potentially life-saving resources from the young people that need them,” Morrison said in a statement to The 19th. “Canceling research-backed, evidence-based programs that prevent STIs, decrease teen pregnancy and save lives is a dangerous policy decision.”

The administration’s criteria place marriage and future parenthood at the center of adolescent sexual health.

But for Saintonge Austin, that framing fails to account for the actual questions young people bring into Children’s Aid classrooms.

Those questions are often about loneliness, acceptance, pressure, confidence and the struggle to establish boundaries. They come from teenagers trying to understand how to care for themselves while growing up in a world that does not always provide them with safe or reliable guidance.

Federal policy may define the program by the pregnancies it seeks to prevent. The young people inside it experience something broader: a place where they can speak honestly, learn whom to trust and develop the skills to enter adulthood with greater control over their lives.

“A lot of times people equate teen pregnancy prevention with sex,” Saintonge Austin said. “I always say it’s never that. It’s about, ‘I want my friend to like me. I want to know how to have a healthy relationship. I don’t know how to say no, or I don’t know how to negotiate.’ It goes beyond the physical act. It’s really about how to navigate a world, become a healthy adult and make decisions in a way where you can reach the goals that you want.”

The need for that work feels urgent in New York City, where the birthrate for teenagers not only remains above the national average, but has begun inching back up after a long decline.

“Congress specifically funded TPPP because evidence-based prevention programs work, and the Administration owes Congress and the American people an explanation for disregarding that clear directive,” said Chu. “We should be strengthening these proven programs, not jeopardizing young people’s access to the accurate health information and resources they need to thrive.”

Nationwide, the birthrate has fallen over the past 15 years, to 11.7 births per 1,000 girls ages 15 to 19 last year, according to federal data. That’s a drop of more than 65 percent since 2010, when the rate was 34.3 births per 1,000 teenage girls.

have attributed the long decline to several factors, including fewer teenagers having sex and increased contraception use among those who are sexually active. Federal prevention programs have also been credited with helping young people delay sexual activity and make informed health decisions.

New York City was part of that trend for a long time. However, it has begun moving in the opposite direction.

In , three out of every four pregnancies among New York City teenagers were unintended, according to the city health department.

Those pregnancies were also concentrated in communities with the fewest resources. The teen pregnancy rate in neighborhoods with very high poverty was 3.6 times the rate in the city’s lowest-poverty communities, according to New York City’s Taskforce on Racial Inclusion and Equity, and many of these teenagers are Black and Latinx. They continue to face the effects of systemic racism, historic disinvestment and reduced access to health care and other resources that support healthy lives.

Saintonge Austin said the recent rise demonstrates what can happen when young people lose consistent access to sexual health education.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, much of Children’s Aid’s school-based programming was interrupted. New York City high school students did not broadly return to buildings until spring 2021, and schools facing enormous academic losses had to make difficult choices about which subjects and services to prioritize.

At the same time, teenagers were spending more time online, where accurate information competed with rumors and misinformation spreading across social media.

“It shows what happens when there’s this sort of disruption in mass education around comprehensive sexual health education,” Saintonge Austin said. “We were really getting back into the flow of it being integrated into their education and their spaces again, and now the funding was pulled.”

The disruption is occurring again, this time by federal design.

Braxton said Children’s Aid has tried to place affected employees in other vacant positions within the organization when possible. It has contacted school and community partners, notified elected officials and begun searching for other funding.

But replacing nearly $1 million each year is not a realistic short-term solution.

“We have very generous donors,” Braxton said. “We have not been able to fill that huge gap as of yet.”

The organization is also trying to preserve relationships built over years with young people who learned they could approach Children’s Aid staff members without judgment and receive medically accurate answers.

“Our concern is the loss of trusted relationships for our young people,” Braxton said, “and our inability to provide these much-needed, evidence-based, medically accurate services in an era where there’s a lot of disinformation and mistrust.”

was originally published by .

Roughly 2,000 families received offers for a spot in the inaugural year of 2-K, New York City’s new free childcare program for 2-year-olds, officials announced Tuesday.

Around 5,700 families applied for the , which were restricted to priority neighborhoods in Manhattan, Brooklyn, Queens, and the Bronx.

“Today represents a monumental step on the path to universal childcare here in New York City,” Mayor Zohran Mamdani said at a press conference Tuesday morning in the Bronx. Mamdani made a key campaign pledge.

“We are writing a better chapter for … the generations of New Yorkers many years from now who will start families here in our city and who will not need to worry about leaving their job or moving out of the neighborhood they love to make it all work,” he said.

The release of the offers comes after city officials spent months spreading the word about the new program with events such as a “ in Manhattan’s Fort Tryon Park and a judged by Cardi B and Lin-Manuel Miranda.

The initial interest in 2-K comes as welcome news for Mamdani after his administration’s efforts to boost publicity for the city’s 3-K and prekindergarten programs Those programs, while wildly popular and oversubscribed in some neighborhoods, have in other parts of the city.

Officials didn’t share any details about how the initial round of applications and offers were distributed between the priority neighborhoods: Washington Heights and Inwood in Manhattan, Canarsie and Brownsville in Brooklyn, Ozone Park and the Rockaways in Queens, and Fordham, Belmont, Riverdale and other nearby neighborhoods in the Bronx.

Emmy Liss, the executive director of the mayor’s Office for Childcare and Early Childhood Education, said the “majority” of the children who received offers live in the priority districts. Officials prioritized applicants who have siblings at the program they applied to, or were already attending that program, and those who live in the same district, Liss said.

More than 80% of applicants got into one of their top three choices, and more than half got into their first choice, officials said. Families that applied and didn’t get an offer will automatically be added to waitlists.

In a press release Tuesday morning, officials said that the application results from this year would help guide the expansion of the program next year. Mamdani has pledged that the program will grow to 12,000 seats next year and expand citywide by the end of his first term, though Gov. Kathy Hochul has only committed funding for the first two years. A found that it will likely cost around $9 billion to provide free universal childcare for all children under age 5, about $5 billion more than the city is currently spending,

Officials haven’t yet shared where the additional 10,000 2-K seats for next year will be located, except that they will likely add seats in the priority neighborhoods and some of the new seats will be in Staten Island, the only borough not a part of this year’s 2-K rollout.v

Seats are split between center and . Unlike 3-K and pre-K, which mostly follow the K-12 school calendar, .

This story was originally published by Chalkbeat. Sign up for their newsletters at .

So I asked the members of my what they wanted to say to this administration. They responded with recommendations for curriculum, discipline, technology, afterschool programming and teacher quality. 

Maria K. spoke for hundreds when she wrote, “I’d strongly urge to reconsider eliminating G&T programs for grades K-2. … If the objective is equality, then programs should be expanded, and underprivileged groups should be given wider access.”

“Create more of what is in demand rather than redistributing what already exists among different socioeconomic and ethnic groups,” Adam C. concurred. “Reinvest resources in schools that provide what families are specifically looking for: specialized high schools, academically screened middle and high schools, and high-performing zoned middle and high schools.”

“Everyone should have a default, large zoned high school that provides tracking by academic subject,” former Citywide Council on High Schools member Rachel Fremmer said. 

Regarding the quality of educators, one parent wished, “I would LOVE for all teachers to have education on how to recognize when a child is bored or struggling in school.” S. Meng from Queens suggested, “Survey which districts have higher percentages of lower-level students and employ better teachers with higher pay for that district to bring up the overall level average.”

“We need highly qualified teachers who hold themselves to the same academic standards we expect our children to meet,” agreed Natalie Iarko. “Teachers should model strong writing, communication and subject knowledge. My son’s pre-K teacher wrote in all lowercase with no punctuation. We need higher expectations for those entrusted with educating our children.”

“Teachers have given up on chaotic classrooms,” lamented CN. “Kids do whatever they want while the teacher attempts to teach until they all give up and watch cartoons together. I’ve spoken to many parents, and we are uniformly disappointed in the lack of discipline in school. It is basically low-value childcare. I went to low-ranking public schools in Queens, and even we got yelled at for clowning around in the classroom. Why won’t teachers discipline anymore?”

“Parents should be given the ability to formally evaluate teacher and administrator performance annually,” a Manhattan mom proposed. “These evaluations should be part of broader performance evaluations for school faculty and officials, tied to compensation and career advancement.”

“Strengthen discipline for both teachers and students,” Acel M. contributed. “If a teacher is not performing, make it easier to replace or downgrade or terminate them. Bad behaving kids should be disciplined and be expelled as a last measure.”

“Safety is important,” J.C. stressed. “In my son’s elementary school, there were children who were violent (repeatedly starting fights, etc.) and were simply moved to another classroom instead of detention or expulsion. As my son was the victim of this, I would like to see safety/protection measures for the victims of school violence, especially at the middle and high school levels.”

But families weren’t merely concerned with what happens during the school day.

“Every elementary school should offer afterschool programs such that parents don’t have to pay extra for childcare coverage until 5 p.m. every day,” one mom chimed in. “Working parents need this essential support.”

“Our kids need to have opportunities to be creative, work with adults and other kids and heck — PLAY,” Helen K., Queens mom of two, insisted. “NYC schools need to admit that the adoption of individual devices and online learning platforms for students is a failed experiment. In our middle school, there is rampant non-educational use of their devices. Let parents opt out of devices and online platforms!”

H.D. suggested: “Bring back pen and paper coursework and tests!” Then, on another note, offered, “Share resources among neighborhood schools such as for music. Third Street Music School has partnerships with some schools. A more citywide effort would be great.”

Finally, “A Black mother from District 9, Bronx,” summarized, “Schools don’t need blame — they need thoughtful, targeted investment. If children face more obstacles outside the classroom, then inside the classroom they should have the city’s strongest teachers, experienced principals, enrichment programs, arts, music, science, tutoring, counseling and the resources that help children thrive. Retain experienced teachers, support school leaders, expand tutoring and enrichment, and focus on long-term student success.”

The parents have spoken. The mayor and chancellor have promised to listen. Will they follow through?

Mom Carin Rosenfeld already has concerns. “I would like transparency regarding the process itself. How were [working group] participants selected? How were families and educators notified? What efforts were made to ensure broad representation rather than participation by only those already connected to political or educational networks? If City Hall and the chancellor truly want to hear from constituents, the process must be open, widely publicized, accessible and transparent from the beginning, not limited to a select group of stakeholders whose identities and selection criteria are unknown to the broader public. Public engagement in NYC education feels performative rather than substantive. If more parents truly knew what was happening in our schools, there might be a full-scale parent uprising!”

Similar legislation introduced last year was backed by the United Federation of Teachers in an effort to address the city’s paraprofessional shortage. After the bill failed to move out of committee, it was in February by multiple council members. 

If Mamdani signs the bill, full-time paraprofessionals will receive four payments of $2,500 throughout the 2026-27 school year. The allows the council to reauthorize stipends each year as long as New York City Public Schools has a paraprofessional shortage or until the city changes the practice of — a local policy that lets the salary increases negotiated for one municipal union’s contract set the pattern for all the others.

The United Federation of Teachers and council members said pattern bargaining has contributed to low paraprofessional pay.

“Once the initial bargaining pattern is established, it becomes an enormous challenge to get the city to grant significantly better terms to another union,” the United Federation of Teachers said on its .

New paraprofessionals earn roughly $32,000 in the city. Over the past 20 years, have increased nearly $12,000 for paraprofessionals but top $86,000 for the highest-paid principals.

“We are going to pass this bill and we are going to put it on the desk of the mayor of New York City saying that the paraprofessionals have been unjustly treated and we are in a crisis,” said UFT President Michael Mulgrew at a at New York City Hall on Thursday. “And the paraprofessionals are dealing with that crisis each and every day with their work, going above and beyond, and now it’s time for our city to act and do the right thing.”

Mamdani supported the bill while campaigning but expressed concern after he took office, compensation should be handled only in the collective bargaining process. He has 30 days to decide whether to sign the bill, according to the . If he vetoes it, the legislation will go back to the council, and members can override his veto with a two-thirds vote. If he doesn’t sign or veto the bill, it will become law.

Priscilla Castro, president of the paraprofessional chapter of the United Federation of Teachers, said several paras from each New York City borough gathered at City Hall as the bill went through a committee vote. 

“Today, we’re making a change. It’s a movement. We will not stop until we get this legislation passed and bring it home,” she .

During the council vote, members said paraprofessional pay raises were overdue and are crucial to rewarding some of the hardest-working school employees in the city.

Shirley Aldebol, chair of the council committee that passed the bill, said during voting on Thursday that the payments are the first step toward fixing the city’s paraprofessional staffing crisis. New York City Public Schools was short more than 1,500 support staff last year. 

“Paraprofessionals are critical members of our school environment, providing instructional, behavioral and physical support to students with disabilities,” she said. “I have a deep respect for the collective bargaining process. This bill’s structure does not interfere, in my view, with mandatory subjects of collective bargaining, as it does not attempt to legislate wages or benefits and matters that must be resolved at the bargaining table.”

I taught math in a New York City public high school before I read a single study about how children learn. I was equipped with some basics, like making sure I checked if my students had understood the day’s lesson. At the end of every class, they would answer a few questions on paper while I moved around the room, reading over their shoulders to see what had landed and what had not.

Back then, blended learning was the hot thing: putting kids on screens for personalized instruction while I was supposed to circulate and answer questions. It did not work for my students, so I abandoned it and built my own lessons instead.

Fast forward to now, and the fight playing out in city councils and statehouses over . But that is the wrong battle. Screens are not the enemy of learning. The real enemy is older than any device: a classroom where students sit isolated and a teacher is too swamped with grading and paperwork to notice who is falling behind until it is too late to help. Technology can deepen that problem or solve it. It depends entirely on who you build it for.

There is a better way. I watched it this past school year in the Bronx.

At P.S. 83, a middle school in District 11, technology barely appears until the final minutes of math class. A lesson is projected at the front of the room, and students work through problems together on paper, talking and arguing as they go. Then, with a few minutes left, they open their school laptops and answer a short set of questions about the day’s work.

As they type, the teacher watches the answers appear, one student at a time, on a dashboard on his or her own screen. Rather than collecting stacks of papers to grade that night, the teacher can see, in real time, who understood the lesson and who did not, and offer help in the moment. By the time class ends, the teacher knows exactly where each student is stuck, and what needs to happen the next day: a quick conversation with one child, a small group lesson for a few others or a separate session for the handful who missed the same step.

That dashboard is part of a tool called , created by the company I co-founded, Kiddom. This past year, in a pilot program, District 11 added Atlas to the curriculum its teachers already used through the math initiative. The partnership became a co-design: District 11’s teachers shaped the tool, and Kiddom is now bringing it to schools nationwide. But the tool is not the point. The point is what it handed back to teachers: time and information early enough to act on. Those are the two things every teacher is short of, and they are essential for catching children before they fall behind.

That is harder than it sounds. American schools are notoriously bad at catching kids up. A student who starts behind usually stays behind, year after year — not because teachers are not good enough, but because no human can grade, diagnose and personalize for 20 or more children every single day. The math defeats them.

The early results from District 11 are worth a look. Across nearly 5,700 students and 179 teachers, Kiddom’s analysis found that children in classrooms using these quick daily checks most consistently outscored other District 11 students whose teachers used them rarely. In seventh grade, for example, District 11 classes scored an average of 68% on these checks, versus 52%. That’s a 16-percentage-point difference, which works out to roughly five additional months of learning in a single year.

District 11’s results were also measured against a demographically comparable district using the same curriculum without the real-time tool. District 11 still came out ahead, by 11 to 13 points in sixth and seventh grades. The effect was smaller in eighth grade, but the pattern still held, and it tracked with how teachers worked. The biggest gains came in classes where teachers returned graded work in under three days. When the tool handled the grading, teachers could respond to students faster than their colleagues elsewhere. 

Word has traveled. Since District 11’s superintendent, Cristine Vaughan, adopted this time-saving tool, senior city schools officials and parent advocates have come to the Bronx to see it for themselves.

Notice what is missing from this story. The children are not on screens all day. District 11 students spend class time talking, reasoning and writing by hand. The technology serves the teaching and finishes the paperwork.

This is what the screen-time debate keeps missing. The is not whether technology belongs in classrooms. It is who the technology is built for. Point it at the child, and you get a generation doing its thinking on a black mirror. Point it at the teacher, and you get educators who know, in real time, what each student will need the next day.

This is not a preview of some distant future. It is a public school district closing gaps right now for students who are behind, with the same children and the same curriculum it already had, because its teachers got their time back.

So keep pencils in children’s hands, but take the paperwork off teachers. It would make a catch-up crisis so often called intractable look a great deal more solvable.

Disclosure: The Gates Foundation provides financial support to Kiddom Atlas and 91ɬ��.

New York City public school kindergartners will automatically receive $1,000 for college expenses, up from $100, under a budget deal announced Tuesday between Mayor Zohran Mamdani and the City Council.

The budget also restores a handful of education programs that Mamdani proposal and were at risk of cuts, including a mental health initiative that operates clinics in schools and a program for students with disabilities who have sensory issues that interfere with their learning.

The $125.8 billion budget agreement marks the end of Mamdani’s first budget cycle since taking office. Though he initially warned of a multi-billion shortfall, the mayor indicated that the deal with the City Council “balanced the budget without slashing the services that New Yorkers rely on.”

“Above all else, this budget offers a roadmap for the years to come,” Mamdani said shortly after shaking Council Speaker Julie Menin’s hand.

The mayor steered clear of some potentially controversial cuts. Earlier this month, city officials indicated that they will spend $290 million next year to , a pandemic-era “hold harmless” policy that many school funding experts argue should be phased out. Former Mayor Eric Adams tried to wind that program down, but and reversed course.

Still, Mamdani scaled back other education initiatives. He initially planned to spend to comply with a state mandate to shrink class sizes. After convincing the state legislature to , Mamdani .

Here’s what you should know about the budget deal.

A tenfold boost for college savings accounts

All kindergartners in New York City public schools will automatically receive college savings accounts with $1,000, money that is invested in a tax-advantaged 529 account and is expected to grow before students tap it for higher education expenses. (Most charter schools have opted into the program, too.)

The NYC Kids Rise program, which launched about a decade ago, previously doled about $100 per student. Making the program more generous was a who framed it as “one of the most effective ways we can truly address income inequality” and ultimately boost students’ future wages.

The money can be used for vocational schools, community college, or four-year programs. Menin said the $64 million initiative is the largest universal college savings program in the nation. Families, businesses, and other organizations can contribute as well.

City Council’s initial proposal called for depositing $3,000 into accounts for low-income families, but that did not make it into the final budget deal.

A slew of programs spared from the chopping block

Similar to prior mayors, Mamdani did not include funding for several existing education programs until he faced pressure to do so from advocates and City Council members. Those programs, restored in next year’s budget, include:

• Mental Health Continuum ($5 million) , largely in the South Bronx and Brooklyn as well as several school-based clinics.
• Restorative justice ($6 million) Supports schools to to student misbehavior, such as peer mediation and circle discussions.
• Sensory Exploration, Education & Discovery ($8.4 million) Provides that interfere with their learning.
• Outreach to immigrant families ($4 million) Helps fund efforts to communicate with families in their home languages, including translation services and in local ethnic media outlets.
• Student Success Centers ($3.3 million) Trains youth leaders to help high school students navigate the college admissions process.

The Coalition for Equitable Education Funding, a constellation of more than 120 advocacy organizations, praised the funding restorations.

“These programs are currently benefiting thousands of students and families, and we thank the Mamdani Administration and the City Council for ensuring these critical programs will continue for another year,” the group wrote, which reported the dollar amounts that were restored. (A City Hall spokesperson did not immediately confirm them.)

Fate of popular school data contract remains unclear

Mamdani vowed to slash wasteful spending in outside Education Department contracts, but his budget proposal included cuts to just one: A portal that . Many educators say it is a useful tool that saves countless hours that would otherwise be spent combing through creaky databases by hand.

City officials did not immediately respond to questions about whether the $8.9 million contract with the nonprofit New Visions for Public Schools would be restored in the final budget deal. A slew of educators, advocates, and lawmakers have called in recent weeks for the city to reverse the decision to cut the contract.

Chalkbeat is a nonprofit news site covering educational change in public schools. This story was originally published by Chalkbeat. Sign up for their newsletters at . 

The heart of New York City’s initiative are the caring adults in schools who check in with students living in temporary housing, build relationships with families and help connect them to support during difficult moments.

Every public school and Department of Homeless Services shelter in NYC has access to the , a planning, case-management and interagency operations platform. It’s built to let school teams, shelters and partner organizations do the daily work of moving individual students toward promotion, graduation and postsecondary outcomes.

The success of this initiative has reinforced for me how relationships need infrastructure behind them to translate into system-wide change. That’s now at risk as the city considers cutting funding for the portal.

The Portal integrates student data from NYC Public Schools with families’ shelter information from DHS, helping school staff better understand how to support students living in temporary housing conditions. The ECFIK initiative builds additional features and functionality into the Portal by supporting the day-to-day work of caring adults — social workers, teachers and other school staff who volunteer to serve as the primary point of contact for a student in temporary housing. This allows these adults to document check-ins, coordinate referrals and access key information in one centralized place.

Families experiencing housing instability are often already carrying enormous burdens. The last thing they need is to repeatedly retell painful situations to different people because systems are disconnected. Having one caring adult serve as a single point of contact solves part of the problem, freeing families from having to navigate a rich but labyrinthine system of available resources across nonprofits and agencies throughout NYC. 

Technology addresses the other part of the problem. Better coordination helps preserve a family’s dignity. It allows schools and support staff to meet families with greater care and continuity, giving families the sense that people are really working together on their behalf and are coming to each interaction prepared to meet their needs. School staff cannot support students and families effectively — and thereby maintain trust and strong relationships — if critical information is fragmented across systems, buried in email attachments or dependent on staff chasing down phone numbers and updates from multiple places.

Importantly, the initiative’s integration with the Portal ensures that students’ needs and plans for support do not live in separate systems disconnected from the rest of the educational experience. A student needing clean laundry should rise to the same level of importance as a failed state exam, and the initiative makes that visibility happen.

Within the portal, caring adults and school staff see student support information alongside attendance patterns, academic performance and other school data, all following strict data privacy protocols and permission rules that respect students’ privacy and limit information to the adults who are supporting them. Having plans and outcome data living together allows schools to respond in real time instead of reacting too late and to pivot if an intervention doesn’t work. 

Caring adults all using a common platform designed with and for them also allows central program leaders to identify patterns, such as how families’ needs change in the last 10 days of the month or how the resources families seek differ across neighborhoods and boroughs. Instead of information living in scattered, static spreadsheets on individual computers, the data becomes a real-time tool to support deeper system-level understanding and action. 

An of the initiative’s first year found that the students involved experienced stronger academic performance and fewer mid-year transfers when compared to similar students who weren’t in the program. In elementary school that translated into a 8.8 percentage point gain in math. In surveys and focus groups, caring adults reported stronger relationships with families and a shift in school culture toward more empathy and support for students experiencing homelessness.

Beyond the data, the initiative has seen caring adults respond to needs both large and small, making life-changing impacts for their students’ families. One caring adult helped a family experiencing domestic violence secure relocation support after hours during a moment of crisis. Another helped a mother get haircuts for her two sons so they could return to school feeling confident. Many others have been the sole reason a student showed up to school that day: Because someone cared about them, was expecting them, was ready to listen if they needed anything. Because they felt known. 

The Portal didn’t get those boys their haircuts. It didn’t take the midnight phone call. It didn’t sit with a mother and figure out what comes next.

What the portal did was make sure that when someone was ready to do those things, they weren’t starting from zero.

That’s the part I care about. Not the software itself, but what it makes possible: that caring adults got to spend their attention on a family instead of on a spreadsheet.

That is what this initiative represents to me: technology that works behind the scenes, so the relationships front and center can hold and transform the trajectory of a family’s outcomes, one check-in at a time.

Tucked in New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani’s sprawling universal childcare plan is a little-talked-about milestone: In September, the city will open what appears to be the first free daycare for municipal workers in the country. 

The center, called , is a pilot program that could prove to be a model for cities across the country that are childcare curious, but not ready to take the big universal swing. 

Housed in a renovated space on the first floor of the David N. Dinkins Municipal Building in Manhattan, home base for more than 2,000 city workers, the Little Apple will offer free care to the kids of full-time staff. All workers in the Department of Citywide Administrative Services (DCAS), a city government support agency, can also take advantage of it regardless of their work location.

The center will be small — just 40 seats for children ages six weeks to 3 years old. To pay for it, the city budgeted about $1.5 million, or $35,000 per child.

“This is what Wall Street could call a good investment,” Mamdani . “We know that after housing, the cost of childcare is what is pushing working families out of this city.” 

DCAS Commissioner Yume Kitasei told The 19th said the solution came about as a retention strategy, responding to the needs workers shared. In surveys, workers enthusiastically embraced the idea. One worker described access to free childcare as “life-changing.”

That’s probably not hyperbole. Childcare affordability is a national problem that has only grown more acute. Childcare costs an average of nationwide; in New York for an infant at a center it’s closer to on average. Paying for a daycare now vies with housing costs as , so much so that some parents have had to move or . 

Cities, meanwhile, have been since the pandemic. Benefits like childcare, which some cities and private companies have dabbled with, can help address the quality-of-life issues that are pushing workers out of jobs. 

“This is a great time for us to sort of be thinking about: How can we make our jobs even more attractive to people and also retain the city workers that we have?” Kitasei said. “This is one piece of that puzzle.” 

Kitasei added that a “healthy” number of staffers applied for The Little Apple and the department expects to fill its 40 childcare seats. Anyone who doesn’t get a spot will be put on a waitlist.

There is an appetite across the country for childcare solutions that could help bring down costs for certain workers, and cities are already taking on creative fixes. 

Several already have childcare centers in municipal buildings or for city employees, including , , and , Colorado, though none of them are free like New York’s. In Chattanooga, Tennessee, the county school district and a local childcare center known nationally have partnered to provide childcare for the children of teachers inside unused classrooms in schools. Boone County, Missouri, is . 

In the private sector, and closed longstanding childcare centers they operated on their campuses in recent years, but efforts continue elsewhere. Patagonia has operated at its California headquarters since the 1980s, a move it argues has lowered turnover from employees who use the site by 25%. Overstock.com also has an at its Utah headquarters. Both are subsidized, not free.��

“As cities in every region of the country compete with the private sector and other municipalities to attract and retain workers and elected officials, ensuring access to childcare offers an opportunity for local governments to build a representative workforce and invest in the future of their communities,” said Quincy Midthun, an outreach specialist with the Mayors Innovation Project at the High Road Strategy Center, a think tank focused on solutions to social problems.

The Little Apple, and New York City broadly, reflect a when it comes to childcare. 

The announcements of universal childcare in New York City and in the last year received an enormous amount of attention across the country. Both places took an idea that for many years was floated as a pipe dream — treating childcare similarly to public education — and turned it into reality. In New York, it’s one of the few issues that Mamdani, a Democratic socialist, and Gov. Kathy Hochul, a centrist Democrat, . 

Voters are also hungry for more solutions: In poll after poll, they assert that spending money on childcare is a . 

Emmy Liss, who heads Mamdani’s childcare office, said childcare is at a “political tipping point.” 

“We’re in this moment where folks across all political, socioeconomic, demographic spectrums recognize that childcare is essential, that childcare is something families are struggling to access, and know that the market economics of childcare don’t work without public investment,” Liss said. “We see recognition of that.”

With Little Apple, New York is testing what it looks like to commit to its promises of free care for all, but doing it first for its own employees. 

“If we are asking folks to report to work in person in parts of the city where childcare is expensive, as it is all over the city, I think that we have to recognize that childcare is an important part of how we keep people in the workforce,” Liss said. 

Mamdani and Hochul have been working to make childcare universally available to children in the city through a phased rollout set to conclude in four years. For 2-year olds, the mayor announced that will be available in the fall in four largely low-income areas of the city. Another 12,000 are planned for 2027. For 3-year-olds, about 2,000 new seats will be added in the fall, as well. The city has an existing universal childcare program for 4-year-olds. 

Universal childcare as Mamdani envisions it will cover kids ages 6 weeks to 5 years with a price tag of about $6 billion annually, making it the most expensive pillar of his affordability agenda. Mamdani is expected to push to fund the program with a tax increase on the wealthy, a strategy Hochul for, though the state is . Mamdani has not yet unveiled what his universal childcare program would look like for infants and young toddlers.

How New York City’s program rolls out and its sustainability are being closely watched by proponents of universal care, who argue it’s also an anti-poverty measure.

“We know that other places are watching as we try different things out, including the work at the Little Apple,” Liss said.

In New York City, 21% of working parents experienced some kind of childcare hardship in 2024 that forced them to forgo care or use inadequate care, particularly families living in poverty, single mothers and Black parents, from Robin Hood, an anti-poverty organization, and Columbia University’s Center on Poverty and Social Policy.��

An average of 3,400 2- and 3-year-olds were pushed into poverty between 2022 and 2024 specifically due to the cost of childcare, a from the same organizations found. An estimated 4,100 2- and 3-year-olds would be lifted out of poverty each year if they had access to universal 2-K and 3-K education. That would reduce poverty for this age group .��

Rebecca Bailin, the executive director of the parent organizing group New Yorkers United for Child Care, said the problem has reached such a fever pitch that thousands of parents started to organize around the issue in 2023 and helped push the agenda that was central to Mamdani’s election. 

Bailin, who has a 1-year-old, said she can now depend on a 3-K program when her child turns 3 and likely a 2-K program, as well — a savings of about $100,000. The 2-K program Mamdani is rolling out will also be full-day care rather than partial-day care that wraps up around 2 p.m. like the existing 3-K program, addressing a top ask from parents.

“People are stoked,” Bailin said. “People feel like they can stay in the city.” 

The Little Apple is a small part of the larger effort, but, “if we want to retain people, we have to do this,” Bailin said. 

“This is something we want to see scaled. If city workers can’t afford to live here, that’s a real problem,” she continued. “This is really critical and we need this for everybody.” 

was originally reported by Chabeli Carrazana of .

Unlike needs-based programs that are limited to households where students qualify for free or reduced-price school lunch, families with of the median for their area would be eligible to apply for a Federal Scholarship Tax Credit from a participating organization. An estimated could benefit.

This could be a game-changer for New Yorkers currently struggling to afford educational opportunities for their children. At the same time, the scholarships could also prove an incentive for even more public school students to exit already . 

Since they would be the ones most immediately affected by it, I asked the New York City families subscribed to my and social media how they felt about Hochul’s announcement.

To begin with, there was general confusion about how the program would operate.

One anonymous poster asked, “(Does) ‘donate money to an eligible scholarship-granting organization’ means you gift a school $1,700 per year and that gets deducted from your tuition? Otherwise, how does this increase choice for parents? Also, can I donate $1,700 to a tutoring company and get $1,700 worth of lessons?”

That is not how it would work. Donors could not directly benefit from their donations, and the reason supporters believe the program would increase school choice is that it would give parents who otherwise could not afford private schooling a break on tuition.

As the majority of NYC private schools charge upward of $60,000 a year, detractors scoffed that a measly $1,700 wouldn’t make a meaningful difference. But that’s assuming the scholarships given would be only $1,700 per family. If 40 benefactors donated $1,700 to a private school like Trinity, Horace Mann or Dalton, one child could receive a full scholarship, or two children could get half-off tuition.

In addition, NYC is home to dozens of parochial schools, which charge much less than the independent schools name-checked above. Some Catholic elementary schools cost $6,000 to $10,000 per student per year, as do some Jewish yeshivas and Muslim madrassas. An increase in donations from the Federal Scholarship Tax Credit might make it possible for many new students to attend at a discount.

This doesn’t sit well with NYC mom Rebecca Garte, who wrote that the program would be “publicly subsidizing private institutions.”

That’s true, but public money is already being used to subsidize city private educational organizations in a variety of ways across all grade levels. 

The only way then-Mayor Bill de Blasio could get his signature initiative, universal pre-K and, later, 3K, off the ground was to pay private schools, including religious ones, with public money. The majority of afterschool programming in public elementary and middle schools is who are paid by the city. And there are , which students can use for public and private colleges — again, including religious ones. 

Nevertheless, parents like Elizabeth Kelly don’t care about precedent. Her position is simple, “I am against the tax credit.  Let’s just make our public schools better.”

Yiatin Chu, parent of an NYC public school ninth grader, on the other hand, recognizes how the Federal Scholarship Tax Credit would help families like hers. She says, “I support the federal tax credit scholarship program because even middle-income families are eligible, a segment of public school families that don’t get much help. I like that the scholarship can be used for SHSAT (Specialized High School Admissions Test) and SAT preparation or extra tutoring on any subject that our children might need. If Gov. Hochul doesn’t renege on her support, I hope to use it for my child’s SAT prep.”

In the end, opinions in support ran 3 to 1 versus those against. Those who were for the program expressed sentiments similar to those of mom Desiree Milin, who said, “Since the NYC public school system is not equal for all children, I would have no problem helping parents pay into a private school education. We switched our child into Catholic school after he did not get any of his public middle school choices. A good education should be accessible to all children.”

As of now, have signaled that they plan to opt into the program. Only three of them are headed by Democratic governors: Colorado (Jared Polis), North Carolina (Josh Stein) and now, New York. With New York City being the largest school district in America, the results of the Federal Scholarship Tax Credit here could become a case study for all those still on the fence about bringing it to their respective areas, and answer questions— not to mention address misconceptions — that many still have about it.

Despite New York City’s last-minute withdrawal of, parents, students, and educators packed this week’s school board meeting to speak on AI anyway.

More than 100 New Yorkers testified at a nearly seven-hour-long meeting of the Panel for Educational Policy, or PEP, earlier this week.

Community members repeatedly argued that the Education Department is rolling out AI tools without clear rules, transparency, or adequate knowledge of the technology. Students said AI was already reshaping classrooms, and surveillance practices, like the, are already in use at 150 city schools. Educators expressed concern that the increasing use of various technologies in schools conflicts with the the city released in March.

One parent from Park Slope approached the microphone with her two toddlers in tow, holding one in her arm while clasping the other tightly by the hand.

“I’ve never been an activist before, but I feel so strongly about this: It is starting. Gen Z is turning against AI; I’m turning against AI. The city is telling us that AI is inevitable, but won’t tell me what devices and applications my children are using. You tell us you are spending our money to give artificial intelligence to our children?” she said to a chorus of cheers at Wednesday night’s packed meeting.

The had little to do with AI. It centered on the Education Department’s capital plan, the estimated budget for the coming year, and the updated Fair Student Funding weights that shape how money flows to schools. The panel also voted on 30 separate contract agreements, from cafeteria equipment repairs to special education services.

But the bulk of the seven-hour meeting involved parents, children, and educators arguing against the city’s spending on AI and educational technology contracts and the city’s preliminary AI policy. Although the Next Generation High School proposal was removed from Wednesday’s agenda following backlash over its AI focus and selective admissions, speakers said those concerns would extend to future school plans.

“Many feel AI is teaching a dangerous message that results matter more than the learning process. Some of the most important learning happens when students struggle, make mistakes, ask questions, and improve over time,” said student panel member Julia Nasef, of Staten Island’s Tottenville High School.

AI discussions surface issues with current Department of Education process

Throughout the night, speakers expressed waning confidence in the Education Department’s and its ability to protect students, educators, and families from a complex and rapidly-changing technology.

Most of the speakers were opposed to any AI in the classroom.

Panel for Educational Policy Chair Greg Faulkner admitted on Wednesday that he was a “baby boomer” with limited understanding of AI, and that he wanted more thorough engagement with both the community and Education Department in future AI-related proposals.

But he also thought that Chancellor Kamar Samuel’s move to pull the AI-focused school proposal for Next Generation High School aligns with the schools chief’s priority to better engage and respond to the needs of local communities.

“Under previous administrations, the general assumption was that the panel votes yes on all DOE proposals. But the chancellor’s decision and the panel’s back-and-forth discussion on Wednesday showed us that the old model isn’t working anymore,” Faulkner told Chalkbeat on Thursday.

Faulkner said the “AI question” has him considering proposing changes to some of the Education Department’s policy-making processes. He said he would like the panel to work more closely with the department’s AI policy authors — the names of whom are not public — so the panel can get up to speed on AI research and better share community concerns.

Education Department officials said that the initial AI guidance was shaped by the Department’s central Academics and Instruction team, with input from stakeholders and various internal Department subcommittees.

“We have not had any briefings on AI research, and while I am concerned about a moratorium, I don’t know enough about this technology,” said Faulkner.

Nasef, the student PEP member, said at the meeting that many of her peers acknowledge that AI can be helpful when used “intentionally” to help them understand math and science concepts, for example.

She urged the panel to “support clear, student‑centered guidelines for AI implementation.”

The, released last month, did not include guidance on how or if students can use AI for homework, nor did it differentiate AI use for students in different grades

Panel greenlights controversial tech contracts as AI policy lags

Of the 30 contract proposals up for a vote, three included three educational technology products. Just one was voted down.

One of the contracts approved covered the full line of K-12 digital learning products from , a global educational services company that has in their digital test prep products. Several speakers who testified at Wednesday’s meeting mentioned the company’s recent privacy breach affecting the personal information of. Despite those concerns, the PEP approved the company’s $500,000 contract.

A representative for AI-based software tailored to early childhood education , spoke at the meeting. He assured panel members that the software could be “turned off at any point” because “teachers have complete control of what is going on in the classroom.” This was the only contract that the PEP voted against.

Naveed Hasan, the panel’s de-facto technology expert who had previously supported the AI-focused high school, announced at the meeting that he now supports a two-year moratorium on AI use in schools, saying the city needs more time to address data privacy infrastructure and learning concerns.

The term limits of all current panel members expire at the end of June. The Education Department’s full AI policy is also expected to be released that month, and the Education Department is asking families and educators for through May 8.

Chalkbeat is a nonprofit news site covering educational change in public schools. This story was originally published by Chalkbeat. Sign up for their newsletters at .

Anyone familiar with NYC knows that while it has some of the most iconic green spaces in the world, from to the , it also has a shocking number of neighborhoods with almost .

This is where schoolyard transformations come in. Every NYC neighborhood has a public school, and most of them have outdoor yards. For years, various initiatives have taken those city-owned spaces, often covered in asphalt, and opened them up to millions of students and nearby residents for recreation and relaxation.

Nationwide, the Trust for Public Land and other partners have transformed — including New York, Pennsylvania, Georgia, Minnesota and California — over the past 25 years, playing a vital role and combatting by planting trees and replacing blacktop with permeable surfaces.

But there’s another, unexpected benefit from this work. It turns out that involving students in the design process has been a powerful lever for learning and leadership, unlocking children’s creativity while planting seeds of inspiration and ambition.

Engaging students as young as third grade gives them something they rarely experience elsewhere: genuine agency. For many, it may be the first time they’ve had a real say in shaping their everyday environment — and their first real encounter with collective decision-making and the democratic process.

It gives them purpose and ownership and helps them see how their input matters through consultation with an array of stakeholders, from school principals and city agencies to PTAs and community groups. 

Our design process starts with a schoolwide assembly where the project is explained and the outcomes explored. That is followed by a survey where every student can offer ideas about what the new playground might look like.

About 30 student volunteers are then selected to make up the design team — in cases where an elementary, middle and high school share a schoolyard, the design team will have representatives from all three levels.

During four sessions over a three-month period, students measure their schoolyards, visit completed projects for ideas and interact with landscape architects, general contractors, engineers and other professionals about the project — getting invaluable exposure to career opportunities along the way.

We emphasize to the students the importance of making the schoolyard design work

for everybody. They figure out what they want during the day, but they also have survey input from parents and other community members about how they’d like to use the space after school and on weekends.

The kids are often the ones who come up with the most innovative and impactful ideas. 

At a Bronx elementary school, girls loved playing basketball, but boys often took over both of the playground’s courts at recess. So the girls asked if one of the courts could be painted pink. Of course, anyone could play there. But the boys tended to avoid it, and the girls finally had an equal chance to play basketball in their yard.

At a Harlem elementary school, students wanted a space for braiding hair during recess, so they designed one: a two-tiered seating area built for exactly that. It’s the kind of idea no adult would have thought to ask for.

Meanwhile, at an elementary school in Queens, students wanted a wildlife viewing area, so they selected plants known to attract butterflies — such as lavender and Joe Pye Weed — and planted them in the schoolyard. They added birdhouses and bat boxes, too, turning a concrete corner into a small urban sanctuary.

The payoff of these transformed spaces extends well beyond recess, yielding numerous positive effects in the classroom. There’s research showing that exposure to nature can help . It can also lead to . 

That’s a fantastic perk for any public school. Now, imagine multiplying that across an entire city. In New York, more than 240 schoolyards have been reimagined throughout the five boroughs, but there are about 950 citywide, so there are plenty more waiting to be transformed.

The potential is enormous — not just for more equitable access to green space, but for young people to discover that they can make their voices heard, make a difference and actively shape the world around them.

Having access to Algebra 1 in eighth grade can often make or break a student’s path to , which in turn, is often a gateway to selective colleges as well as science and engineering careers.

But many eighth graders can’t take Algebra 1 — regardless of how well they did on their seventh grade state math test. And when New York City parents are exploring middle school options for their fifth graders, they might not realize the consequences a school’s math offerings might have for their students’ education trajectory.

Across New York state, more than 1 in 4 schools don’t offer Algebra 1 to eighth graders, , a group convened by EdTrust-New York. Schools that disproportionately enroll Black, Latino, and low-income students tend to have less access to Algebra 1 in middle school.

“When we have qualified kids that are denied that opportunity, and it impacts them in high school and beyond … it is such a critical inflection point,” said Jeff Smink, deputy director at EdTrust-New York, an advocacy group focused on improving outcomes for students of color.

Smink hopes to raise awareness about the importance of Algebra 1 for eighth graders so parents can advocate for it.

“If there’s no demand, then schools aren’t going to respond to it,” he said. “They’re going to offer the easier, simpler option, which is just tracking kids to the standard eighth grade class, which is going to avoid kids struggling, it’s going to get potentially better test scores.”

While 58% of New York’s seventh graders scored proficient (a 3 or 4) on their 2023-24 state math exams, in the following school year — 2024-25 — just 37% of eighth graders enrolled in Algebra 1, representing a gap of 20,000 proficient students, the report said. More than half were estimated to be from low-income families, and nearly half were students of color.

In New York City alone, there were 8,000 more students proficient on seventh grade state exams than enrolled in eighth grade Algebra 1, according to the researchers.

The state’s gaps were starkest for Black and Asian American students: while 38% of Black students and 75% of Asian American seventh graders were proficient, 13% of Black and 14% Asian American eighth graders the following year enrolled in Algebra 1, the study found.

Drilling down into the data,, reveals vastly uneven access across New York City’s 32 local districts.

The top three districts with more proficient seventh graders than eighth graders in Algebra 1: Queens’ District 24, Brooklyn’s District 20, and Staten Island. Each had gaps of more than 1,400 students, researchers said.

In five districts, fewer than half of their schools offered Algebra 1 for eighth graders: Manhattan Districts 4 and 6, Brooklyn’s District 13, and Bronx Districts 7 and 12.

Eight districts appeared to be outliers, with either more than or an equal share of eighth graders taking Algebra 1 last year compared to the percentage of seventh graders who scored proficient on their state math tests the year before: Manhattan’s District 3; Bronx’s District 11, Brooklyn Districts 15, 19, 23, and 32; and Queens Districts 27, 28, and 30.

Equity gaps in proficiency remain, however, and three of those districts — 19, 23, and 32 in Brooklyn, which overwhelmingly serve Black, Latino, and low-income students — had fewer than half of their students who were proficient.

The report recommends the state adopt an automatic enrollment, or opt-out policy, for all eighth graders who score proficient on seventh grade state tests. They want an $8.5 million investment to help 15 high-needs districts expand Algebra 1 access as well as fund tutoring, staffing, and public data tracking enrollment and completion by race and income.

The report comes at a time when Gov. Kathy Hochul, , called for an overhaul of math instruction, getting “back to the basics,” New York City’s schools Chancellor Kamar Samuels, a former math teacher, has also argued for a emphasizing memorization of math facts along with a focus on creative problem-solving.

Samuels

Under former Mayor Eric Adams, the city required nearly all high schools to use a single math curriculum from Illustrative Math for Algebra 1 — Education Department officials are also .

“We are working to strengthen early math instruction, expand equitable pathways to Algebra 1 by eighth grade, and ensure every student has access to rigorous, high-quality curriculum,” Education Department spokesperson Chyann Tull said in a statement.

Several states and cities have focused more attention on eighth grade access to Algebra 1, , which has offered the class online and has covered educators’ training costs to get credentials to teach algebra.

Chalkbeat is a nonprofit news site covering educational change in public schools.

A report released last month makes this even harder to ignore: New York State ranks among the most segregated in the entire country. That finding builds on a showing that deep school segregation in New York City has been the status quo since at least 2009. In some districts, the racial divide looks no different than it did in the 1930s.

Why have the state and the city failed to live up to the promise of excellent schools for all? Because a misconception persists: that building racially and economically diverse schools means lower quality and less academic rigor. Prospect Schools, a K-12 network of intentionally diverse charter schools in Brooklyn, was founded to challenge this notion, and I’m proud to have served as CEO since 2021. 

Brooklyn Prospect, our first campus, was the city’s first public charter school designed intentionally to be integrated along racial and socio-economic lines. Today, Prospect Schools serves almost 3,000 students across seven campuses, and is one of the few open enrollment public charter school networks offering the International Baccalaureate program to all high school students. Integrated schools benefit all students and raise performance across the board by spreading out resources and opportunity, expanding access to the best teachers and facilities, and preparing learners to thrive in a diverse world. 

The recent appointment of New York City Public Schools’ Chancellor Kamar Samuels and his policy agenda underscore that equity and excellence are not at odds. He garnered community support during previous leadership roles while  pursuing integration, an approach usually too controversial to touch. As superintendent of District 13 here in Brooklyn, he made the bold decision to replace exclusionary programs with school-wide IB enrichment. He understood that true equity isn’t about picking winners and losers; it’s about raising the ceiling for every child. 

Since taking office, Chancellor Samuels has signaled he is ready to hold this entire city accountable to a vision of education that is both radically inclusive and relentlessly rigorous. This is the right move for New York City. It also validates the approach to integrated education we rely on at Prospect Schools, where nearly two decades of work demonstrate that this vision can deliver meaningful results for students. 

We operate with a conviction that Samuels shares: that students learn best alongside peers who do not look, pray or live like them. At Prospect, we are “diverse by design,” which means we ensure that all of our classrooms reflect the vibrant diversity of the city through strategic recruitment, a weighted lottery, provision in our charter and a program that is inclusive and affirming. The result is a student body that is 29% White, 29% Black, 27% Hispanic and 10% multi-racial;  currently 44% of our students qualify for free and reduced-priced meals. 

We ensure all of our students have access to excellent teachers and rigorous academic curriculum which we model on the renowned IB Program. Through this globally recognized program, we raise the level of academic responsibility for all our students by cultivating curiosity, academic confidence, empowerment, global mindedness, community stewardship and life readiness. Further, we have proven that when you combine this intentional diversity with the high bar of the IB curriculum, the results are transformative.

Our students excel on state English language and math exams, most recently outperforming their city and district peers by 23 and 18 percentage points, respectively. This past year, over 80% of our graduating class was IB Diploma eligible, the highest in our history, and 100% of graduates were accepted into college. 

In Chancellor Samuels, I see a kindred spirit: a leader who understands that equity and excellence are not zero-sum competitors but twin pillars of a functioning democracy. Like Chancellor Samuels, I am the proud daughter of West Indian immigrants. I attended school in the Bronx and navigated the complexities of being a first-generation college student. Those experiences taught me early on that talent is distributed equally, but opportunity is not.

When I discovered the IB program, I saw a framework that didn’t just teach students what to think, but how to think. I knew then that this opportunity shouldn’t be reserved for private schools or select tracks of students — it belonged in every neighborhood and should be accessible to every child. 

We need this focus now more than ever. We are living in a time of deep polarization across our country, where echo chambers are solidifying into concrete walls. If NYC schools continue to remain segregated by race, class or academic tracking, we are merely preparing the next generation to perpetuate this divide. By championing integrated schools, academic excellence for all and global-mindedness of the IB, Chancellor Samuels is offering an antidote to this fragmentation. 

A few years back, a groundswell of Brooklyn parents in District 13 wanted to ditch gifted and talented classes, concerned about sorting and segregating children starting in kindergarten.

Then-Superintendent Kamar Samuels, now chancellor of New York City schools, wanted to find an alternative that offered rigorous academics for all students in a school rather than a select few. He settled on the and encouraged schools in District 13, which spans from Brooklyn Heights to Bedford-Stuyvesant, to pursue the yearslong authorization process, using a grant to support the shift.

The IB approach embraces inquiry-based, transdisciplinary learning that allows students to go deep into a specific topic across classes, connecting global issues to their own experiences. Educators are trained to facilitate these connections and foster ways for students to become independent thinkers and leaders.

“It means something for a teacher to be an IB teacher. It means you’ve gone through a process,” , when introducing the initiative, “and you’re really pushing the envelope as you think about all your students.”

The district now has five elementary schools and two middle schools in the program, representing New York City’s first IB “pathway” designed to serve children from 3-K through eighth grade. (The district also hopes that students continue on to the handful of public IB high schools in the city, including those in neighboring districts.)

The IB model might soon gain in popularity as schools grapple with the state’s graduation requirement overhaul, as the Portrait of a Graduate framework replaces Regents exams for diplomas starting in the 2027-28 school year. The approach closely aligns with the state’s students must demonstrate (such as being creative innovators, effective communicators, and global citizens). And as schools await the state’s guidance on how to assess students under the new framework, IB schools already have a well-developed system of project-based assessments.

The schools also boast strong post-secondary outcomes: 71% of IB students in the U.S. enrolled in college compared to the average of 56%, .

On a recent Monday at P.S. 56, in Clinton Hill, second graders hummed as they worked on a project for a unit on self-expression. The kids were creating shapes to use for fabric construction, incorporating math, writing, and social-emotional learning as they jotted down the way the colors they used made them feel.

In a fifth grade room down the hall, students — also doing a unit on self-expression — tackled a poem about technology, as they discussed the effect technology is having on education. Another fifth grade class read a poem about bullying, and students were asked to write their own poem about a problem they wanted to change.

Jayda, a fifth grader, wrote about concerns with the increase in immigration enforcement across the nation. She recently participated in an anti-ICE protest that Lucy, another fifth grader, organized. They and their peers talked about how they struggled with writing when they were younger but have since blossomed as writers, especially as they’ve been able to work on more creative writing.

“Now it’s my passion,” fifth grader Noah said. “I couldn’t imagine life without it.”

Tracey Scronic, the instruction lead and coordinator for District 13’s IB schools, sees the shift to the IB model as an “equity tool” to ensure all of a school’s students are exposed to enrichment. She said it “de-prioritizes traditional testing’s emphasis on regurgitation of information.”

Leaning on IB to tackle enrollment declines

The IB program at P.S. 56 has helped prop up enrollment, its principal, Eric Grande, said.

Just before Grande became principal of P.S. 56 a decade ago, the Clinton Hill elementary school tried to bolster enrollment, then hovering below 200 students, by adding a gifted and talented program. Grande added a “world language” program, focusing on Spanish, hoping that would attract more families. But the school didn’t feel cohesive.

“Even though we had a relatively small school, there was almost like schools within the school,” Grande said. “You had your world language Spanish program, your gifted and talented program, you had your special education classes and your gen ed classes, and it just started to feel a little bit off.”

Students within the school, which is more racially diverse than most New York City elementary schools, were not integrated within the different programs, he said. (Last year, about 36% of its students were Black, 36% were white, 17% were Latino, and 1% were Asian American; roughly 47% of children came from low-income families.)

Grande began looking for a model to bring everyone — and all of their different programs — together, appeasing families who wanted a foreign language and those who wanted a project-based approach to teaching. IB offered the “perfect synergy of all things that we were doing.”

The school is now in its second year as an authorized IB school following three years as a candidate school. Enrollment has increased, with about 230 students last year.

And while Grande said his school has never been too focused on test prep, he was proud to see a shift in state test scores since his teachers transitioned to the IB framework, from about 35% proficiency on reading in 2019, the year before the pandemic, to more than 60% last year.

The move to IB can be challenging

The buy-in from teachers on IB takes some time, said Scronic. They needed training to shift practices and must do more in-depth planning around the new units. They also needed to figure out how to meld the IB framework with the mandated literacy curriculum for their district, EL Education.

“It is a bit more cognitively intense for the teachers,” Scronic said. But after a while, she said teachers feel like they’re being respected again for their craft and facilitating connections between the curriculum and students’ own lives. “I feel like the passion that a brand-new teacher brings to the profession then kind of gets squashed sometimes, IB has brought that back.”

Becoming an authorized IB school is not easy. Schools have to pay the Switzerland-based nonprofit that oversees the IB program about $9,000 a year to start the training and candidacy process. It’s about $10,000 each year once a school is authorized to support the implementation and maintenance of IB programs, . District 13 used a grant to cover the costs for the initial training for the schools, though the schools have had to foot the bill for new teachers.

Though Scronic leads District 13’s IB initiative, she’s started holding monthly Zoom meetings for about 40 IB elementary and middle schools in the city, a grassroots effort to provide support and create a community to share best practices and resources.

Samuels continued to promote IB schools when he left his Brooklyn district to become superintendent of Manhattan’s District 3. He encouraged schools in Harlem to adopt the IB model as a way to tackle declining enrollment in a part of the district facing heavy competition from charter schools. (District 3 used a grant to cover the costs as well.)

But Samuels acknowledged the challenges in pursuing IB authorization.

“I do believe in a lot of the work of IB, but it really takes a big investment,” “It takes principals being onboard. It takes teachers being onboard and willing to go and get a lot of background and content knowledge, and to be able to personalize for young people and the kids in your school.”

A middle school IB program helps students find their ‘voice’

Sanai Gary, an eighth grader at Bedford-Stuyvesant’s Restoration Academy — which is in its first full year as an authorized IB school after its yearslong candidacy — said the IB approach has helped her deepen her learning.

“I like how the topics transmit over to other classes. I feel like it helps me learn better,” said Sanai. “It gives me more time to focus on it.”

Last year, she and her peers became clean water advocates after diving into a unit on global sustainability.

It started after they read a novel in English class, “,” about the struggle in South Sudan for clean water. In their Individuals and Societies class (akin to social studies), a student brought up questions about t, that got the students wondering about the water quality in their own school. So, in science class, they tested their school’s water fountains and created makeshift filtration devices.

Concerned about the color and clarity of their school’s water, back in English class, the students mounted a letter-writing campaign to city officials demanding changes.

Restoration Academy has struggled with enrollment and has long served marginalized students. The middle school currently has roughly 80 middle schoolers; about 80% are Black and Latino, and more than 90% are from low-income families. Pre-pandemic, about 20% of its students were considered proficient in reading. Since transitioning to IB, the scores have improved, rising to about 30% last year.

But more importantly, Principal Adele Simon said, students are increasingly linking what’s happening around the world to their own lives and finding their voices to advocate for change based on what they’re learning in school.

“It’s the connection between what they’re reading,” Simon said, “and not just reading it for the purpose of reading it, but reading it for the purpose of, ‘Okay, what am I going to do with this? … Who’s in power and who is not in power? And how can I make sure that the people in power represent me and my community?”

Their school is getting new water fountains with filtration devices this spring.

Chalkbeat is a nonprofit news site covering educational change in public schools. This story was originally published by Chalkbeat. Sign up for their newsletters at .

This bill would grant student members of the right to vote on the decisions the councils take. If passed, out of the 13 votes per council, students would hold two of them. 

CECs consist of elected community members who evaluate the efficacy of educational programs, recommend improvements, approve zoning lines and weigh in on all things related to public education. State law currently requires that two students, serving in student government and nominated by their superintendents, serve on each of the 32 councils and one on each of the four citywide councils.  

Students on these councils attend the meetings, offer feedback and consultation, share informed perspectives — perspectives that carry unique weight because of their lived experience — yet when the time comes to decide, they have no voting power. 

This dichotomy reveals how  deeply shapes our civic relationship with young people. For decades, institutions have them from the democratic process or included them only in token ways.  

Ironically, CECs themselves perpetuate this pattern. Not only do they deny students voting power, but they have also failed to comply with state law requiring student representation. As of 2024, only 14 student seats were filled, leaving at least two-thirds vacant. An honest reflection of the law makes that not surprising. Would you sit on a council if you were the only non-voting member? 

This bill addresses both problems. It increases the number of students on each council and ensures that students not only inform decisions about policies affecting their daily lives but can cast votes on those decisions. It also broadens access by removing a requirement that the student members serve in student government.

When considering the utilitarianism of this bill, it is easy to understand why it hasn’t generated a lot of attention — it seems like an obvious ‘Yes.’ But pragmatism alone doesn’t guarantee success. Lawmakers introduced this bill in 2023 and three years later, it has yet to pass.  

This is particularly concerning as the new mayor and chancellor vow to improve our current governance model that gives the mayor control over our system. CECs are contingent on mayoral control and are expected to provide vital input to both the mayor and chancellor. Giving students a real seat at the table is a simple but important first step they could advocate for. 

The lack of traction likely stems from limited awareness, paired with to fully embrace the burgeoning movement for youth voice and enfranchisement.   

Fortunately, young people deserve the right to inform and influence the policies and practices that affect their daily lives.  

For those of us working in the youth civic and democratic ecosystem, we’ve witnessed young people’s perspectives and impact on policy from communities to the . We trust their judgment and benefit when we listen. This bill asks lawmakers in Albany to extend that trust.  

Research on adolescent development reinforces this need. By their early teens, young people’s brains are developing in ways that heighten their focus on . 

Evidence from the field and research alone will not secure this bill’s passage. Advocates must also demonstrate what this looks like in practice. , the original author of this bill, demonstrates that reality better than anybody in the city. 

For three decades, BroSis has in New York City. These efforts show how capable young people are and how essential their voices remain in galvanizing change. Young leaders bring insight into systematic challenges in ways that very few decision-makers can fathom, such as longstanding racial disparities in education as well as emerging challenges like artificial intelligence. 

EdTrust-New York has seen the same impact. Through the developed in partnership with BroSis and Adelante Student Voices, students have shaped policy conversations on school discipline, suspension rates and equity across the state. Their contributions have improved both the quality and urgency of those discussions. 

Together we view this bill as a catalyst for better informed education policy and a mechanism to ensure direct student representation. It will also help build civic ownership among young people. 

The bill will ensure the education reflects what students actually need. It also signals to young people, who are growing from the lack of access to the democratic process, that New York City is committed to engaging them and elevating their civic power.  

The strength of this bill lies in its practicality, but we should not mistake simplicity for insignificance. As advocates and policymakers consider how to improve mayoral control, they should take this simple and meaningful first step. This bill deserves full-throated support from anyone in New York City who values young people’s perspectives and believes they must play a meaningful role in the civic process. Let’s give high school students, not just a seat at the table, but a vote.

Instead of being asked to score at least a on tests of English Language Arts, mathematics, social studies, science and one optional exam, New York students will be assessed using standards. 

It is yet unclear as to who will be evaluating whether they can be considered:

• academically prepared
• creative innovators
• critical thinkers
• effective communicators
• global citizens
• reflective and future-focused

It is also unclear what the criteria for succeeding in each category will be.

When I asked parent subscribers to my mailing list how they felt about the shift, the answers split starkly into two camps.

There were those who cheered. Josh Kross, father of two high schoolers and one graduate, wrote, “Regents are outdated. Good riddance.” Moria Herbst added, “Other states don’t have them. Certainly not in Massachusetts, where I grew up. And Massachusetts does just fine!”

“I am deeply in favor of moving away from a standardized testing model,” said E.J., the Washington Heights parent of a first grader. “While Portrait of a Graduate is still being worked on as to how it will actually function, I’m encouraged by the idea and the possibility of it being a more complete picture of the human we’re sending out into the world.”

Other parents, however, were less enthused.

“Portrait of a Graduate is so fuzzy as to be meaningless,” wrote Rachel Fremmer, dismissively. “I didn’t think standards could be lowered any further, but they have been.” 

“It seems like a process that will make things more subjective for teachers, and thus less fair for many students,” opined Marina. “This seems like a vague requirement that will allow parents with resources even more leverage.”

Yiatin Chu, mom of a ninth grader, went even further, saying, “For those who criticize the Regents as a low bar/waste of time, why aren’t we improving it and making it more rigorous instead? Portrait of a Graduate is aspirational — over 40% of eighth grade students are entering high school not reading at grade level. I see the change to these graduation metrics for HS graduation as a way for the system to push kids out the door.”

New York City already faces the issues of straight A students being unable to perform equally well — or even pass — state elementary and middle school tests, not to mention high school Regents exams.

“Without objective tests, there is no way to gauge what kids are actually learning,” Diane Rubenstein predicted. “This will allow the (Department of Education) to give kids nothing in the classroom. This will give (them) cover to not teach.”

“Removing this requirement dilutes education standards even further,” agreed AW. “It plays very well into the current administration’s program of ‘equity,’ aka ‘mediocrity for all.’ It disincentivizes kids from learning and teaches them that if something is hard, just protest and it will be removed from your path, even to your detriment.”

For many parents, the perceived lowering of standards will hurt city students when it comes to competing not just nationally, but internationally.

“If USA high schools become less competitive, that’s not good for the next generation,” Jenny worried, while Ella added, “Our kids will fall behind other countries. We are already falling behind in the world. My kids cannot compete with foreign students.”

Of the that currently have high-school exit exams in place, New Jersey ranked No. 2 in the country for educational achievement for 2025, Virginia was No. 13, Ohio was No. 15, Florida was No. 19, Texas No. 31 and Louisiana No. 35. (Massachusetts, which got rid of its exit exams in 2025, is, as noted above, ranked No. 1. However, that ranking was achieved while the state still had its exit exam up through last year.)

In New York, while students will no longer be required to sit for Regents exams in order to graduate, they will still have the option of taking them in order to earn a .

This could have the effect of widening the gaps between students, rather than improving equity. Colleges and employers will be able to see who earned a Regents diploma and who opted to bypass established standards via a more subjective metric, which could imply less academic rigor.

Like those rejected from colleges that went SAT/ACT scores because they realized those were a reliable predictor of applicants’ capabilities, students who choose not to take the Regents exams could find themselves negatively perceived and penalized.

“I understand the growing pressure to move away from standardized testing, but we still need a meaningful way to measure student progress and evaluate our schools,” ventured Stephanie Cuba, the mother of children in seventh and ninth grades. “Education policy should be deliberate and comprehensive, not a series of reactive decisions. If you’re going to dismantle the old system, you need a clear, credible plan to replace it. Without that, we’re operating without a compass.”

Right now, with Profile of a Graduate details vague and , New York risks graduating multiple cohorts whose achievements will not be properly valued. The repercussions might follow them for years.

The report, released this month by the education reform nonprofit Available to All, builds off The new report found overlaps and similarities among dozens of redlining maps from 1938 with school attendance zones in New York City, Long Island, Westchester County as well as upstate cities, such as Albany, Buffalo and Niagara Falls.��

The report also identified New York as “one of many states where a parent can be arrested and criminally charged for using an incorrect address to get their child into a high-quality school,” with one such incident occurring as recently as .��

The state’s laws and regulations make it “one of the strictest systems of residential assignment in the country,” the report said, adding it limits a to take advantage of — a practice that allows students to attend public schools outside their assigned district.

“There’s this paradox of New York, where it’s run by progressive politicians, it’s a very democratic state,” said Tim DeRoche, founder of Available to All, “but it’s the most segregated.”

Across the United States it’s common for sections of the same town or city, neighborhoods and streets to have communities that look vastly different from one another because of historical government-led housing segregation.

Redlining, the practice of drawing boundaries around neighborhoods based on race and denying mortgage assistance to areas considered “hazardous” or “undesirable” typically housing people of color, was more than 50 years ago. Despite this, many public services, including , still perpetuate inequitable access to resources and opportunity based on housing.

While school districts themselves are drawn through legislative processes, districts are often given autonomy when drawing attendance zones for schools. Both boundaries, the report said, “carry on the legacy of redlining in New York.”

“Public schools must be ‘,’ and … if you look at the system we have across the country, you can see that we are falling so far short of that — and the primary reason for that is that we assign kids to schools based on their address,” DeRoche said. 

The report used Public School 19 and Public School 16 as examples. Both schools are in the north Bronx’s school District 11 and are located about a mile from one another — a 20-minute walk — but serve contrasting populations.

The Bronx

Attendance zone boundaries for P.S. 19 “mirror, almost perfectly, the area deemed to be ‘desirable’ by the racist redlining map drawn by federal government bureaucrats in 1938,” the report said. Whereas P.S. 16’s boundaries fell directly in a declining area, according to the 1938 map.

The remnants of redlining are echoed in both schools’ data — where P.S. 19 educates a population that is 43% Black and Latino and two-thirds low income, with 62% reading proficiency. That compares to P.S 16’s 88% Black and Latino student body, 95% of whom are low income with grade level reading just over 30%.

Schools like P.S. 19 “become almost quasi-private schools,” DeRoche said.

There were many examples across the New York City Public Schools system, as well as several upstate school districts.

Manhattan

Queens

“It’s really hard to find a place [in New York] that’s not segregated or a school district that’s not experiencing either racial segregation or some sense of class segregation,” said Kris DeFilippis, a former assistant superintendent in the New York City Department of Education, who is now a clinical professor at New York University. “Not much has changed. … Wherever those lines were drawn [in the 1930s], it has largely stayed the same, unless there’s been a movement toward gentrification.”

In Albany, New York’s capital, New Scotland Elementary School was zoned over neighborhoods identified as desirable in 1938. The school serves a student population that is less than half Black or brown (41%) and low-income (47%) with reading scores near 60%.��

Just about two miles away at Giffen Memorial Elementary School, more than three-quarters of students are Black and Hispanic (84%) and qualify for free and reduced priced lunch (84%). Less than a quarter of students at Giffen Memorial read on grade level (21%).

Much of Giffen Memorial’s attendance zone lines up with 1938 redlining declining areas.

Albany

“You wouldn’t see these massive gaps [in demographics and student achievement] between two schools two miles away … if those two schools were truly open to kids,” DeRoche said. “The government has to be enforcing that in some way. How are they enforcing it? Well, they’re enforcing it with these maps. The kids on the wrong side of the line aren’t eligible to go to the public school that’s a mile [or two] from their home.”

In upstate New York, while there’s access to charter and magnet schools, school choice within a district is limited among traditional public schools. Students are generally required to go to the school in their attendance zone, “unless there are exceeding circumstances,” DeFilippis said, “but that is rare, it just doesn’t happen.”

In New York City, “it’s a bit different,” DeFilippis continued. Students typically attend a local elementary school before choice options open up in middle and high school grades across the metropolitan area  – creating its own challenges and limitations when it comes to admission to later grades.

“There’s almost like a false narrative that in New York City students can go where they want,” DeFilippis said, “but it’s not entirely accurate.”

For a student, traveling across the city to attend a school that works best for them can be difficult and it may also be challenging to get into competitive schools because they “haven’t had the same experiences at the lower grades that their peers have had,” DeFillipis said. So, ultimately, the current setup, “does not lead to equitable outcomes for Black and brown students, or low-income students, at all.”

The report recommended possible solutions for lawmakers to consider, such as decriminalizing address sharing, requiring every public school to reserve at least 15% of seats for students who live outside the zone and allowing students to enroll in any public school within a three-mile radius of the child’s home.

The underlying principle, DeRoche said, is to “just decrease the link between where you live and which schools you’re allowed to attend.”

“These policies have been bad, not just for educational opportunity, but I think they’ve affected urban development and I think they’ve affected how our cities work and don’t work,” DeRoche said.

It’s not widely acknowledged as such, but America is experiencing a surge in anti-tax politics.

You see this of course on the right, which has always been skeptical of taxation. But we’re also starting to see a version of this on the left.

The growing progressive interest in exotic new tax-policy ideas — like Bernie Sanders and Ro Khanna saying they can  — shows a left that has lost faith in the idea of asking Americans to pay higher taxes in exchange for more and better public services.

And whatever you think of the Sanders/Khanna proposal, it’s important to understand that this kind of plan doesn’t scale well to small states or to cities and counties since it can be relatively easy for people to leave to avoid the taxes.

So, especially when it comes to local services, you really have to ask questions like “Can we make people feel that it’s worth paying more for this?” and “Can we get more value for the money that we are already spending?” Unlike with the federal government, where  in part because it was based on , local governments actually spend a huge share of their budget on direct provision of labor-intensive public services.

The most expensive of these line items is public school systems.

Education spending presents us with something of a paradox. We know from small-scale studies that marginal increases in school spending . In particular, fairly boring things like  are effective at promoting student learning, especially in low-socioeconomic-status schools.

So it seems to be the case that for a lot of schools there’s low-hanging fruit that could be addressed at least somewhat effectively with an influx of money.

On the other hand, if you look at large-scale cross-sections of American schools, it’s just not the case that higher levels of spending are strongly related to student outcomes.

The Urban Institute’s  shows that the top-performing state for eighth grade reading is Massachusetts. That’s a relatively high-spending blue state, but not the highest-spending state. Number two is Louisiana. On eighth grade math, Massachusetts is number two and Louisiana is number three (Mississippi is number one).

The highest-spending system, New York, gets above-average results (I’ve seen a lot of people express excessive negativity about this), but they’re not dramatically above-average in the manner of either lower-spending Massachusetts or dramatically lower-spending Mississippi and Louisiana.

Which is all just to say that even though there do appear to be useful opportunities to spend more money on schooling —  — it seems like just looking at the average expenditure in high-spending systems is not very useful.

And those of us who think there are things the government should probably spend more money on ought to confront the reality that in many states the government is already spending a lot of money, some of it on things that are not very useful.

Teachers don’t move to higher-paying states

The question of how you design a high-functioning school system is complicated, and it’s clear that money isn’t the only thing that matters. For example, one factor that has gotten a lot of attention recently, and that I believe is a dominant factor in explaining why Mississippi and Louisiana in particular have started doing so well, is curriculum.

A restaurant can buy quality ingredients and hire decent cooks and have everyone work hard, and the food is still going to be bad if the chef’s recipes are no good.

But even when you get high-level agreement on something like curriculum, you can run into implementation problems. When I spoke recently with two people who worked in state government in Louisiana on setting up the current curriculum framework (which has had good results), they told me that a lot of their teachers had been taught in education school that the concept of centralized curriculum was bad. So, even with a strong curriculum in place at the state level, it still took work to get to a broad agreement to actually teach the curriculum.

So there’s obviously a lot happening that isn’t directly related to spending, but I do think it’s worth focusing on the more tedious technical question of how school systems are paying their staff, especially the teachers, who account for the lion’s share of the money and the work.

New York is number one in overall  and . So how come teaching talent isn’t fleeing Mississippi and Louisiana for New York, where average teacher salaries are 70 percent higher?

There are, of course, many reasons someone may not want to move across the country, but we’re also seeing the hidden cost of bad housing policy. Due to the much higher cost of living in New York, the real value of a middle-class salary is quite a bit lower there.

We know that there’s a lot of domestic migration out of the coastal states, and that it’s primarily not rich people fleeing taxes but . But this ends up inflating the cost of providing frontline public services, which leads to higher tax burdens, which itself further inflates the cost of living.

Another issue, though, is that teachers just don’t move state-to-state very much.

A  on Washington/Oregon border counties found that “teachers along the state border were almost three times more likely to make a within-state move of 75 miles or more than to make any cross-state move.”

They attribute the lack of interstate teacher mobility to two things: one is that mid-career teachers tend to lose a lot of pension value, and the other is that teacher licensing and certification is handled at the state level in a way that discourages mobility. Policy toward interstate transfers of teaching certifications differs from state-to-state. But New York in particular is a  — it’s one of only three states that has not  the National Association of State Directors of Teacher Education and Certification interstate agreement.

So while you might think that one point of paying teachers unusually well would be to make your state an unusually attractive place for teachers to move, New York undercuts that with high cost of living and also has regulatory policies that specifically discourage out-of-state teachers from coming in.

Rewarding veterans, not attracting new talent

The issue behind the issue is that the highest-paying states are the ones with strong collective-bargaining frameworks for public sector workers: The National Education Association says  have salaries that are 24 percent higher on average. And when labor unions negotiate compensation packages, they prioritize the interests of their existing members. That’s different from the mindset of an employer who decides to unilaterally increase compensation specifically for the purposes of recruiting new talent. An employer who is eager to attract new talent would, for example, put money into hiring bonuses, but a union is never going to demand that around a bargaining table.

That’s how states end up raising compensation without reducing barriers to entry.

It’s also why compensation in the more generous states is heavily backloaded. So while New York pays 70 percent higher teacher salaries than Louisiana on average, its entry-level salaries are only . That doesn’t come close to compensating for the higher cost of living. If you ask where “teacher” counts as a decent-paying job for someone just starting out, Mississippi and Louisiana look good and New York looks terrible, despite there being much higher average salaries in New York.

I don’t want to overstate the significance of this. Massachusetts, as noted previously, has very good school performance despite a New York-esque compensation scheme.

My guess is that other things like curriculum are moving the needle on outcomes, so I think we should look at it the other way around: What is the case for spending a lot of money on teacher salaries if not to make it easier to hire teachers? Plowing tons of money into backloaded compensation systems while making it hard for people to laterally transfer in is not a good way of achieving any of our education goals.

Of course, if you assume that people are perfectly rational maximizers of income across the life cycle, it’s possible that people considering entry-level teaching jobs care a lot about the fact that a teacher with 23 years of experience will earn dramatically more in New York than in Mississippi.

But in the real world, people are imperfect in thinking that far ahead. And they are extremely imperfect about assessing the long-term value of things like unusually generous pension and health insurance plans. Veteran members who are closer to retirement and have more health care needs place a lot of value on these benefits, so unions can end up bargaining for things that cost the state a lot of money but have very little juice in terms of teacher recruitment.

Pensions in particular also intersect with housing and growth policy in a nasty way.

If your community is experiencing rapid population growth, then you can spread pension costs accrued in the past across a relatively large number of present-day taxpayers. But if your community has low population growth, then the retiree hangover is a much larger burden in per capita terms. The economic impact is even worse if those retirees take their pension incomes to Sunbelt states, leading to New Yorkers’ tax dollars supporting the economy in Florida.

Governing is hard

I’ve been thinking a lot lately about how structural roles in the political system can be at least as important as factional affiliation.

When Zohran Mamdani was in the state legislature, he voted for a law that created an unfunded mandate for New York City to reduce class size in its public schools. The comptroller’s office thinks this  and more than $1 billion per year in subsequent years. Not coincidentally, now-Mayor Mamdani .

It’s easy for even relatively moderate state legislators to vote for policies that push up school costs, and it’s hard in practice for even very progressive mayors to raise taxes.

Matt Mahan is running in California’s crowded gubernatorial election, arguing that  before raising taxes to fund new initiatives.

I think that’s a courageous and correct moderate/reformist platform. But even a politician who has a totally different factional identity and set of priorities should consider this. If you have a new spending idea that you truly believe in on the merits — whether it’s free buses or child care subsidies — then it shouldn’t be all that hard to identify something the state is already spending money on that is not as good or important.

Not just as an exercise in sloganeering but as a way to actually get things done.

Even if you assume there are zero political or substantive problems with raising huge sums of revenue from new special taxes on billionaires, residents of high-tax places will reasonably ask “Why not use the money to cut my taxes?”

The explanation for increasing net revenue — as opposed to just making the base more progressive — has to be that the money already allocated is being well-spent.

Unfortunately, state budgets are quite complicated, so I can’t just write down three bullet points for cutting waste. But if you start looking under the hood of major budget categories like teacher compensation, you start seeing problems pretty quickly. I get why taking this on is nobody’s idea of a good time, but with the public increasingly cranky about taxes I don’t think there are any easy options available.

When I asked the subscribers to my how they felt snow days should be approached, I received a variety of answers, ranging from approval to frustration to constructive criticism.

For some, a snow day was greeted simply as a welcome break. 

“Kids need to be kids,” wrote Jessica Feinstein, an Upper West Side mom of elementary and middle school children. “Many in politics have forgotten this. Playing in the snow with family and friends is more than just a childhood pastime. It’s important for social-emotional health.”

The majority were relieved that they didn’t have to navigate remote learning while working from home. 

“A real snow day should be with no remote instruction,” Greenwich Village mother of three Kaya Heitman said. “Parents are still required to work remotely on a snow day, and assisting multiple children with remote instruction is awful for parents also juggling their own meetings.”

“It is particularly unreasonable to ask children under the age of 6 to participate in synchronized remote learning,” said Harlem mom Maria McCune. “During the January storm, the school expected my 4-year-old to participate in two Zoom meetings. It was necessary for me or my husband to participate, given that she wasn’t capable of navigating on her own. Despite the school’s best effort to make these sessions educational, they were an absolute disaster. I am confident my child learned nothing essential during that time.”

“If I have to take time off my own work because staff and/or kids can’t get safely into school, which is understandable,” added Amanda, “don’t make me try to be a teacher, hovering over my kid, fighting with them to do work in an environment that is not conducive to the effort. This is miserable for all and does not result in meaningful strides forward in their education.”

On the other hand, some parents said remote learning made their lives easier.

“My husband and I both needed to work from home on Monday,” said Amber, mom of a second grader. “It would have really helped if remote school had been in place. It allows us to focus on work while our daughter stays in her normal routine and logs in virtually.”

Marie D. agreed. “If closure becomes necessary, there should be remote classes available, along with learning packets that each child can complete independently.”

Nearly everyone who responded to my query was sympathetic to the needs of those who rely on public schools for child care and meals. They offered a variety of solutions.

SW suggested, “All grades should be given an option to drop in to any school location in-person if child care, a warm location or a meal is needed. Before the start of each school year, schools need to take a poll of staff willing to come in on snow days at bonus pay. If there is not enough staff that volunteer to be available, then that school is physically closed on snow days. If there is enough staff to open the location on a snow day, then that school gets listed as a Snow Day Location where students can go regardless if that is their regular school location. DOE should publish a list of Snow Day Locations on their website by the end of November so people, staff and meals can be planned for such an emergency.”

Regardless of how they are handled, all agreed that snow days must be built into the school calendar so as not to lose class time NYC students cannot afford to go without.

“My 10-year-old self would hate to hear me say this,” Brooklyn’s Melinda LaRose admitted, “but I think the February vacation should be eliminated. It’s too close to the winter break. If Presidents’ Day was kept as a long weekend, that would give four snow days to play with and/or end school a little earlier in June.”

McCune concurred: “I would be willing to lose the midwinter break so the schools can have more flexibility for a return to traditional snow days in the future. Navigating precarious sidewalks and streets is not worth it if it ultimately puts people in danger or in unsafe situations. Perhaps giving the city and property owners an additional 24 hours after a snowstorm for cleanup (without school) can help. There is the consideration of children who need a hot meal and can only access these through school resources, but I think this can be resolved in a way that does not involve the nonsense of navigating crosswalks that are not appropriately cleared, or walking on the street instead of a sidewalk because the sidewalk is not appropriately shoveled.”

As with anything, it is impossible to please all of the people all of the time. School closures and free play will always be preferable for some, while others would rather their children be engaged in remote learning, and still others will need in-person child care no matter how brutal the commuting conditions. 

Just as I advocate for school choice in selecting the optimal learning environment for every family, snow days should also be a matter of personal preference, with schools offering a variety of options, depending on a given family’s needs, and no penalties for whichever choices they end up making.

But rhetoric alone does not produce impact. Progressive intent is not the same as progressive design or progressive results.

After years inside the nation’s largest school system, helping build improvement strategies and working with families who have rarely experienced the benefits of reform, I believe the mayor’s education plan is strong on aspiration but thin in two areas that determine whether equity becomes reality: a clear framework for communities to shape policy and the system’s capacity to move reforms into practice.

Mamdani is right to speak urgently about expanding opportunity and addressing racial disparities in achievement and discipline. But without a design process rooted in Black and brown students’ experiences, and without the operational strength to turn vision into daily action, New York risks repeating a familiar cycle. The city has produced many equity plans – some I’ve helped craft – that were bold on paper but failed to change the lived realities of the children they targeted.

For decades, New York City has produced reforms for communities rather than with them. Mamdani wants to change that. He describes a future where families, students and educators help shape the policies that govern their lives. But valuing co-creation and building the infrastructure for it are two different tasks. That gap is where his plan is most hazy.

His platform does not yet outline a concrete process for shared design. What does engagement beyond listening sessions look like in a system this large? How will students and families, especially those most affected by inequities, help shape solutions, not just identify problems? These questions remain unanswered.

This absence of structure is not hypothetical. In 2019, the city attempted a more collaborative model through the Imagine NYC Schools initiative, a call for students, families and educators to redesign existing schools and imagine new ones. I was deeply involved in its creation and implementation. It demonstrated that meaningful community design is possible.

But Covid-19 and institutional challenges stalled progress, and the city lacked the long-term supports needed to sustain it across crises and leadership transitions. The lesson was clear: Co-design succeeds only with sustained investment, careful scaffolding and continuity that outlasts political cycles.

Mamdani’s plan does not yet include those commitments. It references student voice but does not require schools to establish student design teams with real authority. It encourages family engagement but does not build mechanisms that allow families, particularly Black and brown families historically marginalized, to shape how equity efforts unfold at the school level. Nor does it commit to updating initiatives based on continuous community feedback.

When communities are excluded from design, schools often reproduce the very conditions they aim to change. Interventions miss cultural complexities. Strategies misread disengagement. Metrics track what is convenient instead of what matters. Designing with the community, not for it, creates structured partnership with those who understand inequity from lived experience. Mamdani has named this value, but he has not yet built the durable process to realize it.

The Implementation Gap Leaders Overlook

Even if Mamdani’s plan were perfectly designed, another challenge remains: What happens when bold vision meets operational reality?

Many reforms fail not because they are misguided but because they lack viable implementation. School systems are complex ecosystems; change in one area creates ripple effects everywhere else. Black and brown students — already navigating inconsistent instruction, resource instability and high staff turnover – are the first to feel the consequences when reforms move faster than the system can absorb them.

Mamdani speaks extensively about vision. He rarely addresses capacity.

Who will train more than 1,600 principals and tens of thousands of teachers to implement these shifts? Who will modernize data systems so inequities are tracked accurately? Who will prevent new initiatives from piling onto unfinished ones, creating reform fatigue that destabilizes schools already under pressure?

An equity agenda without an implementation strategy remains aspirational. The cost of weak execution is not symbolic. It appears in teacher turnover (an issue Mamdani has pledged to address), inconsistent instructional quality and widening trust gaps between schools and families. These conditions disproportionately harm Black and Brown students regardless of ideology.

New York needs more than bold leadership. It needs leadership grounded in proximity to the students and families who live with policy consequences. Trust is earned when leaders treat communities as partners and designers rather than recipients of reform.

Mamdani can move in that direction by requiring major reforms to undergo equity audits led by students, families and educators from the communities most affected. He can also invest in developing more Black and Brown school leaders, who are essential to translating policy into the daily rhythms of classrooms.

None of this work is glamorous. It will not generate headline-ready accomplishments in the first hundred days. But it is the only path to lasting change.

The election of a progressive mayor has raised expectations. But New Yorkers should not assume that the right values automatically produce the right outcomes.

If Mamdani wants his legacy to be more than moral clarity, he must pair vision with structure. That might include:

• Establishing permanent, school-based community design councils with real decision-making authority, not just advisory status.
• Piloting major reforms with a small group of schools before scaling citywide, allowing communities to shape implementation in real time.
• Expanding funding for neighborhood-based partnerships with trusted community organizations to anchor reforms beyond political cycles and sustain accountability.

His selection of New York City Public Schools veteran Kamar Samuels as chancellor is a promising step. Samuels brings credibility and lived experience that could help bridge the gap between City Hall and school communities. But even strong leadership must be supported by systems that distribute power, build capacity and institutionalize feedback.

Black and brown students have waited long enough for promises to become practice. In this climate, the city cannot afford to get this wrong again.

We worked hard to address the knowledge gap between what students and their families knew and the viable career pathways that were available to them. In many schools, however, these gaps are not addressed, a challenge that is particularly acute for students considering non-college pathways. While opportunities exist, the systems designed to help students find and access them often fall short. 

That’s why as president of New Visions for Public Schools, a nonprofit organization that has supported NYC schools for over 35 years, I’ve led an effort to create a to ensure that students can access opportunities by design, rather than by chance. 

Today, as students increasingly seek postsecondary pathways beyond the two- and four-year degrees that educators are most familiar with, we must rethink how we support young people to navigate their choices with clarity and confidence. College remains a powerful and important route. For most students, it is the right choice, and we should continue to prepare them well for it. But a substantial share of students are also considering vocational training, industry certifications and apprenticeships, either as a path directly into a good job or as a first step on their educational and career journey.

The challenge is that reliable, comprehensive, publicly accessible information about these opportunities is extraordinarily hard to find. In many cases, if a young person plans to pursue career training, they and their counselors are left to navigate a maze of websites that present information in ways that are incomplete, confusing or inconsistent.

The was created to make the full range of free or low-cost postsecondary career training opportunities in New York City visible, comparable and accessible to everyone. Launched in 2024 with support from The Heckscher Foundation for Children, the Career Directory is a free, open-access digital platform that compiles over 300 programs across the city: from medical assisting to carpentry, commercial driving to cosmetology, information technology to early childhood education.

What makes it transformative is not just the number of programs it includes, but the clarity it provides. Each listing is verified and standardized, with key details such as eligibility, cost and aid, program duration, credential earned and location.

To build it, our team began with a review of existing tools in the field. We then held dozens of conversations with counselors, workforce providers and community partners to understand the information students need to make decisions about which programs are the best fit for their interests, priorities, and long-term goals. 

We built relationships with providers so we could call them directly, confirm details and translate their information into a format students and counselors can use to evaluate their options. Maintaining accuracy isn’t a one-time task, but an ongoing commitment. 

We iterated on the design and conducted user research to help us understand what kind of support students and counselors need to explore career training options with the same clarity and rigor as they approach the college selection process. We’ve now trained hundreds of educators and expanded our work beyond the tool itself, developing lesson plans, one-on-one advising worksheets, quick-start videos and professional learning for counselors so the Career Directory is a platform for learning and guidance.

The response from educators has been remarkable. One counselor noted, “For students that are not interested in going to college or are unsure about college as their pathway, it gives them lots of information at their fingertips to find and explore. There is no way I could give them all these options to search.”

The directory has gained significant traction since we launched it. We’ve now reached over 38,000 users, and thanks to a new grant from the CD&R Foundation, we have committed funding for maintenance through summer 2027. This support means that tens of thousands of young people will continue to have access to clear, actionable and up-to-date information about the landscape of opportunities available to them after high school. 

As proud as I am of the project, I also know it is only one piece of what the field needs. Too often, students stumble onto job-training programs or career pathways by accident — through a chance conversation, a lucky internship or a personal connection that limits access to those who already know about them. If we want every young person to navigate their postsecondary path with intention, we need to build systems that don’t leave their futures up to chance. 

There is more work to do, and doing that work requires partnership across schools, government agencies, community-based organizations, employers, funders, and the broader public. No single institution can solve this alone. 

New Visions for Public Schools and 91ɬ�� both receive financial support from The Heckscher Foundation for Children.