The Education Gadfly Show

Kimberly Richey, Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights at the U.S. Department of Education, joins Mike Petrilli and David Griffith to talk about the latest federal guidance on school discipline and Title VI. What does the Department’s new approach to racial disparities in discipline mean for schools? Can the new guidance stick, or will the rules continue to change every time a new administration takes control of the White House?

Then, on the Research Minute, Amber Northern reviews a new NWEA study examining whether schools are getting Algebra I placement right, and why students should be allowed to take algebra as soon as they are ready.

Recommended content:

• Dear Colleague Letter: Guidance on Pupil Discipline and Compliance with Title VI —U.S. Department of Education
• Toward a durable compromise on discipline disparities? —Michael J. Petrilli, SCHOOLED
• Doing educational equity right: School discipline —Michael J. Petrilli, Thomas B. Fordham Institute
• Groundhog Day for school discipline —David Griffith, Thomas B. Fordham Institute
• Getting Algebra Placement Right: Expanding Opportunity and Strengthening Preparation —Megan Kuhfeld, Daniel Long, and Scott J. Peters, NWEA (August 2026)

Feedback Welcome: Have ideas for improving our show? We would love to hear them. Send them to [email protected]

Ian Rowe, founder of Vertex Partnership Academies, joins Mike Petrilli and David Griffith to discuss Nikole Hannah-Jones’s recent reflections on her decision to send her daughter to a predominantly Black, low-income public school. They discuss school choice, parental involvement and family stability, and that family structure deserves more attention in conversations about student achievement. Should family structure become a more common measure in education data?

Then, on the Research Minute, Amber Northern shares a new study of team-based teaching in Arizona. The researchers find no overall improvement in student achievement, but positive results in middle school math and much lower teacher turnover. 

Recommended content:

• In Fighting for Every Black Child, Did I Betray My Own? —Nikole Hannah-Jones, The New York Times Magazine
• Choosing a School for My Daughter in a Segregated City —Nikole Hannah-Jones, The New York Times Magazine
• Why I Send My Kid to Low-Income Urban Public Schools —Matthew Yglesias, Slow Boring
• Family Structure, a Key Factor Hidden in Plain Sight: The Case for Federal Reporting in Education —Ian V. Rowe, Brad Wilcox, and Grant Bailey, American Enterprise
• Evidence on Team-Based Teaching Models in Arizona —Mary Laski, Calen Clifton, and Dan Goldhaber, CALDER (August 2026)

Feedback Welcome: Have ideas for improving our show? We would love to hear them. Send them to [email protected]

Mike Petrilli is back on the mic solo this week to weigh the case for and against banning AI in schools. He considers growing concerns about cheating, an erosion of grading standards, and the broader effects of technology on student learning, as well as arguments that well-designed AI tools could still have a useful place in the classroom. Are blanket bans too extreme, or is it time for schools to press pause?

Then, on the Research Minute, Brian Fitzpatrick examines a new systematic review of state and locally funded pre-K programs and what it reveals about the strength of the evidence behind their short- and long-term effects.

Recommended content:

• Let’s debate the AI bans —Michael J. Petrilli, SCHOOLED
• High Tech, Low Standards: High School in the Age of Distraction —Brian R. Fitzpatrick, Thomas B. Fordham Institute
• Schools Are Urged to Embrace AI—and Ban Phones. Can We Resolve the Tension? —Rick Hess, Education Week
• Hot Takes on NYC AI Ban —Ben Wallerstein, Whiteboard Advisors
• A Systematic Review of Research Designs Used to Evaluate State and Locally Funded Pre-K Programs —Anamarie A. Whitaker, Cara L. Kelly, Tyler W. Watts, Mark Lipsey, Juan Camilo Cristancho, Jade M. Jenkins, Caroline M. Botvin, Drew H. Bailey, Greg J. Duncan, Tania Maria Cruz Cordero, Melissa Stoffers, and Mindy Rosengarten, EdWorkingPapers (August 2026)

Feedback Welcome: Have ideas for improving our show? We would love to hear them. Send them to [email protected]

Brian Fitzpatrick, research manager at the Thomas B. Fordham Institute, joins Mike Petrilli and David Griffith to discuss his new report, High Tech, Low Standards: High School in the Age of Distraction. They examine how cell phones, school-issued devices, grade inflation, and AI are changing the high school experience, why banning phones alone may not be enough to solve the distraction problem, and what schools can do to refocus students on learning.

Then, on the Research Minute, Amber Northern reviews a new study on test-optional admissions at elite colleges. The findings suggest these policies may unintentionally disadvantage high-achieving students from disadvantaged backgrounds.

Recommended content:

• High Tech, Low Standards: High School in the Age of Distraction —Brian R. Fitzpatrick, Thomas B. Fordham Institute
• Can schools escape the digital delusion? | Episode 1026 of The Education Gadfly Show
• Why education technologies disappoint —Adam Tyner, Thomas B. Fordham Institute
• How Test-Optional Policies in College Admissions Disproportionately Harm High-Achieving Applicants from Disadvantaged Backgrounds —Bruce Sacerdote, Douglas O. Staiger, and Michele Tine, American Economic Association (September 2026)

Feedback Welcome: Have ideas for improving our show? We would love to hear them. Send them to [email protected]

Programming note: The Education Gadfly Show is taking a short end-of-summer break next week. We’ll be back with a new episode after Labor Day on Wednesday, September 9.

Checker Finn, president emeritus of the Thomas B. Fordham Institute, joins Mike Petrilli and David Griffith to talk about the future of Head Start and why he thinks the troubled federal preschool program needs rebuilding, not destroying. They discuss the Trump administration’s approach to Head Start, the program’s longstanding weaknesses, and what meaningful reform could look like.

Then, on the Research Minute, Amber Northern reviews a new two-year experiment with Khan Academy’s AI tutor, Khanmigo. The study finds modest gains in math achievement, but students rarely engaged deeply with the AI tutor, raising questions about whether the improvement came from the AI itself or simply from structured practice on Khan Academy.

Recommended content:

• The Trump team gives Head Start the DOGE treatment —Chester E. Finn, Jr., Thomas B. Fordham Institute
• Reroute the Preschool Juggernaut —Chester E. Finn, Jr., Hoover Press (2009)
• Head Start Program Performance Standards —U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families
• Transformative for the motivated and mere meh for the unmotivated: How AI will and won’t affect learners —Sean Geraghty and Mike Goldstein, Thomas B. Fordham Institute
• One Click Away: AI Tutoring with Khanmigo in a Two-Year School Experiment —Philip Oreopoulos and Nina Low, EdWorkingPapers (2026)

Feedback Welcome: Have ideas for improving our show? We would love to hear them. Send them to [email protected]

Mike Petrilli is solo once again to revisit the college-for-all debate and consider whether the backlash has become an overcorrection. He considers the risks of steering academically underprepared students toward four-year degrees, the growing enthusiasm for career pathways, and whether today’s push away from college could discourage some students who might actually succeed there.

Then, on the Research Minute, Amber Northern reviews a new study examining more than two decades of state pre-K expansion and what it reveals about balancing access, spending, and program design.

Recommended content:

• Has the pendulum swung too far away from college for all? —Michael J. Petrilli, SCHOOLED
• Notice of Intent to Submit Federal Ed-Flex Waiver Requests— State of Alabama Department of Education
• Hey, Claude, should I go to college? —Michael J. Petrilli, Thomas B. Fordham Institute
• Returns to Four-Year Higher Education —Doug Webber and Celeste K. Carruthers, Live Handbook of Education Policy Research
• Who should go to college? More students may benefit than we think —Matt Barnum, Chalkbeat
• Honest talk about who should go to college —Michael J. Petrilli, Thomas B. Fordham Institute
• 23 Years of State Pre-K Expansion: How States Balance Investment, Access, and Quality in the Modern Era —Casey Moran, Mindy L. Rosengarten, Eunho Cha, Jade M. Jenkins, Kenneth A. Dodge, Allison Friedman-Kraus, W. Steven Barnett, and Tyler W. Watts, EdWorkingPapers (2026)

Feedback Welcome: Have ideas for improving our show? We would love to hear them. Send them to [email protected]

Andrew Camp and Collin Hitt join Mike Petrilli and David Griffith to discuss Moving Target: The Success and Failure of Missouri’s Charter School Funding Surge, a new Fordham report by David, Andrew, and Collin. They examine Missouri’s effort to close the charter funding gap, how schools used the additional money, and why true funding parity remained out of reach. They also discuss the effects on staffing, teacher retention, and student achievement.

Then, on the Research Minute, Amber Northern reviews new research from Ohio on whether the threat of third-grade retention can improve reading achievement by prompting schools to provide struggling students with additional literacy support.

Recommended content:

• Moving Target: The Success and Failure of Missouri’s Charter School Funding Surge —Andrew M. Camp, Collin Hitt, and David Griffith, for the Thomas B. Fordham Institute
• The Impact of Increasing Funding for High-Performing Ohio Charter Schools: The Quality Community School Support Fund, 2019–23 —Stéphane Lavertu, Thomas B. Fordham Institute
• Charter School Funding: Inequity’s Next Frontier —Sheree Speakman, Chester E. Finn, Jr., and Bryan C. Hassel, for the Thomas B. Fordham Institute
• Why Ohio’s third-grade retention law worked (until lawmakers killed it) —Vladimir Kogan, Thomas B. Fordham Institute
• The Effect of Retention Threat on Student Learning Gains: Evidence from Ohio —Sarah Souders and Robert Bifulco, EdWorkingPapers (July 2026)

Feedback Welcome: Have ideas for improving our show? We would love to hear them. Send them to [email protected]

Congressman Josh Harder joins Mike Petrilli and David Griffith to discuss his push to revive the National Reading Panel and advance the READ Act. They consider whether a new panel could update the evidence base on reading instruction, how federal funding might encourage stronger implementation of science-of-reading reforms, and whether literacy could help rebuild a bipartisan federal role in education policy without repeating the mistakes of past reforms.

Then, on the Research Minute, Amber Northern reviews a new study on how adding AP courses may affect school enrollment, socioeconomic integration, and academic tracking.

Recommended content:

• Is the Senate’s READ Act a Reading First redux?— Michael J. Petrilli, SCHOOLED
• READ Act section-by-section summary—Senate HELP Committee
• From the Teacher’s Desk: A Science of Reading Progress Report—David Griffith and Brian Fitzpatrick, for the Thomas B. Fordham Institute
• Can Uncle Sam help kids read? | Episode 1023 of The Education Gadfly Show
• Tracking to Retain Higher-Income Students: Evidence from the Addition of Advanced Courses—Farah Mallah, EdWorkingPapers (July 2026)

Feedback Welcome: Have ideas for improving our show? We would love to hear them. Send them to [email protected]

Mike Miles, superintendent of Houston Independent School District, joins Mike Petrilli and David Griffith to talk about his new book, By Design: How to Transform School Systems, and how districts can use systemic thinking and accountability with support to improve schools.

Then, on the Research Minute, Brian Fitzpatrick reviews new research on how classroom context can affect teacher evaluations, and how schools can use the logic of value-added models to develop better evaluations.

Recommended content:

• By Design: How to Transform School Systems —Mike Miles
• State takeovers are back —Michael J. Petrilli, SCHOOLED
• Texas’s controversial takeover of Houston’s schools—Daniel Buck, for the Thomas B. Fordham Institute
• Classroom Composition Affects Teacher Performance Ratings —William Delgado and Lauren Sartain, EdWorkingPapers (April 2026)

Feedback Welcome: Have ideas for improving our show? We would love to hear them. Send them to [email protected]

Tyrone Holmes, chief impact officer at Curriculum Associates, joins Mike Petrilli and David Griffith to discuss the growing parent backlash against education technology and why i-Ready has become one of its most visible targets. They unpack the differences among i-Ready’s assessments, teacher-led resources, and personalized online instruction; consider concerns about screen time and overuse; and discuss why teachers and schools need to communicate more clearly with families about how these tools are being used.

Then, on the Research Minute, Brian Fitzpatrick reviews a new study tracking the effects of Massachusetts charter schools over two decades and examines why their benefits rose, receded, and then rebounded.

Recommended content:

• There’s more to the i-Ready story —Kelly Sia for the Thomas B. Fordham Institute
• There’s actually more to the i-Ready story: A rebuttal —Daniel Carr for the Thomas B. Fordham Institute
• Are Chromebook carts the answer? —Michael J. Petrilli, SCHOOLED
• Can schools escape the digital delusion? | Episode 1026 of The Education Gadfly Show
• How “No Excuses” charter schools went off the rails, with Steven Wilson | Episode 961 of The Education Gadfly Show
• Two Decades of Massachusetts Charter School Effects —Geoffrey Kocks, Blueprint Labs (2026)

Feedback Welcome: Have ideas for improving our show? We would love to hear them. Send them to [email protected]