“I don’t really like asynchronous or online classes. Yes, it’s convenient for me, but it’s not convenient for my learning,” Chase said. “It’s not conducive to any learning.”
Chase is currently taking a statistics class asynchronously with recorded lectures from Zoom and optional lab sections with a graduate student instructor. He feels these lab sections are helpful, but ultimately wished that his statistics lectures could also be in-person.
Chase doesn’t seek out online classes because he feels the opportunity to ask his professor questions is lost. He said although online lectures have benefits, including being able to rewind, edit and speed up lectures, he ultimately feels that interaction with classmates during lectures is more valuable for his learning.
“Sometimes a few things might slip that I can’t hear the teacher saying that I can’t get back, but I’m willing to sacrifice like a sentence or two for just a general overall interaction,” Chase said.
Despite the downsides of asynchronous learning, Chase does enjoy completing homework and exams online because he feels less pressure and is more comfortable. The flexibility in completing assignments on his own time and in a place of preference is an aspect of online class that Chase appreciates.
Ultimately, he doesn’t prefer online classes because he learns best in an in-person environment. Chase expressed the value in talking to and collaborating with a variety of classmates on problems.
“I get better understanding, especially when I’m mixing with my peers to ask for help. When everyone is separated, there’s no creativity, there’s no new ideas,” Chase said. “When everyone’s together mingling, that’s the spark of new ideas, new creations.”
Improving literacy instruction is once again in fashion among America’s policy circles. Between 2019 and 2022, state legislatures passed more than 200 bills that sought to push and pull public schools to embrace the “science of reading.”
But one year into closely following a big city school district’s effort to remake literacy instruction as part of a project with the Center on Reinventing Public Education, I can’t help but think these well-intended legislative efforts ignore the larger problem: teachers working alone in their classrooms are ill-positioned on their own to provide the support children most need to learn to read.
CRPE’s report on this project suggests that addressing the literacy crisis requires more than papering over the harms of bad curricula. It means rethinking the traditional teaching model, long a hallmark of public education in the United States, that leaves one adult in charge of supporting 25 or more children who arrive with wildly different levels of preparation and uneven or absent literacy support at home.
Thanks to the work of organizations like The Oakland REACH and the Oakland NAACP, the Oakland Unified School District started quietly overhauling its approach to literacy instruction two years ago. That work involved familiar investments in new curriculum and professional development.
But the real stars of the strategy were early literacy tutors, community members — including parents and grandparents — who were trained and paid to support small groups of students working to develop foundational literacy skills.
Thanks to the investment in early literacy tutors, Oakland schools were able to offer significantly more targeted and differentiated instruction than they would have otherwise. One school we visited used an “all hands on deck” approach that leveraged eight classroom teachers, two tutors, and two non-classroom educators to ensure that every student was getting the targeted literacy instruction they needed. Another school described using tutors to support literacy instruction in a first-second combination class, where students’ instructional needs varied by multiple grade levels.
In interviews, teachers and principals alike described the importance of having an additional adult to support reading instruction. A teacher we spoke to said having a trained tutor in her classroom meant she could support five literacy groups instead of two and provide extra support to children who were furthest behind. Without the tutor, this teacher said she would have had to rely more on whole-group direct instruction, pushing children who didn’t yet know their letter sounds to learn alongside those already reading.
A parent contrasted her child’s experience in an Oakland school supported by a tutor with her own experience: “I think back to when I was in school. If you were behind where the class was, you were really left behind, or if you were ahead, then maybe you were bored and your mind was wandering and you weren’t paying attention. I feel like with (early literacy tutors) … (students) get special time with an adult who is working with them. And I think that is really impactful.”
Importantly, in shouldering some of the work of literacy instruction, early literacy tutors provided a critical well of support for beleaguered educators, whose jobs have become ever more difficult coming out of the pandemic. Increasing behavioral challenges, an attendance crisis and larger variation in students’ learning needs are putting extraordinary demands on teachers at a time when public attitudes about work and the prestige of teaching are also evolving and eroding teachers’ commitment to their jobs.
Early literacy tutors could meaningfully help shoulder the load of reading instruction in large part because they were fully integrated into the district’s larger strategy around literacy. Unlike other tutoring programs that largely operate on the periphery of schools, Oakland’s early literacy tutors worked hand-in-hand with school staff charged with supporting literacy instruction.
Two years after they embarked on the new strategy, Oakland can’t yet claim to have solved the literacy problem, but there are glimmers of hope. Our study found that students who had access to evidence-based, differentiated literacy instruction — whether tutor- or teacher-provided — made statistically significant learning gains in reading and these gains were especially large in kindergarten. These results were achieved despite the fact that schools told us they needed additional tutors to fully optimize small-group reading instruction. Imagine what might be possible if every child had access to differentiated instruction that met their individual needs.
Expecting teachers, working alone in their classrooms, to provide both all the individualized support students most need was probably always a fool’s errand; continuing to embrace it as students struggle and deal with the lifelong consequences of illiteracy is simply irresponsible. As schools look to make up ground lost during the pandemic, those that support them should understand the limitations that come with investing too little into the effort.
●●●
Ashley Jochimis a principal at the Center on Reinventing Public Education, where her research focuses on identifying opportunities and obstacles to addressing systemic challenges in K-12 schools.She co-authored a report on the organization’s work in Oakland Unified School District.
The opinions in this commentary are those of the author. If you would like to submit a commentary, please review our guidelines and contact us.
Gary Legum writes at the blog “Wonkette.” Legum was appalled when he heard that ABC had suspended its reporter Terry Moran for posting a tweet about the hatefulness of Trump’s top aide Stephen Miller. Miller prides himself on his open hatred of immigrants and his eagerness to expel millions of them. He is ultra-MAGA and proud of it.
ABC punished Moran because he told the truth.
By the way, there is a reference in this piece to Stephen Miller’s wife Katie. I have not seen any reason to mention the flurry of reports that she has left her government job to work as a personal assistant for Elon Musk. Did she leave Stephen? Did she move to Texas with Elon? what about their children? Are they in DC or Starland, Texas?
Legum writes:
Something happened to ABC News reporter Terry Moran over the weekend: He was brought low by a brutal attack of unvarnished honesty.
Sir, really. Honesty? In Donald Trump’s America?
Even better, Moran’s honesty was an assessment of the character — or complete and utter lack thereof — of Stephen Miller, the irredeemably evil sack of donkey vomit who does whatever it takes to stay on Donald Trump’s good side, all so he can continue to hold the power — as shadow president, basically — to destroy lives for no other reason than his parents apparently never hugged him and told him he was worthy of love.
Which, quite frankly, can you blame them? We imagine raising Stephen Miller involved mysterious supernatural happenings around the house and nannies hanging themselves from the top floor of the family manor in full view of the guests at Miller’s birthday party.
The trouble started, as it so often does, with a tweet. On Saturday, Moran posted his opinion, for which your Wonkette congratulates him even though we know this sort of thing is frowned upon by the giants of journalism:
The thing about Stephen Miller is not that he is the brains behind Trumpism.
Yes, he is one of the people who conceptualizes the impulses of the Trumpist movement and translates them into policy.
But that’s not what’s interesting about Miller.
It’s not brains. It’s bile.
Miller is a man who is richly endowed with the capacity for hatred. He’s a world-class hater.
You can see this just by looking at him because you can see that his hatreds are his spiritual nourishment. He eats his hate.
Trump is a world-class hater. But his hatred only a means to an end, and that end is his own glorification. That’s his spiritual nourishment.
None of this is news about Stephen Miller to anyone who has ever known him, going back to his high school days when he once got booed off a stage for excoriating his fellow students for being nice to the school’s janitors. A journalist who wrote a book about Miller during Trump’s first term titled it Hatemonger, and we doubt many people blinked an eye.
Shoot, the man’s own family disowned him, and his childhood rabbi called him out in a sermon on Rosh Hashanah. Do you know how horrible of a person you have to be to get a rabbi to denounce you from the bema during the High Holidays? That’s an honor usually reserved for biblical villains and Adolf Hitler, and we are not glibly invoking Godwin’s Law when we say that. We have sat through a lot of High Holiday sermons.
Moran deleted the tweet at some point, but the damage was done. The White House jumped all over Moran in defense of Miller. Vice President JD Vance called the tweet “an absolutely vile smear” and declared that Miller is motivated by “a love of country.” White House Press Nazi Karoline Leavitt, perhaps forgetting who she works for and what kind of crap he puts out every day, called it “unhinged and unacceptable” in a tweet.
Then the press secretary, her face shining like a highly polished apple, went on Maria Bartiromo’s Fox Business show and said that “ABC is gonna have to answer” for Moran’s comments:
Leavitt: “ABC is gonna have to answer for what their so-called journalist put out on twitter … we have reached out to ABC. They have said they will be taking action, so we will see what they do … hopefully this journalist will either be suspended or terminated.”
Miller himself called Moran a radical “adopting a journalist’s pose.” Oh no, was he so upset he couldn’t eat his usual Sunday brunch consisting of a live bat?
Moran posted his screed at 12:06 a.m. Sunday morning, the “drunk texting your ex because you’ve been drinking all night and are now all caught up in your lonely feels” hour. Nothing good ever comes of picking up your phone at that hour.
“ABC News stands for objectivity and impartiality in its news coverage and does not condone subjective personal attacks on others,” a network spokesperson said. “The post does not reflect the views of ABC News and violated our standards — as a result, Terry Moran has been suspended pending further evaluation.”
ABC should try being like Wonkette, whose only standard is the truth. Then Moran could have called Stupid Nosferatu whatever he wanted: hideous shit goblin, Skeletor, fascist taint shavings, a lower life form than the crud under the fridge, a loser husband who rumors are abounding may have been cucked by Elon Musk, a motherfucking shanda fur di goyim … the list goes on and on and on.
We are not in the habit of giving ABC any advice, but we think their response to Leavitt’s demand that they “answer for” Moran should be two middle fingers raised high, accompanied by a sneer that could melt the press secretary’s face off. It is way past time for high-level journalists to be consistently frank about what Stephen Miller is and what he’s doing, instead of couching his vile bigotry and single-minded pursuit of extremist actions as some sort of polite disagreement between right and left over immigration policy.
Throughout the discussion on Tuesday, the panelists explored why a majority of high school students fail to complete A-G requirements — courses they need to qualify for admission to the University of California or California State University systems — and offered ways that schools can help change that.
“I think we have a responsibility to raise the expectations and then lean in to making sure that we have the support in place for students to be successful in those expectations,” said Sherrie Reed Bennett, executive director of the California Education Lab at the UC Davis School of Education.
Panelists agreed that the more options students have, the better their situation after graduation and that increasing access to college prep courses is crucial.
Michael R. McCormick, superintendent of Val Verde Unified, said that awareness should start well before students enter high school and that schools should create a college and career culture with events such as College Days or elementary school lessons on A-G courses.
But beyond awareness, high school students are not getting the support they need to complete the A-G coursework, and parents and students, who often know little or nothing about these requirements, are left to figure it out on their own, panelists said.
“To expect people to go out and figure it out on their own is really difficult,” Delilah Brumer, a student at Los Angeles Pierce College, said about high school students not having the resources to learn about A-G requirements.
Some schools also struggle with offering the A-G coursework or doing so in a way that supports students. In 2018-19, 2.5% of schools offered no A-G courses, and another 6% only offered some A-G courses.
Although Brumer met her A-G requirements at a Los Angeles Unified school, she said the process was stressful and confusing. Her Career Technical Education courses often conflicted with her A-G courses, and she could only take some courses online.
Taking A-G and CTE courses shouldn’t be a matter of “either or,” Reed said, adding that districts should work to prevent those conflicts. For example, Val Verde Unified offered 42 career pathways and ensured that every course within each pathway was also A–G approved, according to Policy Analysis for California Education (PACE) research in which Reed co-authored and cited during the roundtable.
Whether college or career, the A-G courses are important for all students, no matter what their plans are after high school, panelists said.
Systemic changes needed
Students planning to attend UC or CSU must complete the college preparatory courses known as A-G requirements — 15 courses in seven areas that overlap with the requirements for a high school diploma but are more rigorous.
More than half, 56%, of high school seniors failed to meet these requirements in 2023, meaning they were ineligible to apply to a California public university and may struggle at a community college.
Research indicates that enrollment and completion rates on A-G courses vary across student groups and schools. In 2023, 68% of Black students and 64% of Latino students did not meet A-G requirements, compared with 26% of Asian students and 48% of white students, according to EdSource’s analysis. The highest non-completion group was foster students at 88%, followed by disabled students at 85% and English learners at 82%.
It’s a multifaceted problem that requires systemic changes at a district, and possibly, statewide level, panelists said.
Aleka Jackson-Jarrell, program coordinator for the Heritage program at Victor Valley Union High School District, said schools must evaluate support through an equity lens because there are systemic barriers keeping African American and Latino students from qualifying for four-year universities.
With just 6% of Black students graduating with A-G courses at Adelanto High, Victor Valley started Heritage, an equity program that helps place students in A-G courses. The program also educates families about college applications, financial aid and housing, spearheading school and districtwide changes, such as career advisers helping all students with UC and CSU applications.
“So many system changes needed to be made in order for all of our students, not just the African American students, to benefit,” Jackson-Jarrell said. “So a lot of things have changed because of this one equity program; they’re mirroring and changing the systems.”
PACE research found that at the school or district level, routine data analysis, such as comprehensive A-G course audits, can also help inform school and course-level changes to support students with meeting the requirements.
McCormick suggested that a default enrollment process in the A-G courses would guarantee all students have access and the opportunity to reach their dreams.
“If we can, through a policy solution or the stroke of the governor’s pen, decide that we need to teach cursive writing, why can we not do some sort of a policy solution for A-G?” he said. “It seems like a viable path is there.”
Assemblymember Phil Ting introduced a bill Wednesday to ban legacy admissions in California’s private colleges and universities.
A California assemblymember wants the state to join others in forcing private universities to stop legacy admissions.
The bill would prohibit the state’s private colleges and universities from receiving state funding through the Cal Grant program if they give preferential treatment to applicants with donor or alumni connections.
The bill makes California one of a handful of states considering curbing legacy admissions at both public and private colleges. Nationally, Sens. Todd Young, R-Ind., and Tim Kaine, D-Va., have also introduced legislation to ban public and private colleges from considering legacy connections in admissions decisions.
“Unfortunately, we saw last year that the Supreme Court disallowed the consideration of race in college admissions, but what they didn’t do was disallow the knowledge of income or class in college admissions,” said Assemblymember Phil Ting, D-San Francisco, who authored the bill, Assembly Bill 1780. “For the “1% of Americans, they have complete access, they have a back door, they have a side door, they have an express lane into our most elite institutions.”
Ting cited a study by Harvard University economists that found that children from families earning more than $611,000 a year are more than twice as likely to receive admission to a university when compared with low- and middle-income families with comparable standardized test scores.
Although the vast majority of private institutions in California say they don’t use donor or alumni connections to admit students, and none of the public institutions use legacy status for admission, six universities do, basedon their admissions reports to the Legislature.
Stanford, the University of Southern California and Santa Clara University, in particular, all admitted more than 13% of their students based on connections to alumni and donors, based on their fall 2022 enrollment.
“This is a fairly limited practice within our sector,” said Kristen Soares, president of the Association of Independent California Colleges and Universities. “We have indicated to Assemblymember Ting’s office and others that we welcome the conversation and look forward to reviewing the details of the proposal once it is in print.”
Officials from Stanford and USC did not respond to requests for comment by the time of publication.
Sophie Callott, a senior at Stanford University, said her parents met as law students at the university, and so she’s a legacy student. Despite that, she’s in favor of ending the practice.
“I do not want my achievements to be overshadowed or questioned by the possibility that I only got into Stanford because my parents went there,” she said, during a news conference hosted by Ting on Wednesday about the bill. “People who go to schools like Stanford have an unparalleled advantage in the job market that allows them to disproportionately occupy high-paying leadership positions. If their children are further given a leg up in the admissions process, then this cycle of wealth and privileges continues.”
What is not known about legacy admissions?
The move to ban legacy admissions has taken off following the conservative-majority decision by the Supreme Court to effectively end race-conscious admission programs at colleges and universities. California law has banned the use of affirmative action in public institutions since 1996, and a recent effort to reverse that decision failed in 2020. The state’s private institutions did not have to follow California’s affirmative action ban, but in order to accept federal dollars, they did have to comply with the Supreme Court’s decision.
Alyssa Murray, a Stanford student and co-president of the Stanford Black Student Union, said during the news conferencethat legacy admissions is a form of racial preference and economic discrimination, and ending it would be one step toward creating true equity in higher education.
“For nearly a century, California private schools have predominantly admitted white students, creating an insurmountable racial imbalance,” she said. “That means legacy admissions will always favor white and wealthy applicants at the expense of low-income students of color who often do not have alumni relations.”
Ting attempted a similar bill in 2019 following Operation Varsity Blues, the national college admissions scandal that exposed a scheme through which the children of rich parents were able to get into top-tier schools using fake athletic credentials and bogus entrance exam scores. That bill ultimately failed and was opposed by the state’s private colleges because the system of legacy admissions was unrelated to the scandal and there were concerns that disallowing private schools that use legacy admissions from participating in the Cal Grant program would only hurt low-income students also attending those institutions.
Ting said the 2019 bill failed because Varsity Blues was too anecdotal and there wasn’t enough hard data, but now the numbers show where legacy admissions are prevalent. That data is now available because of a separate 2019 bill, AB 697, that Ting authored in the aftermath of the scandal, forcing private universities to send admissions and enrollment reports to the Legislature.
A June report by the Association of Independent California Colleges and Universities, which did not include data from Stanford or USC, found that only five of 70 private institutions allowed legacy admissions — Santa Clara, Pepperdine, Vanguard, Claremont McKenna and Harvey Mudd.
“It is a fact that legacy admissions perpetuates a cycle of privilege that fortifies inequity in higher education,” said Murray, co-president of the Stanford Black Student Union. “Legacy admissions perpetuates the racism of decades past when colleges and universities were closed to Latinx, Black, Asian American, Native Hawaiian, Pacific Islander, American Indian and Alaska Native people.”
Since his second inauguration, Trump has fired tens of thousands of federal workers, based on snap recommendations by Elon Musk’s team of whippersnappers. They have gone into government departments and agencies and decided in a day or so which workers to fire and which contracts to terminate. They don’t have enough information or time to make considered judgments, so they treat every federal worker as dispensable. The numbers fired are hard to determine, because federal judges have repeatedly reversed their actions. Some have been approved by the courts. The outcome is still in flux, though we do know that little is left of USAID or the U.S. Departnent of Education.
Government Executive reports that Trump plans a new round of layoffs in his second year. It’s unclear what his end goal is: is he destroying the federal government for some reason? With all the laid-off workers, he hasn’t reduced the budget. It’s grown, due to greater expenses for ICE, border security, and defense.
Some agencies, like FEMA and the National Weather Service, are being stripped to the bone. What will remain of our government at the end of his term?
The Trump administration is looking to slash a net of 107,000 employees at non-defense agencies next fiscal year, which would lead to an overall reduction of more than 7% of those workers.
Agencies laid out their workforce reductions in an expanded version of President Trump’s fiscal 2026 budget released on Friday, which includes both ideas they can implement unilaterally and proposals that will require congressional approval. If agencies follow through on their plans, the cuts will likely be even steeper, as the Defense Department and some other agencies did not include their announced cuts in the new budget documents.
The cuts represent changes projected to take effect next year relative to fiscal 2025 staffing levels. The ongoing cuts that have already occurred were generally not factored into the current workforce counts and the White House noted those figures “may not reflect all of the management and administrative actions underway or planned in federal agencies.”
Agencies are currently operating under a directive from Trump to slash their rolls, though those plans are largely paused under court order and awaiting resolution at the Supreme Court.
Under the budget forecasts, the Education Department will shed the most employees, followed by the Office of Personnel Management, General Services Administration, Small Business Administration and NASA. Education has already moved to lay off one-third of its workforce, but those reductions in force are currently paused by a separate court order.
The departments of Labor, Housing and Urban Development and Agriculture are also expecting to cut more than 20% of their workforces.
The Trump administration will seek to eliminate more than 107,000 jobs across government, but the net impact is mitigated by targeted hiring at certain agencies and offices. The Transportation Department is the only agency to project an overall staffing increase, driven by hiring at the Federal Aviation Administration and for IT. The Homeland Security Department will seek to significantly staff up at Customs and Border Protection and Immigration and Customs Enforcement as the administration ramps up its border crackdown and deportation operations, though DHS will see an overall cut due to planned reductions at the Federal Emergency Management Agency—which is set to shed 13% of its workforce—and the Transportation Security Administration—which will cut around 6%.
Many offices will be cut nearly entirely, such as the research and state forestry offices within USDA’s Forest Service. The department’s Natural Resources Conservation Service would shed nearly 4,000 employees, including two-thirds of employees providing technical assistance on conservation planning and forecasting on snowpack and water supply.
HHS, which has already laid off 10,000 employees, would eliminate 10 offices entirely, though some of the impacted employees are being absorbed into the new Administration for Health America or other reorganized areas. NASA is planning to shutter its Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics Engagement office and would cut its Science office in half. DHS would eliminate its Countering Weapons of Mass Destruction office. Cuts at the Treasury Department would be driven by reductions at the Internal Revenue Service— which would zero out its Business Systems Modernization office—though the Bureau of Fiscal Service is also planning to slash one-quarter of its staff.
At the Interior Department, the National Park Service is planning to cut about 27% of its employees, Fish and Wildlife Service would cut 19% and U.S. Geological Survey would cut 32%.
The full scope of the cuts across government will likely expand over time: The Veterans Affairs Department is set to shed more than 80,000 employees and layoffs—assuming a court injunction is lifted—are expected as soon as this month, though they are not a part of the budget. The Defense Department has said it will cut around 60,000 civilian employees, but it has yet to detail those plans in Trump’s budget.
LAUSD Superintendent Alberto Carvalho interacting with a student.
Credit: LAUSD
This story has been updated to removedemographic data, which the CDE has reported may not be accurate.
Shortly after Alberto Carvalho became superintendent of LAUSD two years ago, he created a 100-day plan and named the district’s top 100 priority schools.
At the time, neither Carvalho nor district staff publicly identified the schools. However, LAUSD has continuously maintained that the schools are some of the district’s lowest-performing campuses in all measures, and that they would serve as the focal point of various district initiatives, such as decisions on adding additional instructional days to help students recover from pandemic learning loss and the new policy precluding charter schools from sharing their campuses.
LAUSD’s 100 priority schools, which is being made public for the first time because EdSource sought it, were selected based on considerations about what schools had the greatest need to improve in areas such as attendance rates, performance on the state Smarter Balanced Assessment and interim assessments, rates of completion of college-required courses (known as A-G), and proportion of students who are English learners, a district spokesperson said in a statement to EdSource this month.
The district also ensures that the principals of these priority schools participate in special programs where they can identify and express their schools’ special needs in academics, facilities or human resources.
The principals then receive an immediate response from support personnel with the goal of rapidly accelerating student achievement, the district spokesperson said.
EdSource does not have accurate demographic data for the 100 Priority Schools or the district because California Department of Education’s DataQuest website has noted inaccurate reporting from LAUSD.
Schools on the LAUSD priority list
107th Street Elementary School
109th Street Elementary School
112th Street Elementary School
28th Street Elementary
42nd Street Elementary School
49th Street Elementary School
52nd Street Elementary School
54th Street Elementary
59th Street Elementary
75th Street Elementary
93rd Street Elementary
95th Street Elementary
Alta Loma Elementary School
Dr Maya Angelou Community Senior High
Aragon Avenue Elementary
Audubon Middle School
Bancroft Middle School
Bethune Middle School
Blythe Street Elementary School
Tom Bradley Global Awareness Magnet
Budlong Avenue Elementary School
Bushnell Way Elementary School
Camellia Avenue Elementary
George Washington Carver Middle School
Century Park Elementary School
Cesar Chavez Elementary School
Cimarron Avenue Elementary
Johnnie L. Cochran Jr. Middle School
Coliseum Street Elementary
Columbus Avenue Elementary
Compton Ave Elementary School
Contreras Learning Center-School of Social Justice
Crenshaw High School STEMM Magnet
Susan Miller Dorsey Senior High
Charles Drew Middle School
Mervyn M. Dymally High School
Thomas Alva Edison Middle School
Lovelia P Flournoy Elementary
John C. Fremont Senior High
Gage Middle School
Samuel Gompers Middle School
Grape Street Elementary
Florence Griffith Joyner Elementary School
Haddon Avenue Elementary
Harmony Elementary School
Harrison Street Elementary
Bret Harte Preparatory Middle School
Augustus F. Hawkins High School
Hillcrest Drive Elementary
Hillside Elementary
Holmes Avenue Elementary
Hooper Avenue Elementary
Thomas Jefferson Senior High
Dr James Edward Jones Primary Center
Jordan High School
Martin Luther King Jr. Elementary
La Salle Avenue Elementary
Gerald A. Lawson Academy of the Arts, Mathematics and Science
Limerick Avenue Elementary
Los Angeles Academy Middle School
John W. Mack Elementary
Charles Maclay Middle School
Main Street Elementary
Manhattan Place Elementary
Mann UCLA Community School
Manual Arts Senior High School
Marina Del Rey Middle School
Edwin Markham Middle School
McKinley Avenue Elementary
Miramonte Elementary
John Muir Middle School
Murchison Street Elementary
Napa Street Elementary
Nevin Avenue Elementary
Normandie Avenue Elementary
Northridge Middle School
Norwood Street Elementary School
Barack Obama Global Preparation Academy
Panorama High School
Rosa Parks Learning Center
Pio Pico Middle School
Marguerite Poindexter LaMotte Elementary
Leo Politi Elementary School
Ramona Elementary
Sally Ride Elementary: A SMArT Academy
Carlos Santana Arts Academy
Francisco Sepulveda Middle School
Sheridan St Elementary School
Hilda L Solis Learning Academy
Southeast Middle School
Trinity Street Elementary
Valerio Street Elementary School
Van Nuys Middle School
George Washington Preparatory Senior High
Lenicia B Weemes Elementary
West Athens Elementary
Western Avenue T.E.C.H. Magnet
Charles White Elementary School
Woodcrest Elementary
YES Academy
Enrollment numbers at LAUSD’s priority schools
LAUSD’s overall enrollment, excluding charter schools, is 533,495. Based on census day enrollment data from the 2022-23 academic year, 53,959 students attend the district’s priority schools.
Of the 100 priority schools, there are 12 high schools, 20 middle schools and 63 elementary schools. Two are listed as K-12 schools, while three are alternative schools of choice.
Chronic absenteeism rates
The schools sustained a chronic absenteeism rate of 38.2% in the 2022-23 academic year, meaning that 38.2% of students missed at least 10% of school.
LAUSD on the whole, however, sustained a 32.8% rate of chronic absenteeism.
Performance on state assessments
Just over 23% of students attending priority schools have met or exceeded English standards, while 16.12% have met or exceeded math standards.
By comparison, across the district, 41.17% of students met or exceeded state standards in English, according to Smarter Balanced test results, while 30.5% met or exceeded state standards in math.
High school graduation rates
During the 2022-23 academic year, LAUSD sustained a graduation rate of 90.4, while, on average, nearly 80.74% of students enrolled at Priority high schools graduated.
Rate of A-G requirements completion
Across LAUSD, 43.8% of students in the 2022-23 academic year did not complete the A-G requirements and were thus ineligible for admission to the California State University and University of California systems.
At the priority schools, however, 69.18% graduates did not complete their A-G requirements.
Yuxuan Xie, EdSource data visualization specialist, contributed data analysis to this report.
A rumor spread quickly on Monday morning that Huntington Park High School in southeast Los Angeles might be the site of a raid after federal immigration agents were seen at a Home Depot nearby.
Credit: Betty Márquez Rosales, EdSource
Top Takeaways
LAUSD assures students’ and families’ safety during graduation ceremonies.
Huntington Park schools activate emergency protocols amid ICE activity.
More summer school locations, plus virtual option, made available to students who fear ICE raids.
Los Angeles Unified School District’s superintendent and board members condemned the raids and arrests of undocumented immigrants on Monday during a press conference at the district’s headquarters in downtown L.A. Meanwhile, 7 miles away, another raid was unfolding next to a high school, creating new tension and apprehension.
Around 8:30 a.m., videos posted on social media platforms showed what appeared to be immigration agents chasing and arresting day laborers by the city’s Home Depot, which sits behind and in sight of Huntington Park High School.
Simultaneously, a graduation ceremony for a local elementary school was taking place in the high school’s auditorium. Many people online began speculating that the ceremony might be the target of an immigration raid. It wasn’t, but the fear was real.
“These are communities of resilience and hope — places where generations have worked hard to build a better life, and yet our families are now forced to live in fear, looking over their shoulders on the way to school or their child’s graduation,” Rocio Rivas, vice president of L.A. Unified’s school board, said at the press conference. “This is just simply wrong.”
Huntington Park’s residents are predominantly Latino, immigrant and working class, a demographic that has been the target of many of the known immigration raids in recent days.
A protest was organized within hours of immigration enforcement activity next to a high school in the city of Huntington Park, commonly known as HP.Credit: Betty Márquez Rosales, EdSource
‘Perimeters of safety’
The district’s protocol, which includes offering families the option of remaining on school grounds and notifying the district of immigration enforcement activity so they can determine the appropriate response, kicked into gear. An alternative exit door on the side farthest from Home Depot was opened.
A Huntington Park High official later confirmed that immigration agents made no attempt to enter the school, though a public statement addressing the rumor was not shared online until hours later. An attendee at the graduation ceremony, who declined to share her name, confirmed via a TikTok message that at the end of the ceremony, a school official announced the presence of immigration agents in the area and confirmed the agents were no longer next door.
Amid the uncertainty, district officials discussed the importance of centering students’ needs: Graduation ceremonies should continue undisturbed, and families should feel assured their children would be safe attending summer school.
L.A. Unified Superintendent Alberto Carvalho stressed that the graduation season, with more than 100 ceremonies taking place Monday and Tuesday, should remain celebratory and joyous. He said the district has directed its police force to establish “perimeters of safety” around graduation sites to help “intervene and interfere” with federal agents if they arrive.
“Every child has a constitutional right to a public education,” he said. “Therefore, every child and their parent has a right to celebrate the culmination of their educational success.”
An estimated 1 in 10, or 1 million, children in California have at least one undocumented parent, and about 133,000 children in California public schools are undocumented themselves, according to the Migration Policy Institute.
Carvalho also said principals have been instructed to minimize entry lines to limit the risks of waiting on the street. And parents will be allowed to stay at the venue as long as they need if there is immigration enforcement outside.
District police will also stay on-site for as long as necessary, he added.
Meanwhile, the possibility of ICE officials storming graduation ceremonies would be a “preposterous condition,” Carvalho said.
“I hope a situation like that will not occur,” he said. “But then again, I certainly would have hoped that militarized equipment would not be seen on the streets of an American city.”
And as the district transitions from this year to the next, Carvalho said L.A. Unified will expand the number of campuses offering summer school to shorten travel times; provide transportation, and add virtual learning options for students who do not feel safe attending in person.
“I want to be very clear to those who may seek to take actions that transcend our beliefs and our policies. We’re not just talking about our schools,” Carvalho said at Monday’s press conference. “We’re talking about our schools, places where kids wait for the buses, the bus itself.”
When immigration enforcement activity occurs near schools, educators and staff are at times simultaneously communicating the information with the district so they can confirm what response may be needed, and calming their students’ and families’ fears.
Communication flows the other way too — top-down from district officials to teachers, parents, and students regarding activity, and about any false rumors.
Rapid response network
On Monday, educators like Marcela Chagoya, a middle school teacher at L.A. Unified’s Stevenson College & Career Prep, reassured students, many somber and tearful after a weekend of raids and protests, that school remains the safest place for them to be. As she talked with students, her phone lit up with constant notifications from a Rapid Response Network about nearby ICE sightings.
“Our school district is a sanctuary district, and we’re definitely not going to put any of our students or their families, if they’re on our campus, at risk,” Chagoya said. “We’re going to defend them as much as we can.”
Chagoya is also one of many teachers who have gone through training by the Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights of Los Angeles, and is tasked with reporting any notification of ICE activity to their principal, who would then inform the district. She also carries a bullhorn in her car to alert the community.
She reminds the students that ICE agents won’t be allowed inside the classroom and quizzes them on what they learned about potential interactions with a federal agent.
“This is a lesson that we’re learning in real time,” said Chagoya. “And we will all just roll with it and be as proactive as we can.”
In case you wondered, I now call DOGE something else. I call it DOGS, although truthfully that’s not fair to dogs. Dogs are wonderful creatures; In my experience, dogs give you unconditional loyalty and love. These DOGS are loyal to one man, Elon Musk. They are shredding the federal government, destroying the careers and lives of tens of thousands of professional civil servants. They have gathered our personal data. They are embedded in high-level positions across the government. They should all be fired and sent back to Elon Musk.
But the bigger risk to our democracy is Russell Vought, Director of the Office of Management and Budget, one of the most powerful positions in the federal government. He is a self-proclaimed Christian nationalist. He is working in opposition to the Founding Fathers, who made clear their intention to keep religion out of government.
Though Elon Musk is leaving the White House, DOGE isn’t going anywhere.
It appears that Russell Vought — Trump’s budget hawk and one of the chief architects of the Heritage Foundation’s Project 2025 — is stepping in to become DOGE’s new power broker.
With Vought, a self-described Christian nationalist, at the helm, the slash-and-burn effort against the federal government may be on the cusp of an even darker turn.
In many ways, Vought is what Musk is not. After working at public policy organizations for nearly two decades, he has a far better understanding of how the government works — and how its weaknesses can be exploited. Despite advising Trump for almost 10 years, he’s also kept a fairly low profile, rarely giving interviews or speaking in public.
And Vought appears to be motivated first and foremost by creating a Christian nation controlled by an overtly Christian government.
Last year, Vought told undercover journalists with the Centre for Climate Reporting that he wants “to make sure that we can say we are a Christian nation.”
“And my viewpoint is mostly that I would probably be Christian nation-ism,” Vought said. “That’s pretty close to Christian nationalism because I also believe in nationalism.”
To achieve that, Vought said in the interview he seeks to replace the non-partisan and merit-based federal civil service with a bureaucracy in which employment hinges on allegiance to Trump. He said he also seeks to impound congressionally approved funding, help coordinate mass deportations and find ways to let Trump use the military to put down protesters.
As former Trump adviser Steve Bannon recently told The Atlantic, “Russ has got a vision. He’s not an anarchist. He’s a true believer.”
Federal agencies, in particular the Office of Personnel Management (OPM), have already implemented numerous policies that Vought drafted to achieve those goals.
Earlier this year, OPM proposed new regulations that would formally revive Schedule F, a key tool developed by Vought to gut the federal government and replace career public servants with partisan ideologues.
In another move championed by Vought, the personnel office last week also announced a s0-called “Merit Hiring Plan” that would, if implemented, ask prospective hires for the thousands of DOGE-induced vacancies across the federal government to write short essays explaining their levels of patriotism and support for the president’s policies.
“How would you help advance the President’s Executive Orders and policy priorities in this role? Identify one or two relevant Executive Orders or policy initiatives that are significant to you, and explain how you would help implement them if hired,” reads one of the essay prompts.
Vought, too, has recently taken steps to impound funds.
This week, the White House sent Congress proposed spending cuts — also called a rescission package — that’s been backed by Vought in order to formalize cuts made by DOGE. The $9.4 billion package targets funding for NPR, PBS, the U.S. Agency for International Development and other foreign aid spending.
The rescission process allows a president to avoid spending money on discretionary programs, and since rescission bills only require simple majority approval in the House and Senate, there’s a chance some of the proposed cuts will become law. If they do, they will be the first presidentially proposed rescissions accepted by Congress since 1999.
If Congress doesn’t pass the package, the 1974 Impoundment Control Act, which restricts when and how the president can delay or withhold federal funds, requires Trump to release the funds — that’s assuming that the administration follows the law.
The same day the White House sent Congress the package, Vought threatened that if lawmakers don’t pass the rescissions, the executive branch would find ways to override Congress’ constitutional authority to allocate funding.
“We are dusting off muscle memory that existed for 200 years before President Nixon in the 1970s and Congress acted to try to take away the president’s ability to spend less,” Vought said.
When asked by CNN whether he was attempting to tee up a legal fight to challenge the Impoundment Control Act as unconstitutional, Vought implied he was.
“We’re certainly not taking impoundment off of the table. We’re not in love with the law,” Vought said.
