At the end of the day, our job is teaching - Mississippi schools excel

[Anonymous]

The 3rd grade retention rule is not the main driver of Mississippi’s success. We can replicate many of the pieces of their success without introducing that piece, which I believe isn’t helpful. They also mandated an evidence-based curricula, literacy coaches for teachers, specific training/certification of teachers of 3rd grade and lower. Debate retention all you want (I believe it’s unnecessary because you can have almost every child on grade level in reading and math with enough intensive, evidence based instruction) but try to focus on those elements that are most impactful.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Mississippi Miracle myth has been thoroughly debunked

https://statmodeling.stat.columbia.edu/2025/12/01/how-much-of-mississippis-education-miracle-is-an-artifact-of-selection-bias/

https://excelined.org/2023/08/11/four-reasons-why-mississippis-reading-gains-are-neither-myth-nor-miracle/

These are not "debunking" the Mississippi miracle. These articles seem to be explaining the policy and practice changes that led to the changes in results, these were entirely predictable results and not actual miracles.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Mississippi also holds kids back in 3rd grade if they are not on grade level, which I think we need to do in FCPS. Kids who are not on grade level should be retained and the earlier they do it the more likely kids will catch up. We are promoting kids for emotional health who then fall further behind, which cannot be good for their emotional health or academic confidence.

holding a kid back and create a whole host of other issues: social, emotional, etc.

Sure, and when we pat them on the head and pass them along with their peers year after year, eventually they get known as the "slow" kid in the class. Eyes roll when they can't comprehend and everyone has to wait while the teacher explains something they should have learned already. Or the teacher rolls eyes and moves on without trying to help the student and the kid doesn't learn as much. The child becomes one that no one wants to do group projects with because they are so far below everyone else.

The kid can take a temporary hit socially and emotionally and have the support needed to get up to speed, or they can be unjustly characterized as "slow" and a burden, never reaching their potential, for the rest of their schooling career.

Then when they are 18+ and have to figure it out with remedial college classes, YouTube instruction or however (if ever) they fix the problem on their own, they will be another person who thinks public school sucks and teachers don't care.

Winning, I guess.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"Even as schools elsewhere have focused on issues like school funding, social justice and mental health in recent years, Mississippi schools like Hazlehurst have made academics their North Star.

“At the end of the day, our job is teaching. Their job is learning,” said Ms. Langston, who added that no matter what is going on in a child’s life, the classroom is the one thing she can control. “If we don’t meet that need, we have failed them.”

This is absolutely journalism malpractice. Nobody is disagreeing that academics is the North Star, but the first paragraph mde is sound like other states are "focusing" on something else.

This is how America get divided, journalist's innate tendency to create drama and conflicts. I am not blaming everything wrong in US to journalists, but let's say my view of the profession changed from the venerated fourth estate to the likes of a group of gossipers never left high school.

Look no further than how FCPS has been spending its money. Look at what the School Board spends its time on during their meetings. Look at the lawsuits. Look at the size of Nardos King's organization. Look at One Fairfax.

What have they done to focus on disadvantaged students other than plan to shift more affluent students into the struggling schools?


Whatever you are "looking" at, did FCPS lose focus on academics? I don't think so. Maybe focused more on academics of disadvantaged communities, and that's how you raise the performance of a school district. Affluent families has resources for tutors and enrichments, and disadvantaged families only have the school.

Do you know what really helps disadvantaged students? Good, direct instruction. Start where they are and push and pull them as far as possible. Throwing them into advanced classes unprepared is not the answer. Exposing them to higher concepts is good--but you cannot hopscotch over the basics.
signed:
Been there and done that.

"Do you know what really helps disadvantaged students? Good, direct instruction. " FCPS is not doing this? "Throwing them into advanced class unprepared" is also "Good, direct instruction". "Throwing them into advanced class unprepared" is also "academics is the North Star". It is about different ways to help kids.

Many people complain about DEI by providing false choices. Giving disadvantaged but proven smart kids some challenge is also focusing on academics. You guys have the zero sum mentality, somehow giving someone something extra means taking it away from yours. Focus on your children first.

FCPS resource allocation is a zero sum game.
Every million dollars you spend on litigating trans kids in locker rooms is a million less to spend on classroom instruction.
Every million spent on changing the names of schools is a million less spent on classroom instruction.

Get rid of DEI. All of it. Then make the argument for why your DEI program is worth taking awasy money from classroom instruction.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The main thing Mississippi did to improve their reading was to dump methods that do not work (Lucy Calkins crap and other junk). They were the first state to mandate Science of Reading.

VA's recent bi-partisan legislation mandating the same in VA public schools directly came from seeing the Mississippi Miracle improve reading scores statewide, even in low performing schools, on NAEP and similar measures.

Why do we let the graduates of the least competitive graduate fields of study in america determine how our children are taught.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"Even as schools elsewhere have focused on issues like school funding, social justice and mental health in recent years, Mississippi schools like Hazlehurst have made academics their North Star.

“At the end of the day, our job is teaching. Their job is learning,” said Ms. Langston, who added that no matter what is going on in a child’s life, the classroom is the one thing she can control. “If we don’t meet that need, we have failed them.”

This is absolutely journalism malpractice. Nobody is disagreeing that academics is the North Star, but the first paragraph mde is sound like other states are "focusing" on something else.

This is how America get divided, journalist's innate tendency to create drama and conflicts. I am not blaming everything wrong in US to journalists, but let's say my view of the profession changed from the venerated fourth estate to the likes of a group of gossipers never left high school.

Look no further than how FCPS has been spending its money. Look at what the School Board spends its time on during their meetings. Look at the lawsuits. Look at the size of Nardos King's organization. Look at One Fairfax.

I wish people don't litigate trans kid or TJ admission, on either side. But whatever FCPS do, having DEI or not, someone will sue. This is how America functions.


What have they done to focus on disadvantaged students other than plan to shift more affluent students into the struggling schools?


Whatever you are "looking" at, did FCPS lose focus on academics? I don't think so. Maybe focused more on academics of disadvantaged communities, and that's how you raise the performance of a school district. Affluent families has resources for tutors and enrichments, and disadvantaged families only have the school.

Do you know what really helps disadvantaged students? Good, direct instruction. Start where they are and push and pull them as far as possible. Throwing them into advanced classes unprepared is not the answer. Exposing them to higher concepts is good--but you cannot hopscotch over the basics.
signed:
Been there and done that.

"Do you know what really helps disadvantaged students? Good, direct instruction. " FCPS is not doing this? "Throwing them into advanced class unprepared" is also "Good, direct instruction". "Throwing them into advanced class unprepared" is also "academics is the North Star". It is about different ways to help kids.

Many people complain about DEI by providing false choices. Giving disadvantaged but proven smart kids some challenge is also focusing on academics. You guys have the zero sum mentality, somehow giving someone something extra means taking it away from yours. Focus on your children first.

FCPS resource allocation is a zero sum game.
Every million dollars you spend on litigating trans kids in locker rooms is a million less to spend on classroom instruction.
Every million spent on changing the names of schools is a million less spent on classroom instruction.

Get rid of DEI. All of it. Then make the argument for why your DEI program is worth taking awasy money from classroom instruction.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Gift Article here: https://www.nytimes.com/2026/01/11/us/mississippi-schools-transformation.html?unlocked_article_code=1.EFA.fmpE.-DdheKRUoFxa&smid=url-share

Even as schools elsewhere have focused on issues like school funding, social justice and mental health in recent years, Mississippi schools like Hazlehurst have made academics their North Star.

“At the end of the day, our job is teaching. Their job is learning,” said Ms. Langston, who added that no matter what is going on in a child’s life, the classroom is the one thing she can control. “If we don’t meet that need, we have failed them.”

Do you think FCPS should focus more on learning and less on equity and mental health?

I haven't read the article but is that school district much more uniform in terms of SES and race?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Mississippi also holds kids back in 3rd grade if they are not on grade level, which I think we need to do in FCPS. Kids who are not on grade level should be retained and the earlier they do it the more likely kids will catch up. We are promoting kids for emotional health who then fall further behind, which cannot be good for their emotional health or academic confidence.

holding a kid back and create a whole host of other issues: social, emotional, etc.

Sure, and when we pat them on the head and pass them along with their peers year after year, eventually they get known as the "slow" kid in the class. Eyes roll when they can't comprehend and everyone has to wait while the teacher explains something they should have learned already. Or the teacher rolls eyes and moves on without trying to help the student and the kid doesn't learn as much. The child becomes one that no one wants to do group projects with because they are so far below everyone else.

The kid can take a temporary hit socially and emotionally and have the support needed to get up to speed, or they can be unjustly characterized as "slow" and a burden, never reaching their potential, for the rest of their schooling career.

Then when they are 18+ and have to figure it out with remedial college classes, YouTube instruction or however (if ever) they fix the problem on their own, they will be another person who thinks public school sucks and teachers don't care.

Winning, I guess.

Back in the day, when I was a child. we did not have the federal laws governing special education. Yes, there were classes for the kids who were the "R" word, as it was called then, but LD? No. Maybe, some reading specialists, but not a lot of that.I do not recall anyone going to "specialists" for additional help. In some places, there was wholesale "holding back." I had a cousin who was held back in second grade--she still cannot spell. I suspect she had a learning disability, but she is quite bright.

So, yes, intensive help makes a difference. I do recall a friend (military family) who convinced a new middle school to let her son repeat seventh grade when they moved to a new school. She said they had tried this before but the school system would not let them do this. It was a good move--but, of course, did not have the social ramifications that might have been problematic in a school where everyone knew he was held back.

I was a teacher who taught lots of struggling kids from poor homes. I taught first grade. Some kids blossom at different times in first grade. I taught a couple of kids who were repeaters and they still struggled. I'm sure that they would have qualified for LD, had it been available to them.
Later, I taught in a DOD school and had a child who repeated first grade. He thrived. He was proud of having "done first grade before." He bragged about it. It was a very positive thing for him--he was quite immature and fit in well with the other kids. However, this is not the norm for repeaters and I think the family played a big part in making it positive.

I kind of like the Mississippi "third grade" model. Grades one and two focus on the basic skills with math and reading. And, kids do sometimes learn in spurts.
However, I do not think repeating more than one grade is a good idea, and I think, even in third, it should only be in situations where growth can be expected.
For kids who have serious problems with learning--I'm not sure that repetition of a grade is good. They may need additional specialized help. I'm thinking of a child I taught who had serious dyslexia--he desperately wanted to read. Repetition would not have helped.
Hopefully, we know a lot more about helping dyslexic kids today than we did then. But, FWIW, I always focused on phonics. It may not be the cure all that some think for dyslexic kids.

[Anonymous]

It'll be interesting in a few years when the reports come out showing how bad retaining kids is for students. I also have learned to not trust what schools report and or how they report things. Is something seems to good to be true, it is. I'm all for really hammering down on phonics and giving kids who struggle extra help early and often. I'm so jaded though. We'll see.

[Anonymous]

I'd like to see every state hire retired teachers or those who are on child rearing leave to tutor small groups of 3-4 kids 4 days a week after school. Any kid not at the 40% in AIMS should be mandated to stay after school for 75 minutes for explicit phonics, OG style extra instruction. Free. Once a kid catches up they can leave at dismissal. Train people well, pay the retired staff and others working the program $500 a week and you won't have trouble getting people. Kids w behavior issues don't get to attend. Once current group is caught up, you'll only need minimal help for the new class entering first grade.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'd like to see every state hire retired teachers or those who are on child rearing leave to tutor small groups of 3-4 kids 4 days a week after school. Any kid not at the 40% in AIMS should be mandated to stay after school for 75 minutes for explicit phonics, OG style extra instruction. Free. Once a kid catches up they can leave at dismissal. Train people well, pay the retired staff and others working the program $500 a week and you won't have trouble getting people. Kids w behavior issues don't get to attend. Once current group is caught up, you'll only need minimal help for the new class entering first grade.

How do we “make” them stay? Parents will always come up with reasons to pull them out: sick, appointments, sports, etc.