Last February, I went out on a limb and made ten predictions about what we’d see this year in terms of policy and practice. At the time, I said: “Unlike cable news pundits, who rarely hold themselves accountable for their (often faulty) predictions, we will grade ourselves and report back at the end of the year. Some of these predictions are optimistic, some less so.” In the spirit of accountability, here’s how I did.
1. Districts serious about addressing learning loss and innovation will have to transform their staffing practices.
Spot on. We’re seeing a lot of momentum on this front. Staffing issues are huge, and districts are struggling with them, but many are looking for solutions. Our research in 2024 demonstrated early but promising results from creative staffing models like team teaching.
2. Districts that fail to innovate will require state intervention.
Not yet. I think we’ll need another year to see the actual financial and academic impacts that will—hopefully—prompt state action. State leaders would be wise to prepare now for what to do when the effects of declining enrollment, failure to reduce costs and close schools, and continued academic stagnation come to a head. As our 2024 State of the American Student report made clear, failure to address these issues will mean we’ve abandoned an entire generation of students. History will not look kindly on states that allow this to happen.
3. Expect more lawsuits and advocacy on behalf of kids not recovering from lost learning during pandemic recovery efforts.
Unfortunately, not as much as I had hoped. There was a successful lawsuit in California, and I thought more states would encounter that same pressure. But it hasn’t happened (yet, anyway).
Part of the problem is that most parents don’t know how poorly their children are faring. For example, our State Secrets report in August 2024 found very few states make it easy for parents or the public to track student progress since the pandemic. Plus, many parents don’t totally understand their rights. For example, those whose kids have a special ed designation often don’t know their child is entitled to compensatory services—that is, more time to make up for lost learning time and services. Without that information, parents aren’t in a position to pressure decision-makers to act more proactively.
4. Leading districts will show how to use generative artificial intelligence to radically personalize learning, especially for students on the margin.
There is exciting work on this front. Over the past five years, our Canopy project has documented hundreds of innovations in K-12 education, uncovering how schools address systemic challenges and envision the future of learning. Some Canopy schools successfully tackle challenges such as learning loss, chronic absenteeism, youth mental health, and college and career readiness—and many see AI as an emerging opportunity. For example, NuVu High School in Cambridge, MA, has no traditional classes; instead, students engage in immersive, hands-on, project-based design studios (and many projects incorporate AI).
5. Solving for attendance and absenteeism will be paramount. Students can’t learn if they don’t show up.
Yes, this was a major focus among school district leaders we spoke to this year. Absentee rates are decreasing, and many schools and districts are working hard to find solutions. Baltimore City Public Schools, for example, is diving deep into their data to try to understand what’s working in school attendance efforts. Rhode Island’s governor led a statewide push to get kids back to school, a smart political move. We’re also seeing more researchers take this on, so that’s promising as well. Unfortunately, this issue isn’t going away anytime soon.
6. School boards will have to withstand political upheaval everywhere, from both the left and the right.
Yes, this continues to be the case. Our American School District Panel, stewarded with RAND, continues to report that superintendents struggle with how politics impacts their work. The pandemic-era craziness about book bans and social studies may have receded a bit, but there’s always something new. Uncertainty around AI, especially concerns about privacy and transparency, could be a hot topic at board meetings in 2025. Some recent court cases (including a prominent case in Hingham, MA, that CRPE principal Bree Dusseault weighed in on) speak to how important it will be for boards to start setting policy in these areas.
7. States will take public charter schools more seriously.
Not yet, partly because of the rise of voucher-like ESAs in some states, partly because money for new schools is tight. I do think the charter space is well-positioned to offer choices that people are obviously hungry for. Some studies have highlighted progress on this front, including how charters contributed to the Denver reforms of the past decade and how the rise of charters in Camden, NJ, helped to spur more in-district innovation.
States and the federal government must provide more seed funding for innovative, accessible, and accountable charter schools, and the money must target comprehensive and coherent programs that work at scale, hopefully in partnership with school districts—these could really turn the tide. The key is to do the research and let the evidence, not ideology, drive any future growth.
8. Good instruction will come back into vogue as central to achieving equity.
I’m very optimistic about this. I am hearing more conversations about solid, evidence-based instruction and high expectations—all designed to ensure that kids have the necessary skills and competencies. Efforts by advocates such as Emily Hanford and Natalie Wexler to push the science of reading and content-rich curriculum have made a positive impact. Nonprofits like EdReports have made it much easier for districts to find strong English and Math materials. Places like Oakland and Baltimore City have made quality curricula central to their reforms. Things are moving in the right direction. I suspect more districts will follow.
9. College access will be cool again.
Let me clarify what I meant by that because I was a little cheeky in my headline. I did not mean to say that college should be the endpoint for all kids. I strongly applaud efforts in the past few years to promote quality career and technical education, zeroing in on career relevance and career pathways. But there’s a renewed recognition that a liberal arts education provides something critical in terms of intellectual growth and readiness for a career. Many career pathway conversations are edging toward college and career—not either/or, but both/and.
What’s most important is to envision K-12 through postsecondary education as a permeable system with no dead-ends and continual re-entry points. That will be more and more critical with jobs changing so quickly. We’re not there yet, but I’m hearing more and more conversations about permeable, interrelated systems rather than one or the other.
10. Barring collective action, public education (and pandemic learning losses) will fade from view as a key voter concern, even during a presidential election year.
Unfortunately, I firmly stand by this one. We saw it play out this election. Presidential candidates didn’t talk about K-12 education at all. We’re not seeing much news coverage about it at the national level. Governors aren’t talking about it. The attention-getter these days seems to be Trump’s pledge to abolish the federal Department of Education, which hardly seems serious and isn’t all that relevant, given that almost all decisions and funding happen at the state and local levels. But it’s an easy-to-understand soundbite.
All in all, I didn’t do too badly. Besides, what truly matters is not the accuracy of these predictions but the innovative ideas and rigorous evidence-building around them that can help shape education policy and implementation in 2025. You can certainly expect to see much more of that from CRPE in the coming year!
Updated January 7, 2025: This piece initially included a reference to Anastasis Academy, a K–8 microschool in Centennial, CO. Since publishing, we’ve learned that the school has closed. This speaks volumes to our previous research on the precarious landscape that microschools and other unique learning environments must contend with to remain operational.
