Interview
Ensuring our schools stay strong

Third grade students at Moulton Elementary in Laguna Niguel, CA, August 20, 2024.  (Photo by Paul Bersebach/MediaNews Group/Orange County Register via Getty Images)

The United States, like every country, requires a strong public education system. Such systems are the foundation on which virtually every kind of national success depends. Strong public schools require that educators, administrators, and policymakers have a clear sense of how their systems and their students are performing. Yet in recent years, both objective assessments (on a state and national level) and accountability measures have become increasingly controversial. To help understand these controversies and how leaders should respond, we turned to Carey M. Wright. Currently the Superintendent of Schools for the State of Maryland, Wright is a nationally recognized expert who previously held the same position in Mississippi, where she oversaw a spectacular turnaround in the performance of that state’s schools. Wright sat down recently with Robin Berkley, the Ann Kimball Johnson Director of Education at the George W. Bush Institute. Their conversation has been edited for length and clarity. To read more about the importance of accountability and assessments, please click on the links to the Bush Institute’s policy briefs.

Our conversation comes at a time when many states are shifting away from strong systems of accountability. As the longest-serving superintendent of schools for Mississippi, you accomplished a lot during your eight years there, including raising the state’s fourth-grade literacy level from last in the nation to 21st on the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP). What role did data and assessment play in helping students make this leap, and why is NAEP an important metric? 

You’re talking about two things that are very near and dear to my heart – assessment and accountability. When we started in Mississippi, the assessment system that we used in state was touting 65% to 70% proficiency rates in reading. Then NAEP came along and gave the state a proficiency score of around 22%. I became determined that I wasn’t going to be the poster child for that kind of honesty gap in reporting. So I started digging into things and found out that the state’s assessment system wasn’t really a proficiency rating; it just measured basic competency in reading. 

So I decided we needed to come up with a new assessment. To do that, we also needed to redo our standards, because they had just been evaluated by two outside organizations, and one called them “horrendous,” and I think the other called them “the worst in the nation.” So we rewrote our standards and then crafted a brand new assessment. When we did this, I said I wanted it to mirror the rigor of NAEP, because NAEP is the Nation’s Report Card, it is the way that we are measured against other states, and it is a rigorous test. We set the bar high for proficiency. And we introduced a brand-new accountability system that focused not only on proficiency but on growth, especially of the bottom 25%. 

At the time, a majority of our children in Mississippi were in that bottom 25%. Even districts that were doing quite well were still going to have a group in the bottom 25%. So I would say to superintendents, “When you go around and talk with school principals, ask them, ‘Have you identified the bottom 25%?’ And if they say yes, say, ‘Show me the list.’ And if they show you the list, then say, ‘I want you to point to a child on the list and tell me what you are doing specifically for that child.’” Because my belief is that behind every data point is a face. And if you don’t know the person behind that face, you’re not going to know what that face needs. 

If all you’re looking at is a whole subgroup, such as students with disabilities or students who are African American, you’re going to miss the point. Because each child needs something different. We really leaned into that. The first year we ran our new accountability system, only 19 districts received A ratings. And I went to every single one of those districts, and invited the community, invited the mayors, and invited the legislators to a meeting, to draw attention to what we were hoping to get from other districts around the state. That first year, as I said, my tour had 19 stops – one for each district that got an A rating. By the next year, I think we were up to 32, and it’s continued to grow each year thereafter.  

Since I got to Maryland, I’ve had a lot of concerns about our current assessment system, and I’ve had a lot of concerns about our accountability model. We have a five-star rating system for schools here, with five being the highest. In December of 2023, the assessment director told me that 76% of our schools were rated as three, four, or five stars. But we had a 47% proficiency rate in reading and a 27% proficiency rate in mathematics. And for me, it was like there was a not-equal sign between those sets of statistics. Something was not right.  

So in 2024, I established an assessment and accountability task force. And in the months since, this group has worked with the Center for Assessment, which is the national gold standard on assessment and accountability systems, to come up with recommendations for what our new model should look like.  

I, too, have read about other states lowering their standards. I don’t believe there’s ever a time you lower standards. I believe that you should set high expectations for children and staff. I believe firmly that children can do and will do what you tell them they can do – if you provide them the help and assistance to get there. And I believe the same is true for staff. But you need to know where your strengths and needs are and use the data to inform the decisions you make.  

A student taking notes. (Shutterstock)

Why are assessments so much more valuable than teacher perceptions or observations, or grades on report cards? And why have assessments become so controversial? 

Statewide assessments are critical because they are the only measure that is consistent from school to school and district to district – just like NAEP is the only measure that’s consistent from state to state. As the state chief, statewide assessments give me a sense of how well we are doing as a state.  

I also believe in accountability. I hold myself accountable each and every day for doing the best that I can to inform instruction across the state. I’m a classroom teacher at heart, and once a teacher, always a teacher. And having common assessments, common benchmarks, common accountability standards is the only way to objectively understand how you’re doing. 

I think testing gets a bad rap when teachers feel they are on the receiving end. In states with a lot of assessments, it can feel to them like there’s a lot of testing – too much testing. But I believe we’ve got to stick with statewide assessments and with statewide accountability, because they’re the only way that you can really try to improve things in your state.  

We’re currently in a time of transition, with new leadership coming in at federal and state levels, and there’s a lot of discussion right now about what is the right federal role in education. Why is a federal requirement of state assessments and accountability systems so important? 

I believe that all communities and parents deserve to know how well their schools are performing. Even if my children were in elementary school, I would want to know what my middle school looks like, and what my high school looks like, and how well we are honoring the fact that we want children to be growing each year. And the only way to know that is if you have a consistent statewide measurement system. So we need to make sure that our measurement is rigorous enough, that it is focused on the content areas that we’ve established, and that it is a true measure of proficiency. 

We also need to ensure that even schools with a large number of children who are underperforming get credit if their children grow every year. I’ll give you an example. When I was in Mississippi, we had a five-level ranking system for districts, with 5 being the highest and 1 the lowest. And after one year, a lot of the districts were saying, “We’ve taken this many kids from the bottom of Level 1 to the top of Level 1, but not into Level 2.” And that was a huge growth for them, but they weren’t getting any credit for it. So we took Levels 1 through 3 and split them into 1A, 1B, 2A, 2B, 3A, 3B. So now a district could show that it grew all of these children from 1A to 1B and could get credit and be honored for that. 

It’s hard work, and people need incentives. People refer to what we did as the Mississippi Miracle, but I tell people, “There wasn’t any miracle about it. It was the Mississippi Marathon.” Year after year, we had to roll up our sleeves, look at our data, and make sure that we were providing the professional learning that teachers needed to continue to grow, while also monitoring our data to make sure that our children were growing and that proficiency rates were improving each year. 

That had to be a fairly painful process for some people. How did you make that change palatable? And what were some of those big “aha” moments in the Mississippi Marathon? 

Well, the one thing that you’ve got to do is honor what districts are doing well. At our board meetings, we had a video every month featuring something wonderful that was happening, that was aligned to our strategic plan, that was aligned with what we were trying to get done with children and teachers and leaders across the state. Those videos were live streamed, and they had a huge following.  

I also formed advisory groups for teachers, for students, and for superintendents. That feedback loop was important. When I met with teachers, I would say, “What do you need from the state?” I remember one time a teacher said, “We’re working so hard on writing, but we feel like we need more help.” So I went back to the department and said to the team, “OK, teachers are saying they need professional learning around writing.” And we provided that. You’ve got to know what’s happening on the ground, because the magic happens in the classrooms. And when you’re the state leader, you need to ensure that people can see that you’re there alongside them. 

This isn’t a top-down issue. And it’s not mostly about money, although it does take some money. This is about children, about making children’s lives better each and every day. It is not like a classic job that you go to and then leave at the end of the day.  

Maryland Superintendent of Schools Carey Wright, October 10, 2023. (Photo from the Mississippi Department of Education via The 74 Million)

A lot of people seem to think that assessments and accountability are unfair to educators, are punitive. How do you strike the right balance?  

Well, you look at the data and see which districts and schools are struggling the most. And you think about the resources that you are providing to those districts, and how they might look a little bit different from the districts that are excelling. As a state chief, you’ve got to step back and really look at what your districts need. You can’t treat everybody the same. I think it was Thomas Jefferson who said, “There’s nothing more unequal than the equal treatment of unequal people.” 

That really resonates with me, because there are some districts, whether in the Mississippi Delta or Maryland’s Eastern Shore, that are really struggling, and you’ve got to do something different for them than you do for districts that are working well. You’ve got to be thoughtful and deploy your staff and your resources in a way that really meets people’s needs. 

I came into education policy right when No Child Left Behind was passed, and the discussions people are having today are remarkably similar to the ones we were having then. Why do you think some states are moving away from assessment and accountability, and what advice would you give to policymakers? 

I would never move away from assessment and accountability. Let me be very clear: It’s hard work. The easiest thing to do would be to just let the districts cruise through, but that’s not in the best interests of the children. It’s our job to help adults see that. When you’re not seeing growth, it’s easy to get deflated. When I got to Mississippi, there was a culture of low expectations because they’d been at the bottom for so long. And when our numbers started to climb, it really changed the culture of the state. People started saying, “Look what our kids can do!” And that’s where the focus needs to be. Regardless of what state you’re in, we need our children to be competitive, not only nationally, but globally. The world is changing very quickly, and our children have to be prepared for those changes.  

But it’s not easy, and sometimes the politics make it a lot more difficult. I’ve always tried to be very clear about what my role is. I was asked once which party I belonged to, and I said, “I wasn’t hired to be a member of either party. I was hired to be the state superintendent and improve outcomes for children.” 

It’s also important to hire the best and the brightest and to make sure that they all believe that there’s nothing that children can’t accomplish if we help them get there. I take that responsibility very seriously, and so do those who work with me. We come into work every day knowing that that’s what we’ve got to do.  

As you’ve already suggested, the one constant we have in this business is change. What makes you feel hopeful when you look ahead? 

I think that changes in technology are going to make things happen faster. We’re already looking at AI to see how it can make teachers’ lives easier. Are there ways that we could use AI on our statewide assessment? Could we use it to help teachers craft IEPs [individualized education programs] for children with disabilities? There’s a lot of potential there.  

I welcome the increase in parental involvement. Having been a parent myself, I think it’s really important that we educators bring parents along and help them understand what we’re trying to accomplish in schools, and to make sure that they understand how they can be helpful at home. Not just at parent nights or PTA conferences, but in a really meaningful way. Parents are their children’s first teacher, and we have to involve them in this journey.