Ending several months of uncertainty, the California State Board of Education on Wednesday chose new labels to describe how students perform on the four levels of achievement on its standardized tests.
The decision was difficult. The 90 minutes of presentations and discussions offered lessons in the subtleties of language and the inferences of words.
Board members said they were aware of the need to send the right messages to many parents, who had criticized the California Department of Education’s previous choices for labeling low test scores as vague euphemisms for bad news.
“Labels matter,” said board member Francisco Escobedo, executive director of the National Center for Urban Transformation at San Diego State. “Knowledge is a continuum, and how we describe students in different levels has a powerful impact.”’
Researchers have warned that parents are getting confusing messages, with inflated grades on courses and declining scores on standardized tests of how well their children are doing in recovering from Covid setbacks in learning. The new labels will apply to scoring levels for the state science assessments and for the Smarter Balanced English language arts and math tests.
Board members quickly agreed on “Advanced” for Level 4 and “Proficient” for Level 3 labels, the top two levels of scores. But their selection of “Developing” for Level 2 and “Minimal” for Level 1 differed from the consensus of parents, students and teachers who had been offered various options during focus groups in December and January.
They had preferred “Basic” for Level 2 and “Below Basic” for Level 1. The terms are clear, simple and familiar, a summary of the discussions said. The National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) classifies Basic as the lowest of its three levels, and California’s old state tests, which the state abandoned a decade ago to switch to Smarter Balanced, used Basic and Below Basic for scoring criteria as well.
But for some veteran educators on the board, familiarity has bred contempt, or at least bad memories, of No Child Left Behind (NCLB), the federal law under the administrations of Presidents Barack Obama and George W. Bush. Schools were under heavy pressure to increase their math and English language arts scores, or potentially face sanctions.
“I had a visceral reaction to the word Basic,” said board member and veteran teacher Haydee Rodriguez. “I remember NCLB and how finite that felt for students.” The feedback should be encouraging, not a label that discourages growth, as Basic did under NCLB, she said.
She and Kim Patillo Brownson, a parent of two teenagers who served as a policy director at the Advancement Project, a civil rights organization, also pointed out that “basic” has a different connotation for students in 2025. It’s slang for a boring and uninteresting person.
“Calling a student Basic is an absolute insult in 2025,” said Rodriguez. “It could shut a child down.”
Board President Linda Darling-Hammond agreed. “If Basic is being used derogatorily, one can only imagine how Below Basic will be used. It is a real consideration; the meaning is different for adults.”
Board members turned to other words that had been presented to the focus groups. They agreed the choices should be frank, not Pollyannaish or dispiriting.
With Level 2, the purpose should be “trying to light a fire under parents to realize there is work to do,” said Patillo Brownson.
Stating that “Below Basic” says a student is failing, Escobedo preferred “Developing” for Level 1 and “Emerging” for Level 2. These terms are consistent with labels used for scoring the progress of English learners.
Patillo Brownson called Emerging “vague” and supported “Basic.”
Board Vice President Cynthia Glover Woods, who was chief academic officer of the Riverside County Office of Education before her retirement, favored “Minimum” for Level 1 because “it is important we are clear for students and parents that students scoring at the level have a minimal understanding of grade-level knowledge.”
Sharing the perspective of her peers, the student board member on the board, Julia Clauson, a senior at Bella Vista High School in Sacramento, recommended substituting “Approaching” for “Basic,” so as not to deter students from trying challenging courses. “Older students make academic decisions (based on what signals they get), so language matters,” she said.
The County Superintendents association also endorsed “Approaching” for Level 2 and “Developing” or “Emerging” for Level 1.
The board initiated what turned into a multi-month decision because of growing dissatisfaction with the labels that had been used since the first Smarter Balanced testing in 2015. They were Standard Not Met for Level 1, Standard Nearly Met for Level 2, Standard Met for Level 3 and Standard Exceeded for Level 4. Focus groups by the California Department of Education found that parents were confused about what “standard” meant. They found Standard Not Met as discouraging and Standard Nearly Met as unclear.
But a coalition of student advocacy groups, including Teach Plus, Children Now and Innovate Public Schools, along with the County Superintendents association and the Association of California School Administrators, criticized the labels for Levels 1 and 2 that the California Department of Education recommended as their replacements as soft-pedaling euphemisms for poor scorers. The department had proposed Inconsistent for Level 1 and Foundational for Level 2.
At its December meeting, the board told the department to try again with more focus groups.
Changing the labels to Advanced, Proficient, Developing and Minimal won’t change how scores are determined; the individual scores within each achievement band have remained the same in all the 18 member states that take all or some of the Smarter Balanced tests, which are given to students in grades three through eight and once in high school, usually in 11th grade.
However, additional work is needed to communicate the changes to parents and students. The department and its testing contractor, ETS, will spell out the differences between performing at the various levels in each subject and grade and the level of improvement needed to raise scores.
Tony Alpert, executive director of Smarter Balanced, pointed out that performance differences are a continuum with students showing gaps in some grade-level skills but not others. A student scoring at Level 1 may have answered some questions showing knowledge at grade level. As scores progress from Levels 2 to 4, students demonstrate increasing accuracy and complexity in their knowledge and skills.
Students who reach Level 3 have the knowledge to succeed in future coursework. Research has determined that for California high school students, Level 3 correlates with preparation for first-year courses at California State University.
The state board hoped that the label changes and new explanations would be ready for this spring’s testing results. Instead, they will take effect in 2026.
Verde Elementary School in West Contra Costa Unified School District
Top Takeaways
Raising attendance would improve student outcomes and help the district achieve a balanced budget.
The district will focus on boosting attendance of all students, not just those who are “chronically absent,” using a range of attendance-improvement strategies.
Improving attendance will require an investment of funds and offering incentives, experts say.
To boost student attendance, the West Contra Costa Unified School District has launched a comprehensive plan to increase attendance by 2 percentage points this school year.
The challenge is in part an educational one. If students aren’t in class, they’re far less likely to succeed. It is also a financial strategy that is crucial to the district’s attempts to fend off insolvency and a state takeover for the second time in 30 years.
That’s because the main source of state funding for schools in California is based not just on how many students are enrolled, but on how many students actually show up each day for class.
But bumping up attendance, even by a few percentage points, is not as easy as it might seem, regardless of the district.
So what happens in this 29,000-student district in the San Francisco Bay Area, which includes Richmond and several adjacent communities, also holds lessons for numerous other financially struggling districts in California and nationally.
According to interim Superintendent Kim Moses, the math is simple: For every 1 percentage point increase in attendance, the district can raise $2.75 million in additional state funding.
Raising attendance by nearly 3 percentage points would generate over $7 million — about the same amount the district is projecting it will have to reduce its budget during each of the coming two years to achieve a balanced budget.
“It’s the biggest lever that we have,” board President Leslie Reckler, who is fully behind the attendance strategy to avert even more cuts in programs and staff than the district has already made, said in an interview. “We get paid by who shows up.”
Moses told the school board at a recent meeting, “If we are successful in increasing our attendance, that is a way to increase revenue. Then we can rescind the reductions we are proposing.”
Until now, the district’s attendance improvement plan has focused on “chronically absent” students — those who miss 10% or more instructional days per year. That has yielded results, pushing overall attendance rates in the district to 92.3% last fall, just below the state average.
But over the last few months, attendance rates in the district have started to drift down again, to 89.5% in February, according to district figures.
Natalie Tovani-Walchuk, vice president of local impact for Go Public Schools, an advocacy organization working in several Bay Area school districts, including West Contra Costa, speculates that some of the decline could be related to illnesses — the flu, Covid, norovirus and RSV — that simultaneously struck the district in recent months. It could also be that some immigrant parents fear bringing their children to school because of the Trump administration’s crackdown on undocumented immigrants.
“All of this creates conditions which you can’t control,” said Tovani-Walchuck, a former school principal born and raised in Richmond.
Aiming to boost attendance of all students
After initially focusing on chronically absent students, the district is now aiming to boost the attendance of all students, and to focus on schoolwide attendance-improvement strategies, including:
Targeting schools with the lowest attendance and developing “individualized action plans” for those schools.
Expecting schools to implement activities that reinforce positive attendance habits, such as recognizing students whose attendance improves and working more closely with families “to build stronger connections between school and home.”
Helping schools use a toolkit developed by the district, including prepared scripts in communicating with parents, along with “action plans” for targeting lagging attendance to promote “Stronger Together: Show Up, Rise Up,” the theme of the attendance campaign.
Recruiting more parents, representatives of community-based organizations and community members to participate in the district’s Student Attendance Review Board, to which students who are repeatedly absent or truant can be referred.
But Michael Fine, CEO of the Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team, an agency set up by the state to help districts in difficult financial straits, said, “There is a limit to how much improvement in attendance can be made.”
A year ago, his agency issued a report concluding that, despite financial and other improvements, West Contra Costa faced a high risk of insolvency.
A realistic goal, Fine said, would be to increase attendance by 1 percentage point each year over the next three years. He pointed out that the district will probably have to spend money on extra staff time and incentives to generate interest among students, parents and schools.
“Programs like this cost money, so you have to spend to be successful,” Fine said.
Fine recalls that when he was a deputy superintendent at Riverside Unified, the district persuaded local businesses to award a used car to high school seniors who achieved perfect attendance across their entire K-12 careers, or other incentives like computers and bicycles for meeting less ambitious goals. His district spent about $250,000 a year on the program, but generated $1.2 million in increased attendance revenue.
Increasing attendance is especially challenging because there are many reasons why students don’t show up for school, all detailed in a presentation to be considered by the board at its monthly meeting this week. These include lack of transportation, illness, parent work schedules, child care constraints, and students feeling disengaged, unsupported and bored at school, plus, in some cases, severe mental health issues.
As a result, any initiative to reduce absenteeism demands a range of strategies to address its underlying causes.
Hedy Chang, executive director of Attendance Works, a nonprofit organization focusing on attendance, said West Contra Costa Unified appears to be on the right track by surveying parents and identifying why individual students don’t come to school. Another plus, she said, is the district’s creation of so-called community schools, which already work with social service organizations that can also help.
“It looks like the district has some things in place,” she said. But she also cautioned that schools with large numbers of low-income students, like many in West Contra Costa, will likely experience higher absenteeism rates and have to come up with multifaceted responses to overcome them.
Building positive relationships with parents
The district says one school that has made notable strides is Verde Elementary, a community school serving transitional kindergarten through eighth grade students in North Richmond, an unincorporated area of the district.
The efforts of Martha Nieto, Verde’s “school community outreach worker,” have been central to the school’s efforts to boost attendance.
Nieto, a mother of six who was born in Mexico, says that a key to getting kids to school is building positive relationships with parents. Each day, the school systematically records which students are absent. Attendance clerk Patricia Martines then calls parents’ homes, sometimes with the assistance of school secretary Patricia Farias, who attended the school and still lives in the neighborhood.
Each Friday, Nieto offers what she calls a “School Smarts” class for parents to learn how to get involved in the school. As for students, Nieto provides incentives to improve attendance with modest gifts like a soccer ball, or free ice cream or nachos, which she also hands out on Friday mornings. Students with perfect attendance are awarded medals at “Celebration of Learning” events held regularly in the school cafeteria.
The challenge, Go Public Schools’ Tovani-Walchuk says, is to extend efforts like these across the entire district.
“These are moments of real strength, and we’re seeing what is truly possible,” she said, referring to Verde Elementary. “But it has not been yet systematized where every school has their school community outreach worker doing this work. That’s really determined site by site, depending on its priorities.”
Verde Elementary school secretary Victoria Farías, who attended the school as a student, assists with keeping track of attendance.Credit: Louis Freedberg / EdSource
School board member Demetrio Gonzalez-Hoy says that in addition to boosting the attendance of existing students, there needs to be more emphasis on attracting new ones to the district. That’s because the district’s financial plight is largely due to student enrollment that has declined by an average of 3.1 percentage points over the previous four years, according to the Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team report.
“It has to be a two-pronged approach,” he said. “We need to get families moving into our community to come to our schools. We don’t want to be a place where we have to be closing schools.”
“If we want to continue to thrive as a district, we have no other option,” he said.
A new Assembly bill aims to swap a voluntary curriculum with academic standards that would direct what should be taught.
The focus would remain teaching the triumphs, struggles and perspectives of Native Americans, Hispanic Americans, Asian Americans and Black Americans.
The bill would restrict an alternative Liberated Ethnic Studies curriculum, which focuses on the power of white supremacy and condemns Israel as an oppressive colonial state.
Thirty-one legislators, led by the Legislative Jewish Caucus, are calling for a do-over on teaching ethnic studies after a half-dozen years of strife.
The authors are convinced that flaws in a voluntary model curriculum have led to complaints and lawsuits alleging that some districts are using biased and antisemitic course content and instruction. Therefore, they propose starting again by creating academic standards that would direct what is taught in the course and how.
Assembly Bill 1468 would require the State Board of Education to restart a curriculum process that was highly contested six years ago. It resulted in multiple drafts and an uneasy compromise of language and goals reflected in a nearly 700-page California Ethnic Studies Model Curriculum. Since its adoption in 2021, school districts have had the responsibility to create their own curriculum based largely on interpretations of ambiguities of what constitutes an ethnic studies course.
“When California believes in something, we write standards for it,” said Assemblymember Dawn Addis, D-Morro Bay, a former teacher. “Whether it’s English language arts, English language development, history, social science — there are different sets of standards. It creates a common understanding of what kids are supposed to be able to learn and do, and what teachers are supposed to teach.”
“What’s happened in our schools is, one, antisemitism. But two, it’s tearing a lot of communities apart over something that is supposed to be really beneficial to children when done right.”
In addition to creating academic standards, the bill would create new disclosure and oversight measures that don’t apply to the current model framework or academic standards for other subjects. They would require:
school districts to submit ethnic studies curricula to the California Department of Education for review
the Instructional Quality Commission, which advises the State Board of Education, to recommend a framework and instructional materials aligned to the new standards;
the California Department of Education to report annually on compliance with state laws;
providers of content and standards trainers to submit their materials to the state to ensure compliance with the standards.
Opposition will likely be intense.
“The bill’s push for increased oversight and censorship is deeply concerning, restricting students’ ability to engage in critical discussions on human rights, globalism, and social justice,” said Tricia Gallagher-Geursten, a lecturer in ethnic studies at the University of California, San Diego. “Furthermore, it diminishes the intellectual integrity of ethnic studies by dismissing the foundational theories and pedagogies that define all academic disciplines, violating the principle of academic freedom.”
“AB 1468 is driven by those seeking to regulate educational content by silencing perspectives they oppose,” she said. “At this crucial moment, the UC Ethnic Studies Faculty Council stands with California students and our diverse communities in urging legislators to oppose AB 1468 and protect the integrity of ethnic studies.”
Last year, the University of California (UC) and California State University (CSU) ethnic studies faculty and the California Teachers Association led the opposition to a less sweeping bill that would have required more disclosure of a proposed ethnic studies course and a review by a committee of teachers and parents. The California Teachers Association and UC and CSU ethnic studies faculty members criticized it as unwarranted and unprecedented interference with instruction.
Addis and Assemblymember Rick Zbur, D-Los Angeles, introduced the bill late in the session and withdrew it because of a lack of support. This year’s 32 co-authors include legislators outside the 18-member Jewish Legislative Caucus, including Assemblymembers David Alvarez, D-San Diego, and Sharon Quirk-Silva, D-Fullerton.
“Jewish students are facing a very difficult environment in the community at large, certainly on college campuses,” said Alvarez. “It’s important that we acknowledge that and that we have curriculum that’s standards-based, as we do with other curriculums, reflects California’s values and steers away from antisemitism.”
Targeting Liberated Ethnic Studies
The legislation would curtail districts that have adopted Liberated Ethnic Studies, although it doesn’t name the curriculum or the consortium identified with promoting it. UC and CSU ethnic studies professors and instructors developed the Liberated version as an alternative after the State Board largely rejected the first draft of the model curriculum, which they had written, as ideological and biased against Jews.
The state’s final version of the model curriculum presents a multiperspective exploration of the culture, achievements and struggles, past and ongoing, of the four primary racial and ethnic groups in California. They are Native Americans, Black Americans, Asian Americans, and Hispanic Americans.
The Liberated version takes a perspective that stresses the ongoing oppression of people of color through white supremacy and capitalism. It directs students to examine their own self-identities as to how their race, ethnicity, sexuality, and wealth and privilege intersect with others. Ethnic studies teachers say students find the courses uplifting, not pessimistic.
To date, the state has kept no records on curricula that districts have adopted, but more than two dozen districts have contracted with groups affiliated with Liberated trainers and leaders.
Charges of antisemitism
Legislators made an explicit reference to that first draft when they passed Assembly Bill 101, which established the as-yet unfunded mandate for districts to offer a one-semester ethnic studies course in high school starting in fall 2025 and to require taking it for a high school diploma starting in 2029-30.
They wrote, “it is the intent of the Legislature that (districts) not use the portions of the draft model curriculum that were not adopted by the Instructional Quality Commission due to concerns related to bias, bigotry, and discrimination.”
Both Attorney General Rob Bonta and Brooks Allen, executive director of the State Board of Education and an adviser to Gov. Gavin Newsom, have sent separate memos reminding districts to follow that prohibition. Nonetheless, proponents of the Liberated curriculum point to references to oppression and “intersectionality” included in the final framework to argue that their approach is consistent with the state framework.
The Liberated curriculum also emphasizes solidarity with the Palestinian people in their struggle against domination by Israel, a modern “settler colonial state” oppressing people of color.
The slaughter of 1,200 Israelis by Hamas fighters in communities bordering Gaza in October 2023, followed by more than a year of fighting and bombings that have displaced hundreds of thousands of Gazans and caused the deaths of an estimated 40,000, have heightened tensions in the classroom. Jewish organizations and parents have complained that one-sided lessons against Zionism and the Israeli government have blended into overt antisemitism.
The federal Department of Education’s Office of Civil Rights is investigating discrimination allegations against Berkeley Unified. The Louis D. Brandeis Center for Human Rights Under Law has filed complaints against Fremont High School, Santa Clara Unified, and, in its latest filing, against Etiwanda School District in Rancho Cucamonga. It alleges that a seventh grade girl’s middle school failed to intervene to stop physical abuse and repeated antisemitic slurs, including a Hitler “joke,” by other students. Last month, Santa Ana Unified agreed to discontinue three Liberated-affiliated ethnic studies courses after a lawsuit over public meetings violations revealed antisemitic bias and slurs by staff members.
The proposed bill does not prohibit discussions of the Israel-Palestine issue, avoiding a trespass on free speech. However, it calls for ethnic studies to “focus on the domestic experience and stories of historically marginalized peoples in American society.”
Like Assembly Bill 101 before it, the bill would ensure that ethnic studies “remains true to its original intent — promoting inclusivity, respect, and historical accuracy for all communities with a domestic focus,” said Sen. Josh Becker, D-Menlo Park.
The 2016 law that authorized the creation of a model curriculum framework called for a committee consisting of faculty members of university ethnic studies departments, K-12 teachers, and administrators experienced in teaching the subject. The committee members whom the State Board appointed ended up writing the disputed first draft. AB 1468 also calls for a similar advisory committee, the majority of whom would be experts in ethnic studies.
Wouldn’t that possibly lead to standards similar to those in the model curriculum’s first draft — and a repeat of the animosities of the first process?
Bill author Zbur disagrees. The governor, not the State Board of Education, would name the members, and the language of the bill’s intent would make clear that the experts would be more “traditional” and not proponents of the Liberated curriculum. The advisory committee would also include representatives of communities most frequently targeted by hate crimes, thus assuring a voice from the Jewish community.
Newsom would appear sympathetic to the effort. In April 2024, he pledged in his Golden State Plan to Counter Antisemitism that he “will work with the Jewish Caucus and Legislature to pursue legislation strengthening the guardrails established by AB 101.”
His administration has not commented on the new bill.
The Sonoma State University men’s soccer team practices in the rain recently on the campus in Rohnert Park. Division II sports are on the chopping block to save money.
Credit: Amy DiPierro / EdSource
On the soccer pitch, inthe physics classroom and in the office of a trusted professor, students at Sonoma State University are confronting a demoralizing challenge: What happens if my program gets cut?
The Rohnert Park campus, 50 miles north of San Francisco, has announced a contentious proposal to close a $24 million budget deficit by nixing six academic departments entirely, eliminating about two dozenmajor degree programs and cutting all NCAA Division II sports, among other measures.
Sonoma State’s experience is the most dire example of the cost reductions at many of the 23 Cal State campuses, which in total serve more than 450,000 students around the state. The university system’s leaders say cuts are prompted by an anticipated decrease in state funding, rising costs and, on some campuses,slumping enrollment figures. The number of students at Sonoma State has plunged dramatically, from 9,400 students in 2015 to a nadir of about 5,800 in2024.
On a recentvisit to the campus, an EdSource reporter spent time with students, faculty and coachesdirectly impacted by the expected cuts. The most defiant promised to fight for reprieves or backed state legislators’ demands for a turnaround plan. This month, some students sued to try to block proposed cuts.
But mostly, students and faculty expressed worry that this could be the last time a Sonoma State undergraduate sees the advanced math explaining why light moves more slowly in air than in a vacuum, ponders the differences between second and third wave feminism or masters the subtle finesse of playing one-touch soccer in the rain.
Geology: ‘All of that will be gone’
Jackson Kaiser grew up at the foot of Mount Konocti in Lake County, part of a volcanic field three hours north of San Francisco that feeds what is reckoned to be the largest geothermal complex in the world. “I had a lot of questions that I didn’t know how to answer,” he said. And that’s why he majored in geology at Sonoma State University.
But the department that has turned Kaiser’s curiosity into a promising career may soon disappear.Kaiser could be among the last 40 or so Sonoma State geology majors, according to a professor in the department, if the university goes ahead with plans to eliminate the department. Sonoma State spokesperson Jeff Keating confirmed that all tenured and tenure-track geology faculty have received layoff notices, though several may be asked to teach temporarily.
On a recent Wednesday afternoon, Kaiser reverently held his favorite rock samples in theclassroom where geology majors take most of their classes. “The idea that that place won’t be here to come back to, that I won’t have an alma mater — it feels like our administration doesn’t want me to be a proud Seawolf,” he said,referring to the campus mascot.
Student Jackson Kaiser, who grew up fascinated by a volcanic field near a large geothermal complex north of San Francisco, laments that he may be among the last geology majors at Sonoma State.Amy DiPierro
Kaiser, 36, was working in the produce department of a Safeway grocery store when he found himself researching the chemical formulas of minerals. He marveled at their straight lines and geometric forms, so elegant they appear unnatural. He wanted to know more.
So around 2022,Kaiser, his partner and their two children, now 4 and 6, started commuting an hour and half or more every weekday from Lake County to Sonoma State, sending the kids to the Children’s School on campus while both parents took undergraduate classes. These days, Kaiser bunks with classmates from Monday to Friday, returning home to his family on weekends. “It’s not great,” he said. “But I’m working towards a better future, where I’ll have a real career and not just be working in a grocery store.”
His chosen career can have high stakes. After all, Kaiser said, it was a careful geological study in the 1960s that ultimately blocked a plan to build a nuclear power plant just 30 minutes from campus on a site traversed by the San Andreas Fault. A geological assessment is often a necessity for construction projects, especially in a region where debris flows can follow climate change-fueled wildfires. But geologists worry their numbers are waning despite growing demand for their skills.
A geology classroom on the campus of Sonoma State University on Feb. 12,Amy DiPierro
Kaiser, who will graduate at the end of the summer, has been collecting business cards from potential employers like geologic consulting firms. Thanks to the department’s frequent field trips, he’s had opportunities to practice skills like mapping, sample collection and paleontology.
He’s also taken part in department traditions, like feasting on watermelon at the summit after mountainous hikes or visiting the mammoth fossil that Sonoma State students excavated in 1981. “I hate the thought,” he said, “that all of that will be gone.”
Soccer: ‘Play all the way through’
The weather was lousy, but there they were in the rain at 9:15 a.m., the Sonoma State University men’s soccer team, lacing up their boots and stowing their belongings in white garbage bags to keep them dry. They had come from nearby Santa Rosa and far away Kapolei, Hawaii, to attendthe university. Together, they navigated the difficult reality that this could be their team’s last season,no matter how well they played.
There was Carson Sterling, a freshman center back from 18 miles north in Windsor, whose father and mother played soccer for Sonoma State before him. There was defender Cameron Fisk, a junior from Los Angeles studying business marketing, who had rebounded from injuries to play this fall.And, of course, there washead coach Marcus Ziemer, leading the Seawolves for the 34th year.
Ziemer watched the players warm up, his eyes shielded from the drizzle under a black baseball cap and glasses. Since he started as head coach in 1991, the men’s soccer team has won eight conference championships and earned its first and only national title in 2002.
But now things are grim. The university announced on Jan. 22 that it planned to eliminate men’s soccer along with the school’s other NCAA sports, among other austerities.
“It’s a very difficult kind of limbo right now,” he said. “We’re fighting hard to try and save the program and some of the other majors as well, trying to get them to reconsider.”
The Sonoma State University men’s soccer team practices recently in Rohnert Park. With the school’s whole Division II sports program potentially being cut, some team players are looking to transfer through the NCAA portal.Amy DiPierro
Ziemer himself is in limbo, too. Unless efforts to save the Sonoma State Division II sports programs succeed, his contract will end on June 30. He would probably retire rather than seek another coaching job.
In the meantime, Ziemer and his four assistant coaches have advised players who wish to continue their collegiate soccer careers to enter the NCAA transfer portal,expressing interest in moving to other schools. A few already have offers.
“I’m just grateful that with everything going on, we have coaches like them that are willing to help us and see other opportunities,” said Fisk, who has entered the transfer portal while the Sonoma State team’s status is uncertain.
But for now, the team’s focus was on preparing the Seawolves for a challenging spring season, including matchups against NCAA Division I and semi-professional sides. Practice started with dynamic stretches, then a frenetic game of keep-away and a shooting drill to loosen quads grown stiff in the damp.
“The energy is still really high,” said Sterling, who is in talks with soccer programs at other schools. “Obviously, it’s a kind of bad situation, and we’re just hoping for the best. But we’re going to play all the way through no matter what, and we’re going to play hard for each other.”
The squad split into teams for a scrimmage, an assistant coach barking urgent encouragement as they played. He called a time-out. “What does it take? Communication. Thinking one pass, two passes, three passes ahead. Moving, adjusting, being aware,” he yelled, his voice booming over the slick turf. “So because we’re struggling, should we say, ‘Ehh, f— it, move on.’? Or should we grow through it? Let’s grow through it — let’s grow through it together!”
The Sonoma State University men’s soccer team practices in the rain recently in Rohnert Park.Amy DiPierro
Women’s and gender studies: ‘I didn’t get that anywhere else’
Under the fluorescent lights of a windowless basement classroom, Xochilt Martinez Balladares and about 20 other students eagerly awaited a discussion on queer and trans theory. But before they could unpack works by critical heavyweights like Adrienne Rich, they trained their attention on an issuecloser at hand: the plan to dismantle the Sonoma State University Women’s and Gender Studies Department.
If the proposal goes forward, Sonoma State will offer the last women’s and gender studies classes in spring 2026. That could mark the end of a more than 50-year run that started with the founding of the program in the early 1970s and evolved into the Women’s and Gender Studies Department in 2001. Several students said the plan compounds their feeling that historically marginalized groups are under attack as the Trump administration seeks to end diversity, equity and inclusion efforts.
Martinez and her classmates also argued that the department teaches skills central to future careers, while providing community when they need it most. For Martinez, a women’s and gender studies major and Chicano and Latino studies minor, the long-term goal is to go into immigration law. In the short-term, she is considering a social work degree so she can work with at-risk youth and families.
“I almost dropped out twice because I felt very out of place,” said Martinez, 32. But she persevered thanks to a women’s and gender studies instructor who “talked to me on a personal level and made sure that I could continue my education. I didn’t get that anywhere else.”
The department typically attracts 25 to 35 majors a year, said Don Romesburg, the professor who teaches the theory course, but many more students who aren’t majors take its classes. Campus spokesperson Keating confirmed that all the department’s professors have been laid off, but said the university “will continue to support and encourage the teaching of courses that support women’s rights and the rights of the LGBTQIA+ community.”
Janis Phillips, 46,an education graduate student, said the loss of the department makes her question whether the university shares her commitment to students’ social and emotional learning.
“When students feel safe and seen and heard on campuses, that is one of the best predictors of academic success,” she said, facing her classmates around the circle of desks. “So to take a bunch of students and make them feel like they are not seen and not heard will be detrimental to their academic success.”
Students said the major prepares them for careers as psychologists, marriage and family therapists or health care providers. Because majors have to complete a community service requirement, students work with local organizations that help unhoused families, prevent sexual assault and support LGBTQ youth. “We’ve really taken seriously this question that parents often ask their students, which is, ‘What would you do with that degree?’” Romesburg said.
Despite the uncertain future of the department, students are doing the reading, Romesburg said, mindful that those who come behind them might not get the same opportunity. “They’re ready to roll up their sleeves and do project-based work, where they’re really generating ideas and reflections and engaging with the material,” he said.
A flier is posted to a bulletin board on the campus of Sonoma State University.
Physics: ‘Watching something that you love die’
The physics students filing into Scott Severson’s 9:30 a.m. optics class brightened with the wide-eyed surprise of children peeking at a gift: a sturdy wooden crate.
“It’s Christmas in our labs,” Severson said, gesturing toward the crate, which was filled with professional-gradelaboratory hardware. “We ordered this in better days,” he added, and a few students chuckled.
The Sonoma State Physics and Astronomy Department has indeed seen better days. Its alumni have gone on to lead companies, earn advanced degrees and become professors themselves. One of the department’s proudest moments came in 2016, when professor Lynn Cominsky was part of the team that documented a phenomenon called gravitational waves, an achievement that won three of her collaboratorsthe Nobel Prize. Cominsky said she has raised more than $43 million in grants for Sonoma State.
Such prestige has not shielded the Physics and Astronomy Department from cost-cutting plans. Though the department will avoid total elimination, Sonoma State plans to phase out its physics major. It is giving 30 majors two years to graduate and leaving 10 first-year students to find another degree or transfer, Severson said. After that, physics faculty memberswill only teach physics courses for students in other programs, like biology or engineering.
Already, one of the department’s lecturers has received a layoff notice, according to the university. Severson said he and three other remaining tenured faculty will cover the teaching load as the physics degree winds down. He doesn’t anticipate that tenured faculty will lose their jobs, but said some may seek work elsewhere or retire.
Troy Wilson and Jeffery Reedy at Sonoma State University demonstrate an experiment created as part of a program aimed at introducing middle and high school students to STEM fields on Feb. 12.Amy DiPierro
Ending the physics major also could reverberate at Cominsky’s EdEon STEM Learning program, which creates educational materials aimed at inspiring middle and high school students to pursue careers in science, technology, engineering and math.
EdEon’s work depends on Sonoma State undergraduates, Cominsky said, and currently employs between 15 and 20 students in fields including physics. “None of the research grants I write would have been possible without physics majors,” she said.
Meanwhile, the students in Severson’s optics class watched as he played them a video illustrating the spiral of two black holes.
“I want you to notice the colors of this,” said Severson, who has taught at the university since 2007. “The brighter the red, the greater the distortion of spacetime as this is happening.”
Among the optics students was Madison Ambriz, who plans to graduate at the end of fall 2025.Ambriz spent the summer learning to assemble circuit boards as part of a collaboration to upgrade the Large Hadron Collider, a famed particle accelerator used to test physicists’ theoretical predictions. “I had such a blast with it,” she said, but her enthusiasm has been tempered by the feeling that it’s too late to save the major.
“It doesn’t matter what we say, doesn’t matter how heartbroken we are, doesn’t matter what the numbers say, they’re still going to cut the [major],” Ambriz said. “And it’s just watching something that you love die, and it’s horrible.”
The Covid-19 pandemic amplified long-standing inequalities; there are no quick fixes to high chronic absentee rates and other challenges.
A return to “normal” won’t address post-Covid students feeling disengaged – nor should it.
Unlike other states, California districts have a $6 billion Covid block grant to replace federal relief that expired.
In March 2020, the Covid pandemic shut down schools, creating havoc, particularly among California’s most vulnerable children. Five years later, despite unprecedented funding from the state and federal governments, most districts continue to struggle to recover the ground they lost amid multiple challenges: more disgruntled parents and emotionally fragile students, a decline in enrollment, and uncertain finances.
According to calculations by researchers at Stanford and Harvard universities, most California school districts remain below pre-pandemic levels in standardized test scores — 31% of a grade equivalent below in math and 40% of a grade equivalent in reading. These averages understate the widening gaps in living conditions as well as test scores between the lowest-income and least-impoverished districts and schools.
The drop in the average scores in California and the nation on the National Assessment of Educational Progress in 2024 “masks a pernicious inequality,” said Sean Reardon, faculty director of the Educational Opportunity Project at Stanford.
Scores are a shorthand measurement of learning, and they do not address the deeper, latent impact of the pandemic.
“We tend to overlook the longer-term effects of the delay in socialization and self-discipline — things that schools nurtured in young people,” said Vito Chiala, principal of William C. Overfelt High, whose 1,400 primarily low-income Hispanic and Vietnamese American students live in East San Jose. “Young people becoming adults at the high school level seem to be maybe two or three years behind where it used to be.”
In the first year of returning from remote learning, the focus was on school-related behaviors and self-management, Chiala said. “Students who had spent over a year saying whatever they wanted on social media had to face people in person, and that was super-uncomfortable sometimes. Now it’s much more about endurance, being willing and able to do hard academic work for longer periods of time.”
Overfelt High is far from unique. The National Center for Education Statistics reported that in 2021-22, 87% of public schools said the pandemic harmed student socioemotional development, and 56% reported increased incidents of classroom disruptions from student misconduct.
Educators, in turn, have taken a more holistic approach to building students’ mindsets and meeting families’ basic needs, said Bruce Fuller, a professor of education and public policy at the University of California Berkeley, who is studying nine California districts’ post-Covid responses.
Recognizing that Covid amplified the harsh conditions of living in poverty, Gov. Gavin Newsom and legislators put $4 billion into creating community schools in low-income neighborhoods to strengthen ties to parents and open health clinics at schools. The state began to fund free universal school breakfasts and lunches.
With state grants, Rocketship Public Schools hired care coordinators in all of its charter schools, most in East San Jose, to cope with the aftermath of Covid.
Fabiola Zamora, a mother of four children from ages 2 to 10, described the support from the care corps coordinator for her school when she became homeless. “We received blankets, diapers, warm clothes. Mrs. Martinez guided me to a shelter and helped get my daughter to school,” she said. “It was hard. I was scared; it made me feel I wasn’t alone.”
Mental health responses
The proportion of students experiencing mental health issues had been rising before Covid. It accelerated during remote learning and coincided with an explosion of social media and cell phone use. The Journal of the American Medical Association reported that the incidence and prevalence of depression among 1.7 million 5- to 22-year-olds served by Kaiser Permanente in Southern California rose by about 60%, and the incidence of anxiety increased 31% from 2017 to 2021.
School districts in turn hired more counselors and psychologists using mental health funding and $13.4 billion the state received from the federal American Rescue Plan Act of 2021, the last and biggest installment of the $23.4 billion in Covid aid from Congress. Savvy districts have tapped Medi-Cal, the California version of Medicaid, to reimburse school mental health services, although Republican plans for massive cuts to Medicaid could jeopardize the funding.
Addressing the whole child makes sense. Disengaged and depressed students can’t focus; chronically absent students fall behind, complicating efforts to catch them up while moving others ahead.
But have these added responsibilities overburdened and preoccupied districts? In a fifth-year Covid reassessment, Robin Lake, director of the Center for Reinventing Public Education at Arizona State University, and Paul Hill, the center’s founder, raised that issue. “By easing up on graduation requirements” (which the California Legislature did), “making it easier for students to earn good grades, excusing frequent absences, and prioritizing social-emotional learning curricula over core academics,” they wrote, “the pendulum has swung too far away from the core business of schooling.”
Stubbornly high chronic absenteeism
The persistently high rates of chronic absences in California since Covid underscore complex challenges. In the first full year back from remote learning, chronic absenteeism nearly tripled statewide from 12% in 2018-19 to 30%, mirroring that of other states.
Just as with test scores, the averages masked yawning differences between ethnic and racial groups and levels of poverty: 35% for Hispanics, 42.5% for Black students, and 46% for homeless and foster youths, compared with 11% for Asian and 23% for white students. Students are chronically absent when they miss 10% or more days of school.
By 2023-24, the statewide rate declined, first to 25% in 2022-23 and then to 20% — still two-thirds higher than pre-Covid. An analysis by researchers Heather Hough of Policy Analysis for California Education and Hedy Chang of Attendance Works helps explain why learning recovery has been slow in impoverished schools. Only 2% of schools with the fewest low-income students had high or extreme levels of chronic absences, compared with 72% of schools in which three-quarters or more of students were low-income. The disparity isn’t new; the dimensions of the divide are.
“If you want to reduce chronic absence, you need to solve the root causes that result in kids not showing up to school in the first place,” said Attendance Works founder Chang. “The barriers — poor transportation, homelessness and food insecurity — are huge, and these issues are hard to solve.”
Schools also had a messaging problem. “During the pandemic, we said, ‘You should stay home for any reason for illness, any symptom.’ I don’t think we had counter-messaging when we wanted kids to come back.”
“The imperception was maybe missing school doesn’t matter so much if I think my kid might be sick,” Chang said.
Some high school students reached the same conclusion, added Overfelt principal Chiala. “We always said school is mandatory, school is important. And then we said for a year and a half (during remote learning) it wasn’t,” he said. “I think psychologically, a lot of young people are like, ‘”If it was really important, you would’ve made me keep coming.’”
Computers for all students
There is an unmistakable positive legacy of Covid: the equitable spread of technology after initial chaos.
Covid caught the state flat-footed, without a plan or the capacity to switch on a dime to remote learning; in many districts, this did not go well, as kids with home computers but spotty internet drove to fast-food parking lots to download the week’s homework assignments and to upload their answers.
In June 2020, the California Department of Education estimated that 700,000 students lacked a home computer — which soon rose to 1 million, or about 17% of students — and that there were 322,000 hot spots for internet service.
State Superintendent of Public Instruction Tony Thurmond created the Bridge the Divide Fund. With $18.4 million in donations, it distributed 45,000 Chromebooks, plus 100,725 hot spots.
The difference-maker arrived in 2021 with $7 billion as California’s share of the Biden administration’s Emergency Connectivity Fund. Federal funds have enabled more than 75% of schools nationwide to provide a computer for every student, and more than 80% of schools have high-speed broadband service, said Evan Marwell, the founder of the San Francisco-based nonprofit EducationSuperhighway.
Soon, it will be time to recycle personal computers. The good news, Marwell said, is a Chromebook can now be bought for $200.
Low return on federal investment?
On the 2021-22 Smarter Balanced tests, low-income students fell back after years of slow improvement. The overall 35% proficiency in English language arts was 4 percentage points lower than in pre-pandemic 2018-19. The 21% proficiency in math was a drop of 6 percentage points. Two years later, low-income students had regained half of what they had lost on both tests.
During these three years, per-student spending in California mushroomed by about 50% per student because of federal Covid relief and one-time state funding due to record-setting revenues, according to data assembled by Edunomics Lab, an education finance organization. The combination of high spending and lower test scores earned California one of the nation’s worst “returns on investments.”
However, a newly released deeper analysis of district-by-district Smarter Balanced results by researchers at UC San Diego, American Institutes of Research, UC Berkeley and Public Policy Institute of California showed that two years of federal Covid spending had a statistically significant effect in 2021-22. It was equivalent to a gain in math and English language arts of about 10 days of learning, said economics professor Julian Betts of UC San Diego.
Schools that reopened a year earlier from remote learning than most schools in California showed a bigger gain: about 20 days of learning.
However, those positive factors were not big enough to offset the effects of poverty — a loss of a quarter year of learning for schools with a high percentage of low-income students.
Researchers also looked at the results of the California Healthy Kids Survey that students fill out annually to see if there was a correlation between widespread bullying and student harassment with test scores. The effect was large: the equivalent of a half-year of lost learning in math and a third of a year in English language arts in 2021-22. The data document what socio-emotional learning advocates have preached for years: School climate matters in recovering academically from Covid declines.
One last source of funding
Starting with the 2021-22 state budget, Gov. Gavin Newsom and the Legislature invested more than $10 billion in TK-12 in the post-Covid years. The bulk of it went to transitional kindergarten (TK) and extended learning programs. What Newsom didn’t direct funding to were comprehensive, statewide, early reading and numeracy programs and high-intensive tutoring — two strategies that other states like Louisiana funded to respond Covid-era declines in test scores. Newsom had proposed $2.6 billion for “high-dosage” in-school tutoring; it vanished in the final budget.
What did survive was a $6 billion Learning Loss Emergency Block Grant program. Apparently unique among states in providing substantial money beyond the expiration of the $23.4 billion federal Covid funding, it directs most money to heavily low-income districts through 2026-27. In settling the Cayla J. lawsuit filed by Oakland and Los Angeles families over the state’s failure to meet their children’s education needs during remote learning, the state agreed to require that districts use the block grant for evidence-based strategies, like high-dosage tutoring. Districts must also conduct a needs assessment study, create a plan for the money, and present it to the public.
The learning recovery block grant provides an opportunity to ask questions raised by the Center for Reinventing Public Education in its five-year reassessment:
What worked and didn’t work over the last five years?
How are the students most in need going to get extra time and attention?
What skills and new work habits are required of teachers?
Authors Robin Lake and Paul Hill concluded that the needed systemic changes would be “a heavy lift.” The necessary changes “probably can’t be done unless state officials seriously consider major waivers of regulation and teacher unions allow experimentation with new teacher roles and school staffing rules.”
Vito Chiala
Bruce Fuller, the UC Berkeley professor who is analyzing the learning recovery plans of 700 California districts, agrees. “It’s hard to sustain anything that’s seriously innovative,” he said.
Vito Chiala at Overfelt High in San Jose, however, said Overfelt is becoming a different place. “When we came back (from remote learning), we really spent a lot of time radically dreaming about how will we treat our kids? How will we grade work? How, what will we be teaching them? How will we embrace our students’ humanity?”
The result: “We don’t grade the same way we used to. Classes aren’t rushing through curriculum like they used to. Teachers aren’t feeling they have to move on, even though half the class hasn’t learned. We’re really trying to motivate students to feel the intrinsic need to learn and get better.”
“We’re still finding our footing in sort of this post-pandemic world,” he said.
Home tutoring has become an increasingly popular job choice for many in Lucknow, offering both flexibility and the chance to make a difference in students’ lives. Whether you’re a student, a retired teacher, or a professional seeking additional income, becoming a home tutor has its own perks and challenges. In this blog, we will walk through the various pros and cons of being a home tutor in Lucknow, helping you decide if it’s the right fit for you.
Pros of Working as a Home Tutor in Lucknow
1. Flexible Working Hours
One of the biggest advantages of being a home tutor is the flexibility it offers. Unlike a traditional 9-to-5 job, you have the liberty to choose your work hours. This flexibility is particularly beneficial for students who wish to earn some money alongside their studies or for professionals looking for a side hustle.
2. A Personalized Teaching Experience
Home tutoring allows you to work closely with students, providing a tailored learning experience. You can focus on their individual needs and weaknesses, which is often not possible in a classroom setting. This one-on-one attention can be incredibly rewarding as you witness your student’s progress firsthand.
3. Lucrative Earning Potential
In a city like Lucknow, where education is a priority for many families, home tutors are in high demand. The pay can be quite good, especially if you have expertise in subjects that are sought after, such as Mathematics, Science, or English. Tutors can charge per hour or per session, and your earnings can be substantial if you manage multiple students.
4. Gaining Teaching Experience
If you are aspiring to become a teacher or work in the education sector, home tutoring is a great way to build your experience. It helps you develop essential skills such as communication, time management, and understanding student psychology. These skills can be invaluable if you decide to transition to a full-time teaching role in the future.
5. Building Strong Relationships
Being a home tutor means you form strong bonds not just with the student but also with their family. This can open up networking opportunities and even help you gain more referrals for additional tutoring work. A good reputation can spread quickly in cities like Lucknow, and word-of-mouth can be your best marketing tool.
Cons of Working as a Home Tutor in Lucknow
1. Irregular Income
While the pay can be lucrative, it is not always consistent. Income can vary depending on the number of students, cancellations, school holidays, or exam seasons. Unlike a salaried job, where you know how much you will earn each month, tutoring can be unpredictable, and you need to budget accordingly.
2. Travel and Time Constraints
If you’re teaching students in their homes across different parts of Lucknow, travel can be a significant challenge. The city’s traffic and weather conditions can make it tiring to reach your students on time. Moreover, if you are traveling to multiple students’ homes in a day, it can limit the number of sessions you can conduct and increase your transportation costs.
3. Managing Diverse Student Needs
Every student has unique learning needs and paces. As a tutor, it can be a challenge to adapt to different learning styles and ensure each student understands the concepts. Some students may require more attention or could be less motivated, making your job harder as you try to find creative ways to keep them engaged and improve their performance.
4. Work-Life Balance
Since tutoring often happens during the evenings or weekends (when students are available), it can affect your work-life balance. You may find yourself working at odd hours or sacrificing your personal time to accommodate students’ schedules. This might not be an issue for some, but it can become overwhelming, especially when you have multiple students with varying time preferences.
5. Reliability and Consistency Issues
Tutoring requires consistency and not all students or their parents are reliable when it comes to scheduled sessions. Some might cancel classes at the last minute, or students might skip sessions due to personal reasons. This can disrupt your schedule and, ultimately, your income.
Tips for Success as a Home Tutor in Lucknow
While there are both advantages and disadvantages to being a home tutor, here are a few tips to help you succeed:
Set Clear Expectations: Be transparent with your students and their parents regarding your availability, fees, and cancellation policies to avoid misunderstandings.
Stay Organized: Maintain a schedule to track sessions, payments, and progress for each student to keep everything in order.
Market Yourself: Spread the word about your services through word-of-mouth, social media, and tutoring platforms like TheTuitionTeacher.
Adapt and Learn: Understand that each student is different and be ready to adapt your teaching methods to suit their needs.
Conclusion
Working as a home tutor in Lucknow has its set of rewards and challenges. While the job offers flexibility, good earning potential, and the satisfaction of making a difference in students’ lives, it also comes with irregular income, travel constraints, and the need for constant adaptability. However, with the right approach and mindset, home tutoring can be a fulfilling career choice, whether you’re doing it full-time or as a side gig.
If you’re considering stepping into the world of home tutoring, weigh the pros and cons, and decide if it aligns with your career goals and lifestyle. After all, there’s nothing more rewarding than helping a student achieve their academic goals and knowing you’ve played a part in their success.
April 7, 2025, by Dean Hoke: This profile of Washington and Lee University is the eighth in a series presenting small colleges throughout the United States.
Background
Founded in 1749, Washington and Lee University (W&L) is a private liberal arts college located in Lexington, Virginia. With a 325-acre campus in the Shenandoah Valley, W&L is the ninth-oldest college in the U.S. Originally Augusta Academy, it became Washington College after George Washington’s 1796 gift. It later took on its current name in honor of Robert E. Lee, who served as president following the Civil War. The school became coeducational in 1985 and is consistently ranked among the top liberal arts colleges nationally. The President of Washington and Lee since 2017 is William (Will) Dudley.
W&L enrolls approximately 1,900 undergraduates and 375 law students. The university boasts an 8:1 student-faculty ratio and an average class size of 15. The university is renowned for its rigorous academics, a single-sanction honor system, and a strong emphasis on ethical leadership and community.
Curricula
W&L offers 36 majors and 41 minors across disciplines such as the humanities, sciences, arts, business, journalism, and engineering. It’s the only leading liberal arts college with accredited undergraduate programs in business and journalism. Students can pursue either a B.A. or B.S. degree and are encouraged to pursue interdisciplinary interests. Popular majors include Business Administration, Economics, Political Science, and interdisciplinary areas such as Environmental Studies and Poverty Studies. Signature programs include the Shepherd Program for the Interdisciplinary Study of Poverty and Human Capability, combining classroom learning with community engagement on social justice issues. Over 60% of undergraduates study abroad, and a significant number participate in internships and research, often supported by university grants.
Strengths
Exceptional Outcomes and Opportunities: W&L’s four-year graduation rate is about 92%, and over 93% of graduates secure employment or enter graduate school within six months of graduation. They are a top producer of Fulbright scholars and other fellowship winners, reflecting the high caliber of their students and the support they receive in pursuing global opportunities.
Academic Excellence: W&L consistently ranks among the top liberal arts schools in the United States. It has been ranked #9 by US News and World Report in Best Small Colleges in America and #9 for best liberal arts colleges. The school consistently ranks among the top producers of Fulbright and other prestigious fellowships.
Experiential Learning: The unique Spring Term and emphasis on study abroad (60%+ participation) offer high-impact, immersive educational experiences. Programs like the Shepherd Poverty Program and community-based internships promote civic learning.
Financial Strength: With a $2 billion endowment (roughly $900,000 per student), W&L offers strong financial aid and has a need-blind admissions policy for most domestic and international applicants.
Weaknesses
Exclusivity: W&L has historically attracted a particular student demographic and features a social scene dominated by Greek life, which presents challenges in broadening campus culture. Approximately 75% of undergraduates join fraternities or sororities—one of the highest Greek participation rates in the nation. This deep-rooted Greek presence contributes to close social bonds and robust alumni networks. Still, it can also create a perception of social exclusivity for Students who do not participate in Greek life.
Historical Legacy and Diversity Challenges: W&L grapples with aspects of its historic legacy that pose modern challenges. The institution’s very name honors Robert E. Lee, and debates have occurred over whether to rename the university, given Lee’s ties to the Confederacy and slavery. In 2020, campus discussions on this issue drew national attention and revealed divisions among stakeholders. The cultural transition – shedding outdated perceptions and ensuring that students from all backgrounds feel fully welcome – remains an ongoing challenge for Washington and Lee.
Economic Impact
W&L is not only an academic institution but also a major economic engine for Lexington and the surrounding Shenandoah Valley. In addition to educating students, W&L significantly boosts the local economy through employment, spending, and partnerships. The university is one of the largest employers in the region, with roughly 870 faculty and staff. A comprehensive economic impact study in 2010 found that W&L was responsible for over $225 million in economic activity in the region in a single year.
Enrollment Trends
As of Fall 2024, Washington and Lee’s total undergraduate enrollment stands at 1,866 undergraduate students, with an additional 355 students in the law school. Over the past decade, undergraduate enrollment has remained stable.
The undergraduate acceptance rate has declined from 24% to 14% over the past five years, reflecting increased selectivity. The gender balance has also shifted to slightly favor women (51%). The university maintains a first-year retention rate of 96-98% and six-year graduation rates remain steady between 93% and 95%, reflecting a high level of student satisfaction and institutional support.
Degrees Awarded by Major
In the Class of 2020 -21, W&L conferred degrees across a wide spectrum of majors. Below is a breakdown by number of degrees awarded that year:
Return of Investment
According to the Georgetown University Center on Education and the Workforce’s study, Ranking 4,600 Colleges by ROI (2025), W&L offers a strong return on investment. In this study, ROI is calculated as the difference between a graduate’s cumulative earnings over time and the total out-of-pocket cost of attending college, which refers to the net cost after accounting for grants and scholarships.
For students earning a bachelor’s degree, W&L’s median ROI significantly exceeds the average for private nonprofit colleges, both in the short and long term.
Source: Georgetown University Center on Education and the Workforce, analysis of U.S. Department of Education College Scorecard data, 2009–2022.
Alumni
W&L boasts a vibrant alumni network that is both tightly knit and far-reaching. There are over 25,000 living W&L alumni worldwide, spread across all 50 states and dozens of countries. Alumni often refer to themselves as “Generals” (after the school’s athletic moniker) and maintain strong ties to the institution long after graduation.
Notable Alumni: W&L’s alumni list includes prominent figures in law, government, business, journalism, literature, and the arts:
Lewis F. Powell Jr. (Class of 1929; Law 1931): Was a U.S. Supreme Court Justice (served 1972–1987) . Justice Powell was one of three Supreme Court justices who attended Washington and Lee.
Tom Wolfe (Class of 1951): Best-selling author and journalist, pioneer of the “New Journalism” movement. Wolfe wrote influential works like The Right Stuff and The Bonfire of the Vanities, and is an icon in American literature.
Roger Mudd (Class of 1950): Emmy Award-winning broadcast journalist. Mudd was a longtime CBS News correspondent and anchor known for his work on CBS Evening News and documentaries.
Joseph L. Goldstein (Class of 1962): Awarded the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine for his research in cholesterol metabolism.
Warren A. Stephens (Class of 1979): Chairman, president, and CEO of Stephens Inc., President Donald Trump nominated him to serve as the United States ambassador to the United Kingdom.
Rob Ashford (Class of 1982): A renowned choreographer and director, Ashford is an eight-time Tony Award nominee (winning one), a five-time Olivier Award nominee, and an Emmy Award winner.
Linda Klein (Class of 1983): American Lawyer and past president of the American Bar Association.
Endowment and Financial Standing
W&L’s financial foundation is exceptionally strong for a liberal arts institution of its size. As of 2024, W&L’s endowment is nearly $2.0 billion, placing it among the top liberal arts college endowments in the nation (and even comparable to some mid-sized research universities).
In a typical year, endowment earnings contribute roughly 40-50% of the university’s operating budget. The 2023 analysis by Forbes rated W&L a solid “B+” in financial health (score of about 3.34 out of 4.5)
Why is Washington & Lee Important?
Academic Excellence & Ethical Leadership: W&L exemplifies a liberal arts education that blends intellectual rigor with character development. Its Honor System promotes integrity and responsibility, shaping graduates who lead with both intellect and ethics.
Graduate Success & Influence: With 93% of graduates employed or in grad school within six months, W&L delivers top-tier outcomes. Alumni go on to excel in law, government, business, journalism, medicine, and the arts—many serving as civic leaders, mentors, and public servants.
Economic & Cultural Impact: Though small, W&L plays a major role in the Shenandoah Valley. It creates jobs, draws thousands of visitors annually, and enriches the area culturally with events, lectures, and museums. Its partnership with the local community strengthens regional vitality.
Access & Forward-Thinking Values: W&L’s need-blind admissions and robust financial aid reflect its commitment to affordability and inclusivity. It ranks highly for free speech and integrates modern disciplines like data science and entrepreneurship into a classic liberal arts framework, demonstrating how tradition and innovation can thrive together.
With its blend of tradition and innovation, W&L continues to influence American higher education. It upholds the time-honored virtues of a liberal arts college—close mentoring, a broad education, honor, and civility—while evolving to meet contemporary challenges by opening doors to more students and engaging with real-world issues. W&L remains a cornerstone institution among small colleges, illustrating the enduring importance of the liberal arts model in shaping thoughtful, responsible citizens.
Dean Hoke is Managing Partner of Edu Alliance Group, a higher education consultancy, and a Senior Fellow with the Sagamore Institute. He formerly served as President/CEO of the American Association of University Administrators (AAUA). With decades of experience in higher education leadership, consulting, and institutional strategy, he brings a wealth of knowledge on small colleges’ challenges and opportunities. Dean, along with Kent Barnds, is a co-host for the podcast series Small College America.
Students in high school now have already lived through two global economic crises, and live in a world that is literally burning at a record rate. They must handle all of this while also coping with the normal chaotic ups and downs of adolescence can be overwhelming. Into this maelstrom, students are supposed to shuttle from Geometry to Social Studies and maintain focus on their studies.
The chaos of the post-pandemic world only adds to difficulties, as it has seen an increase in an already rising percentage of students dealing with mental health problems.
Some of these problems arose in part due to the remote and hybrid learning necessitated by the global pandemic. While undoubtedly better than no learning, students are still recovering from that ‘learning loss.’ Furthermore, the social cost of such extended isolation cannot be fully understood as it has no modern point of comparison. In order to put students back on track, and best position them to succeed in the future, any solution must take into account both the mental and the educational barriers our students face.
Fortunately, just as remote learning software mitigated the damage, proper investment in and uptake of available technology can put student learning back where it needs to be.
After the pandemic many school districts transitioned into hybrid learning systems, and educators had access to information about different learning styles previously unavailable. During and after the pandemic, Artificial intelligence (AI) enabled learning allowed educators to create personalized and inclusive learning for their students, progress that we must continue to build on.
Elements of the remote and hybrid learning implemented during the pandemic must be replicated because without embracing the available technological resources, we are not giving our students the learning opportunities they deserve. Effective teaching must include any and all available resources to support students dealing with ADHD and other mental health issues, or anything else that may impact their learning experience. The increased use of educational technology (EdTech) has a long way to go to meet the need, with 71% of students strongly agreeing that EdTech helps them engage with course materials. Greater access to EdTech helps broaden access and equalize student learning, while AI-enabled platforms can maximize the benefit those students receive.
When it comes to the benefits of AI-enabled EdTech, we cannot forget the impact the pandemic had on teachers as well. The very people responsible for our students and their learning outcomes feel overstressed and overworked, a situation that can only harm the education our students receive. Fortunately many of the same benefits to students enable teachers to perform better as well. With AI platforms able to assist with note-taking, students can pay closer attention in class. This not only helps students struggling with ADHD but those who are hard of hearing, those with reading disorders, or the visually impaired.
Better able to focus on the lesson, AI can then tailor student learning on the very lesson they just sat through. Furthermore, over time, AI platforms will learn about the learning style of students, tailoring advice and assistance on an individualized basis. Students from all ages and backgrounds can benefit, as it enables them to learn in ways that work best for them.
Properly implemented AI will learn from the student just as the student learns from the software. This will lead to more inclusive and cohesive learning, able to cater to every students’ needs. By easing access to learning, and helping tailor learning assistance on an individual basis, AI can relieve the stressors burdens that contribute to poor mental health among students. This, in turn, makes it easier for students to learn, a cycle that can not only erode pandemic learning loss, but help students get ahead.
EdTech and AI software are helping students all around the country, indeed all around the world, at this very moment. My team and I are proud to say we have helped over 250,000 students around the country combat mental health problems to improve learning outcomes. But that is not enough, that number does not even scratch the surface of what AI enabled EdTech can do for learning outcomes. Reducing the burden on our teachers, improving access to learning, and removing mental health barriers will foster a sustainable system of excellence.
By taking the lessons of the pandemic and applying them to today, we can best prepare our students for the future. Not only will AI systems help them in the short-term, but increased AI fluency and comfort with accepting new and emerging technologies will prepare them to be ready to take full advantage of the next advancement as we move deeper into the Digital Era.
Child care providers discuss trauma at a training at BANANAS in Oakland.
Credit: Zaidee Stavely/EdSource
We live in stressful times. This, coupled with the high rate (80.5%) of children experiencing at least one adverse childhood experience by adolescence, necessitates that schools use trauma-informed practices in their daily routines.
Trauma-informed practices, or TIPS, involve understanding the potential impact of trauma exposure on a child, recognizing signs and symptoms of trauma exposure and responding in a way that supports healing and may build resilience. I
nteractive trainings help educators know how to respond to students with adverse childhood experiences, as well as what to do when a collective crisis happens, such as a natural disaster or school shooting. Educators learn and practice trauma-informed discipline, how to help regulate a stressed child, and build systemwide practices supporting student and teacher well-being.
The California Office of the Surgeon General recognized the need for trauma-informed practices training and created an interactive online program for teachers and schools called Safe Spaces. However, it is not clear how many school districts and educators have accessed the program.
A large majority of teachers (64%) want to learn how to better support students affected by trauma, according to a survey of nearly 15,000 educators by the American Psychological Association (APA). They also need support for coping with their own exposures to trauma. Teachers are often affected by the same events as their students — the pandemic, natural disasters, school shootings. And the APA survey shows educators must also contend with violence by students and parents.
Our research team asked 450 of our local educators during the pandemic about why they might not have been using these resources and found that, despite being highly motivated, teachers faced limited energy and time, some perceived a lack of administrator support, and some felt stigma about needing resources to manage their own emotions.
California needs to do more to equip teachers and administrators on how to cope with trauma in their students and for themselves.
One of the best ways to embed trauma-informed practices into our school systems is to start with the programs that train our future teachers. The National Association of State Boards of Education noted that only 16 states require some form of trauma-informed practices training, although the content and type of training varies.
In California, this type of training is one way a future teacher can meet professional standards, but it is not required. Perhaps if it were, future teachers would begin their careers recognizing signs of possible trauma reactions in their students and know how to approach it with a mindset of “What happened to you?” instead of “What is wrong with you?” They would have tools to support their students with coping and handling emotions, and know when to refer for additional supports.
Teachers already in the classroom also need trauma-informed training, but it’s often lost in the many competing demands districts must balance. Some districts can offer professional development days for their teachers where in-person trauma-informed practices training is available. If more districts could offer this, teachers would have dedicated time to learn the current best practices for supporting students with adverse childhood experiences or with the initial aftermath of school crises, such as psychological first aid for students and teachers.
They would learn how to support the safety of students with disabilities in emergencies through Especially Safe, which was developed by parents and educators who lost students in the Sandy Hook school shooting. Especially Safe offers free resources to help schools better plan, prepare and teach safety in a way that is accessible to all students.
Training teachers in trauma-informed practices is not enough if they are in a school environment that is not prioritizing this; therefore, training of administrators is essential as well. And administrators have their own questions about how to support the whole school community following crises and other events. Therefore, it is best if everyone in the school community gets this training.
Although many organizations offer trauma-informed resources and trainings to schools, we need to scale up these programs to reach all schools and teacher education programs. Funding must cover not only program costs, but also dedicated teacher and administrator time to take these programs as part of professional development days.
Until tragedies make the news, better training in trauma-informed practices may not make the top of the list of priorities, but we need to change this.
•••
Erika Felix, Ph.D., is a professor of clinical psychology at the University of California, Santa Barbara and a Public Voices Fellow of The OpEd Project.
The opinions expressed in this commentary represent those of the author. EdSource welcomes commentaries representing diverse points of view. If you would like to submit a commentary, please review our guidelines and contact us.
As a San Francisco liberal, I was surprised to find myself agreeing with some MAGA arguments. It reflects a common way of thinking these days: You are either with us or against us. You are either a flaming woke liberal or an ignorant nutcase conservative.
Thinking fast is how we make emotional, stereotypic, unconscious decisions. Knee-jerk reactions. Thinking slow, on the other hand, takes more effort and analysis.
Unfortunately, we sometimes come up with quick, simple answers to questions that require more complicated analysis.
Let’s take the controversy of whether trans athletes should play on girls sports teams.
President Donald Trump successfully used this issue to fuel culture wars between Democrats and Republicans during the 2024 presidential campaign.
The first reaction is emotional, on both sides of the political divide.
Conservative response: It’s not fair to give one team a competitive advantage and risk injury to students.
Liberal response: Of course they should play on girls teams. We should never discriminate against trans athletes. Banning the athlete treats her as an outsider or misfit. This further traumatizes the trans athlete, who is already struggling with acceptance.
These “my way or the highway” approaches are playing out at both the federal and state levels.
“In recent years, many educational institutions and athletic associations have allowed men to compete in women’s sports. This is demeaning, unfair, and dangerous to women and girls, and denies women and girls the equal opportunity to participate and excel in competitive sports.”
Democrats later blocked an effort in Congress to turn Trump’s executive order into law.
Since 2014, California students have had the right to play on a sports team that aligns with their gender identity, irrespective of the gender listed on the student’s records.
However, two bills were recently introduced in the Legislature to ban this.
Assembly Bill 89 (Sanchez), would have required the California Interscholastic Federation to amend its constitution, bylaws and policies to prohibit a pupil whose sex was assigned male at birth from participating on a girls interscholastic sports team.
Assembly Bill 844 (Essayli) would have required that a pupil’s participation in sex-segregated school programs and activities, including athletic teams and competitions, and use of facilities, be based upon the pupil’s sex at birth, irrespective of the gender listed on the pupil’s records.
Gov. Gavin Newsom has angered Democrats and human rights advocates by breaking from the party line. He believes that allowing transgender girls and women to participate in female sports leagues is “deeply unfair.”
Let’s now take the “think slow” approach: Analyze the issue. Don’t jump to conclusions.
This issue is not hypothetical for me. My son has played on a girls team, and my daughter has played on a boys team. I have played on women’s soccer teams against trans athletes. For years, I played on co-ed teams.
But there is one undisputed fact: On average, adolescent boys and men are stronger, taller and faster than girls.
I absolutely support trans athletes playing on girls’ teams … unless they are bigger and stronger than the girls.
The table below shows you the physical differences.
There are no simple answers.
Conservative response: Ban all trans athletes from playing on a girls team. To heck with equity.
Liberal response: Allow all trans athletes to play on a girls team. To heck with competitive advantage and safety.
Neither approach makes sense. We need a middle ground.
Let’s try an approach that puts students first.
Recognize this is an issue of fairness and equity for both the trans athlete and the members of the girls team.
For high school interscholastic sports, base the solution on the particular situation in junior and senior year of high school. That’s when the dramatic differences in strength, weight and height can influence the outcome of the game and impact the safety of the students.
For college sports, assess whether there will be a competitive advantage or risk of injury.
Understand that whatever the decision, people will be angry.
Forget the political divide and rest your decision on what you think is best for students.
•••
Carol Kocivar is a child advocate, writer for Ed100.org, retired attorney and past president of the California State PTA.
The opinions expressed in this commentary represent those of the author. EdSource welcomes commentaries representing diverse points of view. If you would like to submit a commentary, please review our guidelines and contact us.
