Innovative Schools

Ongoing challenges caused by the COVID-19 pandemic have widened learning gaps. According to a 2021 McKinsey analysis, students ended the 2020-21 school year five months behind in math and four months behind in reading. Historically disadvantaged students were most impacted, widening pre-existing disparities, with students in majority Black schools six months behind, and students in low-income schools seven months behind. Most recently, NAEP results indicate that two decades of growth for American fourth-grade students in reading and math were wiped away by just two years of pandemic-disrupted learning.

Pre-pandemic, a classroom likely contained students who achieved at seven different grade levels; post-pandemic, the range was predicted to span up to nine grade levels. In a June 2020 survey conducted by YouthTruth, teachers in schools with at least 75 percent of students who qualify for free and reduced-price lunch were most likely to say their students work on different content at different paces and need additional support.

Unlike the traditional classroom model, which is often a teacher lecturing at the front of a classroom, a student-centered learning model shifts the focus onto students and how to best meet their needs through coaching, small group facilitation, and the use of educational technology. Studies show students attending student-centered learning environments outperform their peers, especially Black, Latino, economically disadvantaged, and English learner students.

Learning is most effective when content is meaningful and relevant, when adults build caring relationships with their students, and when students are in classrooms that foster a sense of belonging and a growth mindset (Duke et al., 2017; Dweck, 2006; The Science of Learning; Quay, 2017). Overdeck Family Foundation-supported studies by researchers in the Mindset Scholars Network showed that ninth grade students with stronger reports of growth mindset earned higher core course GPAs than students reporting a more fixed mindset. A second study found that math teacher messaging that supported growth mindset, belonging, purpose, and affirmation explained roughly 29 percent of the variance in student test score growth, exceeding the predictive power of established classroom practice inventories.

Tutoring, whether in person or virtual, has continued to show evidence of being an effective student-centered intervention at accelerating student outcomes. Saga Education, an Overdeck Family Foundation grantee providing small group math tutoring, was able to help students gain an average of one to two and a half extra years of learning a year—and lead to higher grades across subjects. Another grantee, OnYourMark, found that 72 percent of students using their virtual literacy tutoring services made above-average to well-above-average growth in literacy skills. Additionally, the nonprofit Accelerate, co-funded by Overdeck Family Foundation, is leading a national effort to scale high-impact tutoring programs in U.S. public schools, while shaping the evidence base for tutoring to ensure the widespread adoption of proven strategies.

Research on the efficacy of accelerated versus remediational learning suggests that it could be an effective strategy to help students who’ve experienced learning loss. One study found that when teachers took an accelerated-learning approach in math, students completed 27 percent more grade-level lessons, and struggled less with content than students in classrooms where teachers used remediation. Research conducted by Overdeck Family Foundation grantees Zearn and TNTP found similar findings in math and literacy, respectively. TNTP’s study revealed that too few students—especially students from historically marginalized communities—had consistent access to grade-level work and students were just as successful on grade-level work as they were on below grade-level work. Zearn found that when a student was consistently accelerated by their teacher, they completed twice the amount of grade-level lessons and struggled 17 percent less in their math learning.

Educators overwhelmingly see technology as a key resource to solve the above problems and meet students’ expanding needs. However, there are over 8,600 ed-tech tools available for schools to purchase and little evidence to help them decide which purchase is best. The lack of information has resulted in an estimated 65 percent of unused ed-tech licenses, causing students to miss out on the opportunity for a technology-enhanced learning experience. The $190 billion infusion of federal funds to schools, and $5 billion in private investment to ed-tech products (more than double the 2020 levels), means the supply of ed-tech products will only increase, making it even more challenging to sort through the market to find the best products. This increases the risk that ineffective edtech is purchased and implemented, continuing to increase gaps in student learning versus closing them.