Applying Lessons From K-12 Education to Today’s College Campuses

There are certain bloggers I read religiously: David Labaree on higher education history, Noah Smith on economic policy and Matthew Yglesias on politics and public policy.

For K-12 education, my go-to authority is Larry Cuban, professor emeritus of education at Stanford. Drawing from experience including 14 years as a high school social studies teacher and seven years as a district superintendent, Cuban has authored at least 25 books, including classics like:

• How Teachers Taught, which finds that despite shifts in educational philosophies since 1890, the fundamental approach to teaching—teacher-centered instruction, whole-class teaching and reliance on textbooks—has persisted.
• Inside the Black Box of Classroom Practice, which argues that despite numerous educational reforms, classroom practices remain largely resistant to change.
• Oversold and Underused, which shows that despite significant investments in educational technology, its impact on teaching and learning has been extremely limited.
• Tinkering Toward Utopia, co-authored with David B. Tyack, which introduces the concept of the “grammar of schooling” to describe core structures and practices—such as grade levels and standardized testing—that remain largely intact despite a century of reform efforts.

One of my favorites is Cutting Through the Hype: The Essential Guide to School Reform (with Jane B. David), which assesses 23 school reform strategies aimed at:

• Fixing students through early childhood education, high-dosage tutoring, ending social promotion, a longer school day and year-round schooling.
• Fixing pedagogy through real-world and experiential learning, inquiry-based learning, differentiated instruction, blended learning, social-emotional learning, and technology-mediated instruction.
• Fixing assessment, using traditional letter grades, standards-based or portfolio-based grading, narrative reports, and test-based accountability.
• Fixing teachers through alternate accreditation, higher standards for teacher education, merit-based pay, enhanced evaluation, instructional coaching and ongoing professional development.
• Fixing schools through tracking or abolishing tracking, class size reduction, smaller urban high schools and rating systems.
• Fixing school districts through charter schools, vouchers, mayoral control and state takeovers.

The book’s overall message is that education reform efforts often get caught up in trends and exaggerated claims, overshadowing the complex realities of implementing meaningful change in school classrooms. Cuban and David argue for a cautious, evidence-based approach to reform, emphasizing that there are no simple solutions or silver bullets for improving education.

They stress the importance of understanding the historical, social and political contexts in which schools operate and call for reforms grounded in a realistic assessment of what is feasible and effective in actual classrooms. They caution against adopting flashy, high-profile reforms without considering their practical implications or unintended consequences, urging educators and policymakers to focus on strategies proven to work, particularly those sensitive to the needs and conditions of local schools and communities.

---

Few areas of public policy are as politically charged as K-12 education, because it’s seen as the key solution to society’s most pressing problems: poverty, inequality, social mobility and workforce preparation. No one has written more authoritatively on these issues than Larry Cuban.

Several themes run through his scholarship:

The cyclical nature of educational reform: Educational reform efforts tend to follow recurring patterns over time, revisiting similar themes, strategies and issues. Certain ideas about how to fix education gain popularity, are implemented and then, after a period, either fall out of favor or are viewed as insufficient, leading to new reform efforts. This includes debates over standardized testing, shifts between centralization and decentralization, and the push for more local control, school choice and charter schools.

Many reform initiatives begin with enthusiasm and bipartisan support, driven by the belief that new policies will solve long-standing problems. Over time, as results are assessed, disillusionment sets in when the expected improvements fail to materialize, leading to backlashes and shifts back to previous methods or new reform campaigns.

There’s also a recurring tension between progressive education, which emphasizes student-centered learning and creativity, and traditional education, which focuses on discipline, core knowledge and teacher-led instruction. Another cyclical theme involves balancing equity—providing all students access to similar education—and excellence, including raising academic standards, especially for accelerated students.

The disconnect between policy and practice: Cuban argues that reformers often fail to consider the realities of classroom practice and the social and political contexts in which schools operate. Most educational reforms are imposed from the top down by policymakers who don’t fully understand the day-to-day realities of classroom life. These reforms may look good on paper but face significant challenges in real classrooms, where teachers often lack the resources, time, motivation or training to effectively implement them.

Reformers tend to propose simplistic solutions to complex problems. Teaching involves not just the transmission of knowledge but managing diverse student needs, building relationships and responding to dynamic classroom interactions. Reforms that impose rigid standards can undermine teachers’ ability to adapt to their students’ needs.

In addition, schools are embedded in communities with their own cultures and values. Reforms that don’t consider these factors may face resistance or fail to resonate with teachers, students and parents. Many reforms focus on structural changes without adequately considering how these changes will impact daily classroom life. Cuban argues that true reform should focus on improving what happens inside the classroom—how teaching and learning occur—rather than just changing the structure around it.

The persistence of traditional teaching practices: Despite repeated reform efforts, traditional teaching methods, such as teacher-centered instruction, remain dominant due to institutional inertia and the deeply ingrained habits of teachers and students.

A skeptical view of technology’s impact on education: While technology has often been hailed as a transformative force in education, it has generally failed to live up to its promises. Cuban highlights several reasons for this:

• Technology is often seen as a quick fix for deep-seated educational challenges, without considering how these tools would be integrated into effective teaching practices.
• Professional development in technology use is often limited, sporadic and not tailored to the specific needs of teachers, resulting in underutilized tools.
• Technology is often treated as an add-on rather than being embedded into daily teaching and learning in meaningful ways.
• Educational technology solutions often do not align with students’ specific needs or the realities of those expected to use them.

The importance of pragmatism in reform: Cuban advocates for continuous, thoughtful, incremental adjustments rather than dramatic overhauls. Meaningful and lasting reform requires an understanding of the deeply embedded practices and values within the educational system.

The importance of teacher agency and voice: Cuban argues that teachers are often excluded from the decision-making process, leading to reforms misaligned with classroom realities. When teachers are not involved in developing reforms, the policies are often out of touch with classroom practice, resulting in poor implementation and outcomes.

These themes reflect Cuban’s broad concerns: recognizing the complex dynamics of implementing innovations in actual classrooms, the limitations of top-down reforms and the need for more grounded, realistic approaches to improving education.

---

When Americans worry about public schools, their concern often centers on those in areas of concentrated poverty, where literacy and math-proficiency rates can be alarmingly low.

The concept of an ecology of poverty is helpful in understanding achievement gaps, because it shifts the focus from blaming individuals or communities to recognizing the complex, interconnected systems that sustain poverty.

This approach emphasizes the environmental, social and institutional factors that shape the lives of those in poverty, showing that poverty is deeply embedded in broader societal structures rather than just a result of individual choices.

Key features of an ecology of poverty include:

• Economic insecurity, stemming from underemployment, income volatility and low-wage jobs with little security, irregular hours and limited benefits.
• Stress, leading to mental health issues such as anxiety, depression and trauma, which complicate the ability to work, learn and maintain stable relationships.
• Residential instability, substandard housing and environmental hazards like pollution and lead exposure.
• Community disinvestment, with few businesses, banks or services, leading to economic stagnation and limited opportunities for residents to find nearby employment.

Alongside these challenges, schools in high-poverty areas face higher rates of teacher turnover and student mobility, chronic absenteeism, a higher number of students with special needs and language barriers, and teachers who must spend more time on classroom management and addressing students’ nonacademic needs.

As Cuban points out, increased spending, smaller class sizes and curriculum changes will have limited impact if schools do not address the real needs and contexts of economically disadvantaged students.

---

Even if the history of educational reform is, in many respects, a history of failure, pessimism is not warranted. Contrary to the belief that school performance among children in poverty is worsening or stagnating, there have been notable improvements in learning outcomes in recent decades.

This progress is particularly evident in standardized test scores, graduation rates and the performance of Black and Latino students compared to their peers in other countries.

The National Assessment of Educational Progress, or the “nation’s report card,” shows significant improvements in test scores for students from low-income backgrounds, including Black and Latino students, particularly in elementary and middle school reading and math. These gains suggest that foundational skills are being strengthened.

While achievement gaps between students of different socioeconomic backgrounds persist, they have narrowed over time, indicating that targeted interventions and reforms may be having a positive impact.

Graduation rates for Black and Latino students have also seen significant increases over the past two decades. The graduation rate for Black students rose from around 59 percent in 2006 to over 79 percent in 2020, and for Latino students, from 63 percent to around 82 percent. College enrollment among Black and Latino students has similarly increased.

In addition, Black and Latino students in the United States are now outperforming many of their foreign counterparts, as measured by international assessments like the Program for International Student Assessment.

Factors contributing to this improvement include:

• The expansion of early childhood education programs, such as Head Start, which has better prepared children from low-income families for school.
• Targeted programs for underperforming schools and students, such as Title I funding, which have provided additional resources and support. Interventions like tutoring, after-school programs and summer learning opportunities have also boosted student performance.

To continue improving outcomes for disadvantaged students, it is essential to sustain and expand these effective efforts. This includes increasing access to high-quality early childhood education, providing targeted support to struggling schools and addressing the broader social and economic factors that impact student achievement.

---

Why is it important for higher education to engage with Cuban’s scholarship?

Here’s why: Today, our student body increasingly mirrors the K-12 population, with similar challenges, needs and uneven educational backgrounds. Many college students face stress, trauma, economic hardship and complex family responsibilities.

The lessons from Cuban’s studies of K-12 educational reform offer valuable insights for colleges and universities. We, too, must address the complexities and disparities present in our students and adopt reform strategies informed by the successes and failures of K-12 education. Our teaching practices must do more than transmit knowledge—they must support students holistically.

Cuban’s work provides critical insights into implementing meaningful and sustainable reforms in higher education.

One key lesson is the importance of understanding the social, political and institutional contexts in which schools operate. This is equally true in higher education, where reforms can be undermined if they don’t consider the diverse needs of students, faculty and institutional cultures. The takeaway: Avoid one-size-fits-all solutions and tailor reforms to fit your institution’s specific circumstances.

Cuban also underscores a fact too often ignored: Ed tech is not a panacea for today’s educational challenges. In postsecondary education, where there is pressure to adopt the latest technological tools, Cuban’s findings encourage faculty to critically assess whether these tools genuinely enhance learning or merely add to the hype without addressing core pedagogical needs.

Another crucial point is recognizing the importance of instructors’ agency and professionalism. Cuban argues that meaningful reform must engage and empower teachers rather than impose top-down mandates. This is directly applicable to higher education, where faculty autonomy and professionalism are key to effective teaching. Faculty can draw from Cuban’s insights to advocate for reforms that support their professional judgment and expertise, rather than diminish it through rigid standardization or excessive administrative oversight.

Cuban also urges having realistic expectations for reform outcomes. He highlights the tendency for new initiatives to overpromise and underdeliver. In higher education, this calls for a measured approach to reform, focusing on sustainable changes likely to improve student outcomes. This also means setting realistic expectations and being transparent with students and stakeholders about the potential and limitations of proposed reforms.

We must better serve a student body with highly diverse academic and personal backgrounds. Faculty must design curricula and adopt teaching strategies that accommodate a wide range of learning needs, ensuring that all students have the opportunity to succeed, regardless of their preparation levels.

Cuban favors an incremental, reflective and contextually grounded approach to educational change. This approach is particularly valuable in higher education, where the stakes and the costs are very high and poorly planned changes can have significant adverse consequences. It is essential that faculty and administrators adopt this mindset, focusing on an ongoing process of experimentation, improvement and reflective practice in teaching, curriculum design and assessment methods.

Let’s not follow the example of Jose Ferreira at Knewton, who claimed to have developed “a robot tutor in the sky that can semi-read your mind and figure out what your strengths and weaknesses are, down to the percentile.” Let’s not overpromise and underdeliver.