The DOE's Erosion of Merit: An Injustice for Black and Latino Students
As the Trump Administration is working to give educational authority back to the states, local school districts have a chance to revitalize merit-based standards abandoned during the Obama administration. That’s good news for Black and Latino students who have suffered most from the Department of Education’s misguided and regressive education policies.
Scores from the most recent 2023 NAEP are at unprecedented lows for all students. While COVID’s impact might explain some of this drop, the long-term composite scores, which combine math and reading performances for 9 and 13-year-olds, show Black and Latino students have been on a downward trajectory since Obama’s second term in 2014. They have yet to rebound from the COVID lows, pinning them further behind their other racial counterparts. For Latino students, their composite score of 232 is more than 20 points lower than the other students’ average score of 256. For black students, their score of 222 is more than 30 points lower. This is the largest the race gap has been since the 90s.
Considering these scores, it becomes hard to ignore the Obama administration’s meritless precedent that prioritized equity over student well-being. There were two initiatives in particular that sent these students on a downward path: the introduction of waivers for the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) program in 2011 and the rollback of Bush’s Zero Tolerance policy under the 2014 Dear Colleague Letter.
These two Obama-era initiatives cultivated a classroom environment that made it nearly impossible for Black and Latino students to thrive. Instead, they have been subjected to an inverted incentive structure, one that rewards mediocrity and deems rigorous standards racist, leaving them academically immature with neither drive nor discipline. The teachers felt this was the hardest, as reports of physical attacks by students rose 22.4% from 2011 to 2016.
The NCLB program is no longer in existence under the Trump administration, but in 2011, some states received waivers to bypass certain NCLB requirements, like the goal of 100% student proficiency in reading and math in a given year, in exchange for implementing alternative standards. For example, states like Michigan prioritized graduation benchmarks over test scores in 2014. School districts would risk losing state funds and relinquishing their local authority if graduation rates were too low, which incentivized them to pass along as many students as possible by making the classes too easy to fail. States like California, New York, and Pennsylvania continue to allow dumbed-down curricula to shape their hardest-hit school districts.
Though Bush’s Zero Tolerance policy mandated stricter punishments for violence and drug possession, Obama’s Dear Colleague Letter in 2014 urged schools to reduce harsh discipline for minority students, warning that racial disparities in punishment could violate Title VI of the Civil Rights Act. Out of fear of scrutiny from the DOE’s civil rights apparatus, school districts refrained from necessary disciplinary actions for Black and Brown students.
Combine these infantilizing policies with the cultural influence of progressive ideologies — that insist subjects like math are racist, and that people of color are victims of oppressive Western standards of merit — it’s little wonder Black and Latino students continue to lag behind their peers. All students, regardless of their race, need to be held to high intellectual and moral standards in order to maintain their dignity and aspire to improve. Assuming minority students lack the potential to have decorum, competence, and the same academic excellence as their other racial counterparts is in itself racist.
The best thing policymakers can do for Black and Latino students is to uphold rigorous standards that call forth their best efforts. I attended a “priority school” for high school — a low-performing, low-income, majority Black and Latino high school. Obama’s Dear Colleague Letter was meant for schools like mine, and my school felt its impact as poor behavior became increasingly common, and discipline was nonexistent. In that environment, I gained a unique resilience and sense of responsibility; if I wanted to go to college or make anything of myself, it would have to be by my own determination and willpower.
James C. Scott calls this kind of wisdom “Metis knowledge” in his book “Seeing Like a State.” It’s the real-world grit that students in disadvantaged school districts like mine develop from dealing with adverse situations. We learn to analyze problems fast and decide what works — skills that employers value.
Rather than coddling supposedly disadvantaged students with perpetually low expectations, states should implement curricula and standards that support and develop this type of knowledge. Pairing challenging environments with rigorous academic standards can unlock students’ highest potential. It’s time to stop underestimating students’ abilities and start building systems that harness strength for true academic success.
