Gary Rubinstein: Eva Moskowitz Sues NYSED for Inadvertently Exposing that They Have Been Gaming the U.S. News Rankings for Years

By dianeravitch
September 8, 2026 //
0

Eva Moskowitz, founder of Success Academy charter chain, has been everywhere recently, promoting her brand. She has written op-Ed’s for major newspapers, she was interviewed by Margaret Hoover on PBS’ “Firing Line,” she is expanding from New York City to Florida. And just the other day, she published an article in The Washington Post saying that she is suing the New York State Education Department for failing to release the AP scores of her charter schools, which caused her schools’ ranking to plummet in the U.S. News‘ ranking of high schools.

Gary Rubinstein looked at her complaint and dissected it. Gary teaches advanced mathematics at Stuyvesant High School in New York City. Stuyvesant is a highly selective school that accepts only the students who pass a rigorous test. Gary is a crack researcher and examiner of claims, who has repeatedly taken apart the Success Academy marketing brand.

Gary wrote:

No matter where you go in New York City, you are forced to ponder the Success Academy charter network. On bus stops, in your mailbox, even as a commercial during a YouTube video, the school seems to be everywhere. A Success Academy looking student was even saved by Superman in the recent 2025 Superman movie.

Waiting For Superman? He finally came!

Starting in 2006 with about 170 students, it has grown to encompass about 60 schools and about 22,000 students. They are known for having very strict discipline and very high test scores.

Over the years I have examined pretty much every aspect of this school. I’ve done post after post about how it should be a red flag that they only graduate about 150 seniors a year despite having over 2000 kindergarteners and about 800 ninth graders across several schools. I’ve interviewed former students who say that, yes, the school stops everything and does test prep for several months before the state tests. I’ve interviewed parents who have been pressured to transfer their kids out of Success Academy. And if you do a search on reddit you will find page after page of stories that will break your heart.

But Success Academy does seem to have excellent test scores, at least the 3-8 Math and ELA state test scores. Though there are a lot of students who are pushed out of the school, the 3-8 test scores are even good considering that. But for these 3-8 scores to be more than a mirage, they need to translate into good high school scores, and here is where things get a bit complicated.

One metric that Success Academy has been able to boast about in recent years has been their position on the US News & World Report High School rankings. Last year, for example, they were rated the 11th best High School in New York State along with the big guns like Stuyvesant, Bronx Science, Townsend Harris, and Brooklyn Tech. Having a rating like that makes for a nice item to show to donors at fundraisers and can help them start new franchises in Florida, for example.

But the US News & World Report High School rankings have always been flawed. Here’s how they work: Three of the main categories are ‘college readiness’, state assessment proficiency, and graduation rate. The ‘college readiness’ score has been worth 30% and it is calculated by averaging the percent of seniors who took an AP test and the percent of seniors who got a 3 or higher on at least one of those AP exams. So if there is a school where every senior takes a bunch of APs and as long as everyone passes at least one of those APs, that school can get a full 30 points for that metric. So if there is a school where all the students get 5s on multiple APs, it gets the same score as the school where students get a 3 on exactly one AP. So this one is pretty easy to game because all you have to do is force your students to take a bunch of APs and since getting a 3 isn’t so hard as it is like getting a 60% or less on some of them, you can get the full 30 points if you make that the goal for the school. The same is true for the state assessment proficiency where as long as your students pass, even if they barely pass, they get the same rating as a school where the students get near perfect scores on the test.

It is possible to game the math component of the state assessment proficiency metric by not making your students take the Geometry and Algebra II Regents. Most NYC students take Algebra I in 8th or 9th grade and at a high performing school, they generally take those other two Regents the next two years. But those other ones aren’t needed for graduation so if a school doesn’t want those scores to affect their US News & World Report ratings, they might not have their students take math Regents beyond Algebra I. Success Academy is one of those schools whose math component of the US News ranking is based on just Algebra I. They seem to be the only supposedly high performing school whose students do not take the Geometry and the Algebra II Regents so their math score that US News uses is based on one easy test rather than three tests in which the other two are much more difficult.

In 2025 Success Academy was ranked 11th in New York State (out of about 1200 schools). But the latest ranking came out and Success Academy dropped to 196th. This prompted Success Academy to sue the New York State Education Department for what they felt was an unfair change in the reporting of the data to US News & World Report. I will try to explain why the 196th ranking this year is actually a more fair ranking than the 11th from the previous year and how this lawsuit could backfire on Success Academy.

So the big change from last year to this year is that New York State did not report the AP score data to US News & World report. So what US News did was increase the weight of the other categories to compensate for that. In theory, at least, it shouldn’t affect the rankings by so much. A school with good AP scores will also likely have good state assessment proficiency and a good graduation rate. Those things generally go up and down together.

But there was a strange thing in the new rankings. Most of the top 25 schools by the new ranking were not high performing on last year’s rankings. So 25 schools shot to the top and most of the other schools that used to be at the top of the list ended up moving down around 25 spots or sometimes a little more. This happened because though NY State did not report the AP scores, they did report for IB schools those scores and those IB schools got to use the college readiness metric which meant that they got the advantage of inflating their scores while the AP schools didn’t. Of the top 200 schools, 42 of them were IB schools in the new ranking, including about 25 of the top 30 schools. It would have been more fair for NY State to also not give the IB scores since it did make top performing AP schools lose around 25 spots on average.

But Success Academy did not just drop 25 spots. It dropped the most spots of any school in the state that I was able to find. Dropping 185 spots in a ranking revealed why Success Academy never really deserved to be in spot number 11 the previous year.

When the AP scores got eliminated from the calculation, the other scores got increased in weight including the ‘graduation rate’ statistic. Now of the top 20 schools from last year, they all had nearly a 100% graduation rate so changing the weight of that category didn’t change their ranking by much (other than the 25 spot move from the IB issue). But there was one school, Success Academy, that only had a 73% graduation rate. They have this because only 73% of their students graduate in 4 years. But what happens to the other 27%? Many of those are forced to repeat 11th grade. At the school last year there were about 180 11th graders but only 120 12th graders. So this 73% affected their overall score and brought them down so many places.

But that is just the tip of the iceberg. See, when they don’t promote the 11th graders this accomplishes two things with the old US News formula from last year. Yes, it lowered their graduation rate but that was only a small component last year. More importantly, by not promoting those 11th graders, this served to increase their old AP college readiness score since those 11th graders who were left back did not have to try to pass any APs. So that policy to leave back so many 11th graders brought down their graduation rate but brought up their college readiness rate and overall since graduation rate wasn’t a big part of the grade, they were able to become 11th ranked with the inflated college readiness grade.

The big question I have is: Is that the reason that they leave back so many 11th graders? It would seem really unusual to get left back when you’ve been surviving at this school from kindergarten to 11th grade only to get left back just before becoming a senior. No other school that was high rated last year in US News had such a drop in enrollment from 11th grade to 12th grade, generally they had about the same number of 12th graders as they did 11th graders. I would not put it past Success Academy if they were altering the course of those left back students’ lives just so they would not hurt the US News & World Report ranking.

But it came back to bite Success Academy in the butt as the AP score was eliminated from the ranking and the graduation rate’s weight was increased. And now they are suing. As they are the only school to drop by 185 places, they will not have any other schools joining them. I don’t know why NY State chose not to report the AP data. They have had some recent conflict with the college board selling student information, and I think they won a giant settlement from them. Maybe that affected their decision. I don’t think the state was aware that it would affect the relative rankings and, in general, it didn’t. They probably should have anticipated the IB bump that gave the top 20 spots to IB schools but it will be really hard to prove in court that this choice was deliberate. Success Academy could just as well sue US News & World Report since they could have come up with some other creative way to weigh the remaining categories so that the top 20 spots wouldn’t have been dominated by those schools.

In the op-ed that Eva Moskowitz wrote in The Washington Post, she says “Parents deserve to know how well high schools are preparing their students for college-level work. That’s why U.S. News & World Report is a great tool. For years, it has publicized students’ performance on Advanced Placement exams as part of its widely followed national high school rankings.” She also wrote: “We’ve done so [sued NYSED] to vindicate not only our right to make our results known, but also the rights of parents and policymakers to have accurate, objective data about our state’s schools. Parents can’t demand excellence if government prevents them from seeing it.” So here’s my challenge to Eva Moskowitz and if not to her, then to the New York State Education Department: Let’s see the granular data of the AP scores from Success Academy. Moskowitz writes that “students at Success Academy, the network of public charter schools I lead, perform extraordinarily well on those tests. We value each AP exam as an independent benchmark and require our students to sit for at least 18 of them to graduate.” That is quite a large number of APs. She says that most of them pass 3 exams, but that means they failed 15. I would really like to see all the scores, all the 1s and 2s on the different exams that students are forced to take for no other purpose than to increase the college readiness score that ended up not being calculated anyway.

A post on Yahoo! news misrepresents this story (with information likely from Success Academy themselves) as: “Because NYSED declined to authorize the College Board to release 2026 AP scores, U.S. News calculated the advanced course metrics using only International Baccalaureate (IB) data. Because Success Academy offers AP courses rather than IB programs, the network received zero credit for 40% of the ranking’s weighted criteria, causing its statewide ranking to crater from 11th to 196th.” But no, that is not at all what happened. Just like all the AP schools, the other rankings were weighted to make the top score still 100% — Success Academy is the only school to drop this much even though AP scores were dropped from about 1000 schools. I would love to see their lawyer try to misrepresent the facts this way in court.

If anyone should be filing a law suit, it should be any Success Academy 11th grader who was mysteriously left back just when they were about to enter their senior year. If they could prove that they were discriminated against for the purpose of juicing the US News ranking, that seems like a good class action suit.

Categories Education Industry, Ethics, Harlem Success Academy, New York, New York City, Standardized Testing

Texas: Something is Fishy about a School District Leader and His Charter Chain

By dianeravitch
September 8, 2026 //
1

Texas has a peculiar law: if only one school in a district is “failing,” the state can take control of the entire district. That happened to Houston. The state takeover was triggered by the “failure” of Phyllis Wheatley High School, which had a higher proportion of high-needs students than any other high school in the district.

The State Commissioner of Education, Mike Morath, who is not an educator, appointed Mike Miles as superintendent of the Houston Independent School District and fired the elected school board.

Morath previously served on the Dallas school board. Miles, a former military officer and a Broad Academy graduate, was the state-appointed superintendent in Dallas, where he drove out a large number of teachers and left with no grand accomplishments. Miles is a top-down manager who believes in standardization and compliance.

But here’s the fishy part. After failing in Dallas, Mike Miles started his own charter chain in Colorado called Third Future.

Here’s the sweet deal: if a district brings in a Third Future charter school, the state won’t take control of the district! It is the only charter school with that privilege!

Third Future started opening charter schools in Texas. The Houston Chronicle reported that it is $14 million in debt.

The Houston Chronicle has the story. It is eye-popping:

One of Texas’ most high-profile charter school networks could soon begin laying off staff amid a multimillion-dollar budget shortfall, throwing its future into question just as more and more districts have turned to it to avoid a state takeover.

The Texas branch of Third Future Schools, founded by Houston ISD Superintendent Mike Miles, is facing a $14 million deficit, forcing it to cut many of the 700 new employees it hired this year. 

The grim budget projection follows years of multimillion dollar deficits and a dire warning by its auditor — issues that might have forced other charter schools out of business. Instead, the nonprofit has seen its footprint more than triple this year, and state officials continue to allow school districts that hire Third Future to avoid being taken over.

At a board meeting last month, its leaders said the nonprofit was experiencing the same problem as many of its traditional public school counterparts: fewer students.

“As you guys know, districts across Texas are seeing a declining enrollment,” Third Future Schools Superintendent Zach Craddock told board members. “Some of that is passed on to us.”

The Colorado-based nonprofit network is far from the state’s largest chain of charter schools, which are taxpayer-funded public schools operated by third parties. But it’s among the most scrutinized because of its ties to Miles, who was brought to Houston under a state takeover, and its unusual role. Rather than open its own campuses, school districts hire Third Future to turn around failing schools using a tool under state law that allows districts to avoid being taken over by the Texas Education Agency. 

To avoid takeover, districts have to have their plan approved by TEA, run by longtime education commissioner Mike Morath. Morath tapped Miles to lead Houston ISD in 2023, where he implemented Third Future’s rigorous learning model, which includes daily quizzes in core classes and requiring teachers to stick to provided curriculum rather than coming up with their own. The model employs high numbers of staff.

This year, Third Futures Schools Texas took over 15 campuses, bringing its total to 19 across seven school districts, including San Antonio and Waco. None of the schools are in Houston.

The Colorado-based nonprofit network is far from the state’s largest chain of charter schools, which are taxpayer-funded public schools operated by third parties. But it’s among the most scrutinized because of its ties to Miles, who was brought to Houston under a state takeover, and its unusual role. Rather than open its own campuses, school districts hire Third Future to turn around failing schools using a tool under state law that allows districts to avoid being taken over by the Texas Education Agency. 

To avoid takeover, districts have to have their plan approved by TEA, run by longtime education commissioner Mike Morath. Morath tapped Miles to lead Houston ISD in 2023, where he implemented Third Future’s rigorous learning model, which includes daily quizzes in core classes and requiring teachers to stick to provided curriculum rather than coming up with their own. The model employs high numbers of staff.

“(We) have a significant amount of right-sizing to do over the course of the next month,” one of its finance directors, Rich Billings, said.

This year, Third Futures Schools Texas took over 15 campuses, bringing its total to 19 across seven school districts, including San Antonio and Waco. None of the schools are in Houston.

To handle the growing workload, the six-year-old nonprofit hired 700 new employees this year and expected to oversee 9,600 students, Craddock told the board last month. At the time, just 7,775 were attending the 19 schools.

Since the nonprofit’s funding is based on student attendance, the gap is expected to leave a $14 million hole. Student attendance is expected to go up slightly, but the nonprofit will be forced to cut $9 million, including reducing staffing, this month, officials said. The other $5 million was expected surplus.

Billings did not outline where the cuts will be made. A spokesperson for Third Futures declined to comment for this story.

A charter school overprojecting the number of students it’s enrolling is nothing new. It’s by far the top reason why charter schools close, said Carol Burris, executive director of the Network for Public Education and a critic of charter schools.

“It’s not that people are shutting them down because the test scores are bad,” she said. “The enrollment gets to a point where it’s unsustainable.” 

Third Future Schools Texas has struggled to break even for years, according to financial audits, and has faced controversy over its finances. Its agreement with Beaumont ISD to operate three schools ended prematurely last year amid a request for millions more than it had previously agreed to. News reports that the nonprofit was inappropriately paying its Colorado headquarters millions of dollars were investigated and dismissed by TEA in 2024. 

Miles stepped down as CEO of Third Future Schools in 2023, but was found this year to have accepted at least $190,000 in consulting fees from the nonprofit since then. Much of that was after a state law barred district administrators from profiting from outside education work.

Financial audits show that the nonprofit posted a $2.6 million deficit in 2023. In 2024, the deficit grew to $5.3 million, after a nearly $3 million “error in the payroll calculation” was discovered, auditors wrote. 

Last year, the same auditing firm wrote that the nonprofit’s deficit grew to $7.3 million, “which raises substantial doubt about the organization’s ability to continue as a going concern.”

That kind of language from an auditor would make it hard for an organization to attract lenders and suggests it could be headed toward bankruptcy, said Nathan Goldman, an accounting professor at North Carolina State University who writes a column for Forbes.

“For any organization, it’s a big deal,” he said.

Typically, TEA might move to shut down a charter school with those kinds of deficits. The agency performs financial integrity ratings for traditional charter schools that includes submitting audits. But because of Third Future’s unusual business model, it falls outside those requirements. TEA told the Chronicle that local school districts that hire the nonprofit are responsible for overseeing its finances. 

The agency does not approve those agreements, known as 1882 partnerships, but does approve the benefits, which can include a two-year delay for a state takeover. Some local school officials have said they felt they had to choose Third Future Schools because it was the only one with which TEA would agree to delay a takeover. TEA has said any outside group can be approved as long as it meets its requirements, including a track record of success.

Financial disaster is not success!

How did this sweetheart deal get approved?

Categories Education Reform, Houston, State Takeover, Texas

Revive Unions to Celebrate Labor Day!

By dianeravitch
September 7, 2026 //
0

Economic inequality is greater today than in the 1950s. A tiny number of people enjoy fabulous wealth while millions of people live paycheck to paycheck.

One reason for the escalation of inequality is the declining number of people who are represented by unions. Big business has waged war on unions for more than a century.

But here is what we have learned about unions: Unions built the middle class. Unions were successful in raising wages, securing healthcare and pensions.

Big business continually complained that unions drove up their costs. But even as they have fought unions, they have raised their own compensation as CEOs and top management to staggering levels. Some CEOs are paid more than $100 million a year. But the f ed real minimum wage has languished at $7.25 an hour.

If workers want higher wages, good healthcare and pensions, they need unions.

Margaret Poydock of the Economic Polocy Institute has compiled important information about labor unions.

They are very popular.

Most working people would like to join a union.

People in unions make more money than people doing the same job but don’t belong to a union.

On behalf of the Economic Policy Institute, Poydock has reported:

New Gallup polling finds that 71% of people in the U.S. approve of unions, continuing the highest period of favorability in over 60 years. This coincides with the greatest number of workers represented by a union in 16 years.

The Gallup polling also showed that unions are favorable across generations and party lines.

  • 77% of adults ages 18–34, 74% of adults ages 35–54, and 67% of adults ages 55 and older approve of unions. 
  • 89% of Democrats, 70% of Independents, and 52% of Republicans approve of unions. 

This is just one of many recent surveys demonstrating the broad popularity of unions:  

  • Unions are more popular than big business. People in the U.S. favor unions over big business by more than 16 percentage points—the greatest gap ever recorded.
  • 56 million U.S. workers would join a union tomorrow if they could. 43% of nonunion workers would vote to unionize their workplace if given the opportunity. 
  • Majority views union decline as bad for U.S. Most people in the U.S. say the decline in union density is bad for the country (60%) and bad for working people (62%). 

It should be no surprise that the public views unions favorably: Unions help workers win higher wages, advocate for safer and healthier workplaces, support a thriving middle class, and strengthen democracy by boosting civic participation.  

Now is the time for policymakers to pass comprehensive legislation making it easier for workers to unionize. A new EPI report shows that tripling U.S. union membership would deliver: 

  • 14.5% wage increases for the typical worker, equal to more than $7,700 per year or nearly $270,000 over a 35-year career. 
  • $1.2 trillion shifted into workers’ pockets every year, reversing a third of the growth in inequality since 1979.  
  • Health insurance for 6.8 million more people.  
  • Greater equality and smaller racial wage gaps. Unions raise wages for everyone and help prevent pay disparities, especially for Black and Hispanic workers.  

Read more about the benefits of rebuilding union power—and the roadmap to get there.

If you want a happier, healthier, fairer society, support the growth of unions.

Categories Ethics, Unions

Ohio: Billionaire Jeff Yass Wants to Buy the Governor’s Race for Ramaswamy

By dianeravitch
September 4, 2026 //
10

Who is Jeff Yass? He is a multi-billionaire, the richest man in Pennsylvania. He is passionate about school choice, even though he is a graduate of the New York City public schools.

When Governor Gregg Abbott was fighting to impose a voucher plan on Texas, he was stopped by a solid bloc of Republicans who were devoted to their community’s public schools, the schools everyone attended, the schools that were the biggest employer in town, the schools where everyone knew the teachers.

Jeff Yass gave Gregg Abbott $10 million to run hardline, pro-voucher candidates against the moderates. He defeated enough of them to get his voucher bill passed.

Now Jeff Yass has decided that Vivek Ramaswamy should be governor of Ohio. Ohio already has charters and vouchers, but apparently that’s not enough for billion as ire Yass.

Is Ohio for sale?

Yass says yass to VPAC

A single billionaire may now have given more money to help elect Republican Vivek Ramaswamy as Ohio’s next governor than Democrat Amy Acton has received from all her donors combined. 

Politico reported this week that Jeffrey Yass of Pennsylvania had made a “fresh ten-figure donation of cash” – in other words, at least $10 million – to V-PAC: Victors not Victims, a political action committee set up to support Ramaswamy’s run for governor in this year’s elections. The money will help fund even more attack ads against Acton that attempt to paint her as unqualified, erratic and too liberal.  

That new contribution, which a source familiar with the group confirmed to Andrew, adds to the $20 million  that Yass previously gave to V-PAC. The $30 million (at least) from Yass now exceeds the $21.8 million Acton has reported raising for her entire campaign, based on the most recent publicly available numbers. As a federal super PAC, V-PAC is allowed to raise and spend unlimited amounts of money, unlike official campaign committees, which must follow state campaign finance limits.

The new check from Yass – who’s among the country’s biggest financial supporters of taxpayer-funded private school vouchers and other school choice programs – further contributes to Ramaswamy’s lopsided fundraising advantage. Ramaswamy and his allies have now spent or reserved $82.3 million on TV and digital ads this year, compared to $11.1 million in expected pro-Acton spending, according to Medium Buying, a Republican political ad tracking firm. Team Ramaswamy’s ads have been running all year, while most of the pro-Acton ads, including an $9.4 million campaign funded by the Democratic Governors Association, are set to begin after Labor Day. 

Polling suggests the attacks on Acton are working. (Acton said the same thing herself in a fundraising appeal this week.) An Aug. 13 poll from Fox News found 47% of Ohio voters had a negative view of Acton – up from 37% in June. Ramaswamy’s image was fundamentally unchanged during that time – although both polls, like others that have been publicly released, projected a very close or tied race.

Center stage

Republicans’ strategy to defeat Acton relies in part on convincing Ohio voters that she’s a liberal Democrat. But she’s taken a few conspicuous stances this year that align her in some instances more closely with Republicans.

As Andrew wrote this week, Acton has come out in support of Issue 3, the voter ID amendment, as well as Medicaid work requirements and Ohio’s ban on transgender girls and women participating in girls’ and women’s sports. Acton’s positions put her at odds with most Democrats, including repeated past statements from her running mate, former Ohio Democratic Party chair David Pepper. 

Acton made a couple more policy announcements on Tuesday that burnish her centrist bona fides.

Appearing in Columbus to tout a new endorsement from the Ohio Patrolmen’s Benevolent Association, the state’s second-largest police union, Acton announced her opposition to a longshot citizens’ effort to eliminate qualified immunity, the enhanced legal protections that cover police officers and other government officials.  Acton also said she would not block local police from helping federal agencies enforce immigration laws.

“We always work with the federal law enforcement, and we will do so – whatever it takes to keep Ohioans safe,” Acton said, according to cleveland.com. 

The OPBA, which represents 8,000 law enforcement officials statewide, announced other endorsements this week. They were a bipartisan variety pack, including Democrats Sherrod Brown and Jennifer Brunner for U.S. Senate and Ohio Supreme Court, respectively, and Republicans Keith Faber and Dan Hawkins for state auditor and Ohio Supreme Court.

Another state police union with nearly three times as many members, the Ohio Fraternal Order of Police, previously endorsed Vivek Ramaswamy, Jon Husted and the rest of the Republican statewide slate this year. 

Categories Education Reform

Los Angeles School District Limits AI in Classrooms

By dianeravitch
September 4, 2026 //
8

As research continues to show the harmful effects of technology on student learning, parents are pushing against it. Los Angeles is the latest district to impose limits.

The district has a checkered history with technology, including massive purchases of a laptop for every student and allegations of payoffs by vendors.

AI has its strengths and weaknesses. It’s useful to obtain information, like where is a TV program streaming or who won the Presidency in 1920. But its interpretations are sometimes wrong, as is some of its information. It can write essays, after getting prompts. But when teachers assign essays, they expect students to write them, not AI.

I have corrected AI on several occasions, and the bot quickly apologized. On one occasion, I asked for NAEP scores in a particular state. The AI responded with a slant implying that NAEP “proficiency” was grade level, and those who did not reach it were below grade level. Of course, I pointed out that NAEP itself warns that “proficiency” is higher than grade level and represents “solid achievement, what most of us would call an A or B+. NAEP is not “grade level,” although many reporters think it is. The bot quickly admitted its error.

On another occasion, I asked for the bio of a friend, and AI had confused her with someone else. Again, it made a correction.

AI makes many errors. My college-age grandson told me he never uses it because it’s unreliable.

Worse, it is a shortcut to learning, like copying an answer from an encyclopedia. But it’s more dangerous because encyclopedias are usually subject to rigorous fact-checking. Students who turn in AI essays are not learning. They are cheating.

Dana Goldstein wrote in the New York Times:

The Los Angeles public school system will vastly restrict the use of artificial intelligence at all grade levels, district officials said on Wednesday at a board of education meeting.

The move came shortly after the nation’s largest school system, in New York City, announced it would ban most A.I. through 8th grade. Both developments seem to respond to an extraordinary movement, driven by parents, to push back against the incursion of technology and screens into childhood.

The board of education in the Los Angeles Unified School District previously barred cellphone use during the school day and strictly limited the hours per day students could spend on laptops.

The new A.I. restrictions, reported earlier by the Los Angeles Times, will apply for the current school year, as a board committee considers how to potentially incorporate the technology in the future, according to a district spokeswoman.

Students may still see A.I. summaries on top of Google searches, but will not be able to engage with Google’s Gemini chatbot within those searches, according to the district.

And they will not be able to use chatbot helpers that Google offers inside its Classroom software, including Google Docs, Google Sheets and Google Slides. Google Classroom is near-universally used in American schools.

Nicholas Melvoin, a school board member who sits on the committee studying A.I., said the board had been surprised by district officials’ decision to fully pause the technology for students.

While Mr. Melvoin has led the push to restrict student screen time, he raised questions about the wisdom of a complete A.I. ban for older teenagers, arguing they would need to understand the technology to prepare for college and the workplace.

“High school is where I would have more teacher discretion, with guardrails,” he said — similar to the path New York City officials outlined on Wednesday.

He said his committee would also consider the many big questions about how educators are using the technology, for lesson planning, grading, student feedback and communication with parents.

Los Angeles teachers continue to have access to A.I.

A.I. chatbots can help students learn, acting as a research tool or tutor breaking down complex concepts.

But chatbots can present misinformation. They have also led to an epidemic of cheating, as students prompt A.I. tools to write essays for them or complete problem sets. Even A.I. apps marketed specifically to schools have few blocks to prevent plagiarism or other forms of academic misconduct.

A growing body of research shows individuals who use chatbots can experience reduced critical thinking.

Common Sense Media, an advocacy group, has broadly tested A.I. chatbots and recommended their use be limited for people under 18, in part because they allow students to avoid the productive struggle of learning.

The group has also raised questions about A.I. search summaries, which may prevent students from seeking out multiple sources of information on contested subjects.

Yvette Renteria, chief program officer at Common Sense, praised the Los Angeles decision, saying it made sense to take a pause on a rapidly evolving technology. While Common Sense believes students of all ages should be given lessons in A.I. literacy to better understand how the technology works, she said that did not generally require classroom access to A.I. tools.

“At this moment, there is oftentimes more danger than opportunity,” Ms. Renteria said. She noted that students would still use A.I. outside of school on their personal devices, and argued that it remains crucial that educators talk to young people about the risks and potential rewards of A.I. use.

Categories Education Reform, Los Angeles, Technology

Florida Couple Homeschooled Their Grandchildren While Confining Them to a Truck and Sexually Abusing Them

By dianeravitch
September 4, 2026 //
13

In Florida, a couple were arrested and charged for keeping their four grandchildren confined in a truck for six years and allowing them to be sexually abused during their long confinement.

The good news (sarcasm) is that they homeschooled the children by enrolling them in Khan Academy online classes.

Did the couple know they were eligible for $32,000 in voucher payments to pay for all their educational expenses from the state of Florida? Maybe they did and were collecting. Why pay for the Khan Academy classes when the state will pick up the bill?

The New York Times reported:

A grandmother and her fiancé are accused of trapping four children for six years inside a semi truck’s cab, where the children endured sexual abuse, malnutrition and neglect, prosecutors in Florida said on Tuesday.

Starting in 2019, the victims, two girls and two boys who now range in age from 11 to 15, slept on a top bunk without all fitting on the mattress, the authorities said in an arrest warrant. They urinated in a plastic cup and defecated in a grocery bag, the warrant said.

One child scarred her hand permanently when hot noodles burned her, and she was not taken to the hospital, the warrant said. One girl contracted a sexually transmitted infection, the warrant said.

“This is just straight evil, and a scourge on our society,” Mark Glass, the commissioner of the Florida Department of Law Enforcement, said during a news conference held on Tuesday.

The victims are the biological grandchildren of Keysha Monique Epps, 51, of Atlanta, according to Jae Williams, a spokesman for the state attorney general’s office, which filed charges against the suspects.

The ordeal began when Ms. Epps and her fiancé, Tamra Marshon Stewart, 37, of Jacksonville, Fla., traveled with the children from Atlanta to Miami, James Uthmeier, the state’s attorney general, said during the news conference. Ms. Epps was a licensed semi truck driver, Mr. Williams said.

The couple served as primary caregivers for the children, and they all lived inside the truck’s cab.

The cab included two seats for a driver and a passenger, a bunk bed, a refrigerator, a microwave and a space for storage all packed into tight quarters, the authorities said in the arrest warrant.

“This was a prison, a rolling prison,” Mr. Uthmeier said.

One of the girls, who is now 12, said Mr. Stewart had touched her inappropriately every day for two years, the authorities said. She said her grandmother knew what was happening to her, and in one instance pretended to be asleep, according to the arrest warrant.

Mr. Stewart furnished the other girl, now 11, with candy and money after sexual encounters in an effort to keep her quiet, according to the arrest warrant. The victim “said it didn’t work,” the warrant said.

A 15-year-old boy confronted Mr. Stewart, calling him a pedophile and a child molester, according to the arrest warrant from the state’s attorney general office. Mr. Stewart punched the victims after the dispute, according to an arrest warrant filed by the Jacksonville Sheriff’s Office.

The children did not attend school while with Ms. Epps and Mr. Stewart and instead used Khan Academy, a website with educational videos that is not accredited, the authorities said.

Categories Accountability, Childhood, Corruption, Cruelty, Curriculum, Ethics, Evil, Florida, Home Schooling, Vouchers

ProPublica: Idaho Permits “Faith Healers” to Substitute for Medical Care for Children

By dianeravitch
September 3, 2026 //
9

Should states permit parents to trust “faith healers” for their children’s medical care? Should the state do so when the child is seriously ill? Should the state stand by idly when children tested by “faith healers” die?

That is what happens in Idaho. Under the protection of freedom of religion, parents may trust their sick children to “faith healers,” even at the cost of their lives.

Audrey Dutton writes about this quirk in the law, which was once widespread, but is now legal only in Idaho.

With the growth and political clout of old-time religions, this dangerous practice may spread to other states. When does freedom of religion become deadly?

Dutton writes:

In Idaho, parents who say their faith prohibits lifesaving medical care for their children can’t be charged with child neglect or manslaughter. Supporters of this protection over the years have included lawmakers who voiced support for “traditional” Idaho values.

But from at least the 1880s through the early 1970s, it was illegal for parents in Idaho to choose prayer over medical care when a child’s life was at stake, newspaper archives and historical documents show.

“Every parent of any child who willfully omits, without lawful excuse, to furnish necessary food, clothing, shelter, or medical attendance for such child, is guilty of a misdemeanor,” reads the 1887 edition of Idaho territory statutes, published before statehood.

The statutes included no mention of spiritual belief as a “lawful excuse.” Three years later, the state constitution explicitly put limits on Idaho’s freedom of religion. It would not excuse “acts of licentiousness,” polygamy or other practices “inconsistent with morality or the peace or safety of the state.”

It wasn’t long before the law came down on members of the Followers of Christ, a faith-healing sect that arrived in Idaho in 1899 and remains active in the state. From 2015 to 2025, the sect’s congregations in Idaho experienced 15 preventable deaths of children, according to ProPublica’s reporting.

Pearl Annis was a 13-year-old girl whose parents had moved from Oklahoma to Idaho’s Magic Valley in the spring of 1915 with at least one other Followers family. The Annises and their 13 children shared “a two-room shack,” a local newspaper reported. An officer and a doctor visited the home after neighbors voiced concern. They found Pearl in bed, fully dressed and on the cusp of death.

Her father, Lurid P. “Lewis” Annis, was arrested on a misdemeanor charge of refusing to provide medical attention. Pearl was taken to the hospital, according to the news story, and died there with what today would be described as septic shock from a bowel blockage. The newspaper, which didn’t appear to follow up on Annis’ criminal charge, called the Followers church “a religious cult” and Pearl’s death a consequence of “religious mania.”

News archives and historic records don’t say how many times Idaho acted on similar cases in the decades after.

But one legal battle over lifesaving care drew attention in the 1960s, as sickness made its way through a Followers family in a Boise suburb. The mother died in December 1965. Her 4-year-old daughter died the following June.

Days after the girl’s death, a judge ordered the state to take custody of her 10-year-old brother under Idaho’s child protection law. The boy was admitted to a local hospital with pneumonia, a complication of the measles. He spent days in critical condition but survived. The judge told the father that to regain custody, he would have to be willing to give the boy medical care as the law required.

A doctor testified that without the hospitalization, the child “almost certainly would have died,” a newspaper report said.

The father’s lawyer told the judge that his sect was rooted in “faith that God will heal the sick.” The law in the 1960s was clear, though: a parent had a duty to protect their child’s health, no exceptions. The judge told Samuel’s father: “The law governs conduct. Religion governs opinion.”

But the legal landscape was about to shift. It came with little public attention.

During a full-on rewrite of Idaho’s criminal code in 1971, the Legislature added a section that said the state could not bring endangerment charges against someone “who chooses for his child treatment by prayer or spiritual means alone.” Legislative records don’t make clear how the wording originated. The passage of another law one year later, affirming the “spiritual means” language and applying it to other crimes, has been credited to the Christian Science church, another Christian denomination with Idaho members.

(The Christian Science website says the church’s practice of “healing in the way Christ Jesus taught” is not “faith healing” and that members are free to choose any form of healthcare. The church also supported Oregon’s full removal of its faith-healing exemption in 2011.)

Faith-healing exemptions soon became widespread nationally. The trigger was the federal Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act of 1974, which set out to standardize the nation’s child welfare system by giving states grants to more effectively investigate reports of child abuse.

The Department of Health, Education and Welfare interpreted the law as requiring states to have a faith-healing exemption to qualify for the grants — an interpretation that records from the time don’t explain.

Open the link and keep reading to learn how federal law changed to deal with “faith healing.”

Categories Accountability, Childhood, Ethics, Extremism, Health, Religion, Safety, Separation of church and state

Freddy DeBoer: Whatever Happened to Raj Chetty and His Claims about Teachers?

By dianeravitch
September 3, 2026 //
6

Back in 2011, Harvard Professor Raj Chetty and two esteemed colleagues (John Friedman at Brown University and Jonah Rockoff at Columbia University) published a dazzling study of teachers, asserting that the best teachers are those whose students get improved scores. Those students have a higher income ($250,000 over their lifetimes), and enjoy a multitude of benefits, all because of that one teacher who induced them to have higher scores. President Obama cited Chetty’s research in his 2012 State of the Union address to show how important it was to find the “best” teachers and fire the “worst’ teachers.

Chetty’s work supported the Obama-Duncan Race to the Top plan to encourage evaluating teachers by the test scores of their students. States that evaluated teachers by their students’ scores were eligible to apply for a share of RTTT funding. Those who did not were not eligible.

Most states, eager for a share of the $5 billion prize, agreed to adopt what was called “value-added modeling” or “value-added measurement.” (VAM)

I posted dozens of times about the flaws of VAM, first of all, because the American Statistical Association said that teachers account for only 1-14% of score changes; most changes were attributable to home life and school system issues. Secondly, because the VAM concept is very unstable and is highly affected by student demographics. Only teachers of reading and math in grades 4-9 could even be assessed by the annual tests, which are mandated only in grades 3-8. Schools started attributing scores to teachers not in those subjects and not in those grades, tied to the work of other teachers in the school.

The Los Angeles Times engaged researchers to calculate VAM scores for the district’s teachers, and the newspaper published them alongside the names of teachers. It was humiliating for teachers, but Arne Duncan thought this disclosure was wonderful.

I happened to be in Los Angeles on the day that a fifth grade teacher committed suicide after he received a poor VAM score. No one knows if that was the reason for his suicide, but it may have been. By all accounts, he was a good teacher in a tough school.

The New York Post did the same for New York City teachers. It listed names and scores. The teacher identified by the newspaper as the city’s “worst” teacher was hounded by Post reporters seeking an interview. It turned out that she taught classes of new immigrants, who moved in and then out of her class as they learned enough English to join regular classes. Her students in September were not the same students by June. The VAM scores for her were meaningless, as they were for other teachers. Teachers of the gifted saw few if any gains because their students were at the top year after year. Expert math teacher Gary Rubinstein noticed that some teachers had high scores in one subject, but not in the other. Should half the teacher get a bonus while the other half was fired?

Freddie deBoer, an independent writer who earned a doctorate in English and education assessment, re-evaluated Raj Chetty’s famous study.

It’s a long review, and I won’t post it all. Please open the link and read it.

He begins:

For a long time I’ve been getting some version of the comment, “What about Chetty!” in response to my perspective on education, as in Raj Chetty, the economist who for the past decade has made a lot of waves asserting that our education problems are straightforwardly the product of bad teachers and that replacing them will have implausibly large economic effects. I tend to try and work from a broader perspective than “this is why I think this guy is wrong,” but I get this request so often, here you go. This is why I think Raj Chetty is wrong.

Few empirical claims in modern education policy have traveled farther than Chetty et al’s findings on teacher “value-added.” In his famous 2014 American Economic Review papers, he and his coauthors reported that students assigned to better (excuse me, higher value-added) teachers were more likely to attend college, earn higher salaries, save for retirement, and avoid teen pregnancy, and that replacing a teacher in the bottom five percent of the distribution with an average teacher would raise the present value of a single classroom’s lifetime earnings by roughly $250,000. Chetty’s research findings in this domain had been floating around for awhile at the time of publication, and President Obama cited the figure in his 2012 State of the Union address, and the judge who decided Vergara v. California leaned on it to strike down California’s teacher tenure laws. Take that, teachers! The findings are arresting, the dataset is impressive – 2.5 million children, linked to IRS tax records! – and the policy implications are clean: identify and remove bad (pardon me, low “value-added”) teachers, watch outcomes improve. It’s exactlythe kind of story our neoliberal policy establishment is desperate to tell, and was clearly catnip to the Obama administration, which was doggedly attached to a simplistic vision of delivery through better education, where the gutting of the uneducated labor market was ameliorated by turning every last child in the United States into a genius, scaling up the Stanford-to-Google pipeline until every American could pass through it.

Unfortunately, the Chetty story is ultimately another neoliberal just-so story, that is to say, a fable, a legend, a myth. The closer you look at what the “value-added” construct actually measures, how stable those measurements are, and how the Chetty results have fared under replication, the more reason there is to doubt both the magnitude of the claimed effects and, more fundamentally, whether “teacher quality” as the literature operationalizes it is a coherent, measurable attribute at all. (Spoiler: it is not.) Let us count the problems.

The construct itself puts the thumb on the scale. The first problem is conceptual. In the Chetty et al. studies, a teacher’s “value-added” is the residual variation in a student’s standardized test scores that remains after controlling for prior achievement and some demographic covariates. It’s not a measure of pedagogical skill, content knowledge, classroom climate, the cultivation of curiosity, or any other property normally meant by “good teaching.” It’s a statistical residual on a narrow set of assessments, usually math and reading tests in grades three through eight. That residual is then defined as quality. I want to be clear about this: any portion of variability in student outcomes that Chetty et al cannot or will not identify otherwise is assumed to be a product of teacher inputs. Since Chetty’s whole project is to argue that educational outcomes are the result of teacher quality, this is what we used to call begging the question – that is, he’s assuming the point he wants to prove, asserting the desired conclusion as a premise, by acting as though any uncaptured variation is necessary evidence of teaching quality. And it gets worse in the telling. When advocates and journalists and politicians summarize his work, the construct expands silently from “the part of test-score gains Chetty cannot otherwise explain” to “good teachers,” and the slippage is rarely flagged. But that’s the whole game, you guys.

Open the link and enjoy!

Categories Accountability, Education Industry, Research, Teacher Evaluations, Teachers and Teaching, VAM (value-added modeling)

Jeff Bryant: Did the Big Teachers’ Protest Rally in 2011 Make a Difference?

By dianeravitch
September 3, 2026 //
6

Jeff Bryant, prolific education journalist, writes in The Progressive about the efforts by educators to fight back against the failed and punitive policies of No Child Left Behind and Race to the Top. It’s a valuable summary of the past 15 years. Teachers rallied. Teachers sounded alarms about the bipartisan attack is on teachers, teaching and public schools.

Did it make a difference?

Now, 15 years later, there are thousands of charters, and they are no better than the public schools, contrary to their promises. Now, most states have vouchers, and the public is funding religious schools, which was unthinkable in 2011.

But we can’t give up! At last, there are candidates running to fight for public schools. Gina Hinojosa is the most prominent of them. If she defeats Greg Abbott in Texas, expect major changes.

Jeff writes:

It was a sunny July day in Washington, D.C., the temperature was forecasted to hit 97 degrees Fahrenheit, and when I arrived at the Ellipse on the National Mall for the Save Our Schools march I realized I would need a hat. Among the vendors that lined Constitution Avenue, the least expensive hat I could find was a gaudy, red-white-and-blue affair with an embossed rendering of fireworks going off over the Lincoln Memorial and Washington Monument. “Some hat,” Anne Thompson, my videographer for the day, said when she arrived…

At the time, I was working on a project, partnered with the National Education Association, called “Starving America’s Schools: How Budget Cuts and Policy Mandates Are Hurting Our Nation’s Students.” The project documented how state governments, following the Great Recession, cut funding for schools and rolled out efforts to privatize them with charter schools and voucher programs.

I had read  multiple analyses by the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities (CBPP) that found at least thirty-seven states responded to the economic downturn that started in 2007 and extended into 2009 by slashing their education budgets back to pre-recession levels. My Starving America’s Schools project would examine how the cuts caused districts to fire teachers, cancel art and music programs, close libraries and science labs, and cut extracurriculars like athletic programs, field trips, and drama performances.

Teachers turned out to denounce high-stakes testing, NCLB, Race to the Top, budget cuts, privatization, and the attacks on their profession, funded by Bill Gates, Eli Broad, and other billionaires.

….The estimated crowd of 3,000 to 5,000 roared in approval at an array of speakers that included the actor Matt Damon (whose mother is a professor of education), Ravitch, best-selling author Jonathan Kozol, renowned educator Deborah Meier, and policy experts Linda Darling-Hammond and Pedro Noguera. When the speeches were over and we marched to the White House, the line of people stretched for blocks and blocks…

The range of themes the speakers addressed included lack of pay and respect for teachers; the harms caused by poverty and privatization; the continuing racial discrimination and segregation in schools and glaring inequities in their funding; the unbearable class sizes teachers endure, and the injustices that result from using test scores to sanction schools and evaluate teachers.

What also animated the crowd, Anthony Cody tells The Progressive in a text message, was a sense of betrayal on education by the Democratic Party’s leadership. Cody, a fulltime classroom teacher at the time—he’s now retired—was one of the principal organizers of the march. “The great majority of teachers supported the election of Barack Obama in 2008,” he says. “[But] RTTT reinforced the worst elements of NCLB by encouraging states to link teacher pay and evaluations to standardized test scores.”

“A theme that ran through the rally was ‘how could a Democratic administration be so hostile to public schools?’ ” says Ravitch in an email to The Progressive.

“The speakers, me included, hated RTTT and saw it for what it was: encouragement for charters, high-stakes standardized testing, teacher evaluation based on student test scores, and other dreadful policies,” Ravitch continues. “We predicted [the policies] would fail, and they did.”

A particular target for invective at the rally was Obama’s Secretary of Education, Arne Duncan, Ravitch recalls. “He regularly assailed public schools as failing. He attacked public school teachers. He constantly praised charter schools, and whenever national test scores came out, he gleefully pointed to results and made them sound worse than they were.”

“Duncan could have fit in a Republican cabinet,” Ravitch adds.

Fifteen years later, did that outpouring in July 2011 matter?…

The sad truth is that the grievances that motivated people to board buses and gather on the Mall on a hot July day in 2011 continue to dominate the K-12 school landscape today.

For instance, one of NPE’s reports that Cody references, published in 2026, found that states that have been the most aggressive about redirecting public funds for schools to private education operators have been the most neglectful of funding and supporting their public schools.

Although No Child Left Behind was repealed in 2015, it was replaced that year by the Every Student Succeeds Act that still enforces standardized testing. And the legacy of the funding cuts enacted during the Great Recession continues to harm schools.

“In the decade following the Great Recession, students across the United States lost nearly $600 billion from the states’ disinvestment in their public schools,” an analysis by the Education Law Center reported in 2021. Calling the time, from 2008 to 2018, a “lost decade,” the organization noted that while states’ economic activity as measured by gross domestic product increased by 17 percent, state and local revenues for public schools lagged, increasing by only 6 percent.

A 2025 Education Law Center report, “Making the Grade,” assessed states on how they fund public schools and found that not a single state earned an A grade on three crucial measures of funding: whether state and local revenues are adequate, whether funding is fairly distributed, and whether funding lags a state’s economic capacity.

In the meantime, the charter school industry continues to expand, with thirty-nine out of forty-three states experiencing growth in charters in 2025, according to charter industry data. And voucher programs also continue to grow, as fifteen states now operate twenty-three programs, and the Trump Administration is set to roll out a nationwide federal voucher program in 2027. As the right wing’s “long game” to end public education continues apace, prominent centrist Democrats call for a return to the education policies of the Bush and Obama years.

“Democrats [have] walked away from standards and accountability [for schools], and our kids are falling through the cracks,” former Chicago mayor and Obama’s Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel is telling anyone who will listen. And Arne Duncan is back in the media spotlight, encouraging Democratic governors to embrace the Trump Administration’s voucher program. That the politics of education in 2026 seem so similar to those of 2011 is evidence that a left-right binary over education policy doesn’t really exist.

As I observed all those years ago on the cusp of the march in D.C., there was no middle ground in education debates. Factions on the right wanted to get rid of public schools. Business interests represented by testing companies, charter schools, and tech firms wanted to make money off schools. And a “reform” community led by wealthy foundations and technocrats wanted to mold public schools to their ideological, and often political, agendas.

As I wrote at the time, “Faced with this array of antagonists toward public education, where does the ‘middle ground’ lie? When people openly admit they want to get rid of you, where should the bargaining start? When people have shown you they are more apt to use you for their own profit, and then walk away when the ‘market changes,’ why should you trust them? And when people say they are willing to align with your cause but only when you say and do things how they want you to do them—even when your ideals inform you to do otherwise—why should you simply bend to their will?”

Those questions are still relevant today. They will remain so until a progressive left faction adopts a robust message on education and articulates it repeatedly in advocacy documents and political stump speeches.

“Our battle for public schools is steeper now than it was when the Save Our Schools rally was held,” Ravitch says. “It will be a battle for many years to come.”

But in 2011, for at least a day, it seemed that public school advocates had the power to, as Ravitch put it in her email, “push back and give people a modicum of hope.”

The battle continues, and it’s not over. America needs a strong public school system, not a hodge-podge of pop-up schools.

We need well-prepared teachers who can knowledgeably teach history, science, mathematics, literature, and foreign languages. We need well-funded schools and respected, well-paid professionals. We need equality of opportunity for all children, and we need excellence.

We need the strong public schools that built the Aunited States into a great nation. We need education for democracy, where children are judged by the content of their character, not the color of their skin.

We need an education system that produces engineers, scientists, artists, musicians, athletes, mechanics, lawyers, doctors, pharmacists, teachers, social workers, idealists, scholars, young people eager to use their hands, their brains, and their hearts to make our society better for everyone.

We are now in a period of disruption and dissolution. That way lies disaster. It is the road to elitism, segregation, indoctrination, and decay.

We need to raise our sights and build better public schools that offer a goood education for all children.

Categories Accountability, Charter Schools, Closing schools, Corporate Reform, Cruelty, Duncan, Arne, Education Industry, Education Reform, Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA), Extremism, Failure, Funding, NCLB (No Child Left Behind), Race to the Top, Standardized Testing, State Takeover, Supporting public schools, Teacher Evaluations, Teacher Pay, U.S. Department of Education, VAM (value-added modeling)

Kennedy Center Begins Removing Iconic Sculpture “Blue”

By dianeravitch
September 2, 2026 //
3

Trump is clearly bitter that his name is not on the Kennedy Center facade. The tarp that covers the original name still hangs, hiding the humiliation of Trump’s name removal.

Last week he cut down 40 weeping willow trees on the Center grounds, which symbolized a grieving nation, grieving for the assassinated President Kennedy.

This week, the Kennedy Center is removing a piece of outdoor art called “Blue,” which was installed in 2019. The artist, Joel Shapiro, thought it was a permanent installation.

“Blue”

The New York Times reported:

The John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts began removing a major outdoor sculpture from the center’s grounds on Wednesday. The work, installed in 2019, was targeted for elimination after President Trump’s takeover of the center, according to internal documents obtained by The New York Times.

The Kennedy Center made no advance announcement of its plans to remove the towering, vivid blue metal sculpture of a stick-like human figure, called “Blue.”

On Wednesday morning, the limbs and torso of the figure were wrapped in protective material; an arm was the first to be removed.

The Kennedy Center confirmed in a statement on Tuesday that the sculpture was being deinstalled and that a foundation dedicated to the artist would determine its next location. It did not say the reason for the removal but noted that the deinstallation of artworks that had been donated or lent was common practice for conservation or preservation purposes.

A news release from around the debut of “Blue” describes it as a permanent sculpture for the grounds.

“We are deeply grateful to Joel Shapiro for the years ‘Blue’ has spent animating our campus and connecting visitors to his vision,” the statement said. “We are honored to have been stewards of his vibrant work and a part of his enduring legacy.”

Mr. Shapiro died in 2025. His daughter, Ivy Shapiro, who is president of his foundation, said in an interview that she thought her father would have been “alarmed” that the sculpture was being taken down from its intended location.

“In Joel’s mind, it was one of his greatest site-specific commissions, which celebrated joy, freedom and creativity,” she said.

Ms. Shapiro declined to discuss what she was told about the Kennedy Center’s reasoning for removing the sculpture. Her father had given it to the center as a gift, but she said that it was now owned by the foundation, and that she would like to see it installed at another public site.

The White House did not respond to a request for comment.

Josef Palermo, who was laid off in March as the curator of visual arts and special programming at the Kennedy Center, wrote in an essay for The Atlantic that he had been instructed to remove works from the center’s permanent art collection, and told that Mr. Trump’s renovations would include new art.

In an interview on Tuesday, Mr. Palermo recalled that “Blue” had been “targeted early on” and said he took issue with the lack of an announcement.

“The Kennedy Center,” he said, “is in effect holding these pieces in trust for the American people, and there should be a lot more transparency.”

The sculpture is on the grounds of the Reach, an addition to the Kennedy Center that opened in 2019. The sculpture was completed that same year by Mr. Shapiro, whose public art is found in cities around the world. One of his most prominent works is a tree-like bronze sculpture, called “Loss and Regeneration,” that is situated outside the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum in Washington.

“Blue,” which is visible from the Potomac and roads traversing the Kennedy Center, has become a local landmark. In a video about the work that was posted by the Kennedy Center around the time of its debut, Mr. Shapiro said he designed it so the figure would appear in different positions depending on the vantage point of the viewer.

“It’s about action and risk and performance and energy,” he said of the work. “It’s a celebration of possibility.”

Of course, Trump had to remove a sculpture that celebrated “Joy, freedom, and creativity.” These are qualities that Trump has never experienced and does not appreciate.

Will it be replaced by a statue of Trump? Gold, of course.

Categories Art, Corruption, Creativity, Cruelty, Evil, Freedom, Joy, Trump
« Older Entries