🛝 The Fix Needs a Test, Too

Welcome to Playground Post, a bi-weekly newsletter that keeps education innovators ahead of what's next.

This week's reality check: Students report that cellphone rules weaken as the year goes on, while California has approved 31 literacy-training programs without making effectiveness a scored requirement. Meanwhile, New York is advancing a graduation overhaul that leaves teachers with a consequential question: what evidence will count as ready?

Bring one big idea. Leave ready to move it forward.

Have an idea you keep thinking about - but haven’t had the time, space, or framework to really explore?

Spend one high-energy day at a Design Dreaming Workshop, where you’ll dream bigger, pressure-test your thinking, and turn your idea into something you can actually move forward.

Leave with greater clarity, 2–3 concrete next steps, and a practical innovation framework you can use again and again.

NYC, October 16 | D.C., October 20 | Chicago, October 22

Playground Post readers get 25% off any ticket.
Use discount code: D5OB8A

Early-bird tickets are $395 through September 18.

Learn more + reserve your spot →

💎 Data Gem

74% of preschoolers expelled in 2021–22 were students with disabilities. Boys accounted for 84% of expelled preschoolers, according to the historical figures in a new Children's Equity Project report.

The Phone Rules Frayed Before the Year Ended

A school can begin the year with a cellphone rule and finish with something considerably looser.

The adults may not notice the same change students do.

Reported school-day phone use rose from 28% to 42% between the beginning and end of 2025–26, according to the reporting on Brookings' nationally representative surveys.

Nearly half of teens said enforcement became less strict. Only 13% of adults reported that change.

The October and May surveys also found differences by policy type. Under bell-to-bell restrictions, reported phone use during core classes rose from 25% to 35%. Under more flexible rules, it rose from 32% to over 50%.

Those classroom figures are separate from overall school-day use. All are survey responses, not device logs or a causal test of competing policies.

The evidence nevertheless changes the implementation question. Choosing a rule is one task. Keeping it workable through the year is another.

A useful review would compare student and staff accounts, then ask where the routine breaks down. Are exceptions clear? Does follow-up land consistently with the same person? Can teachers use the process without losing more instructional time?

The goal should not be another daily reporting burden. A brief recurring check can be designed around decisions a school is prepared to make, rather than collecting information nobody uses.

For education innovators, the opportunity is schoolwide policy checkups, clear exception-and-follow-up workflows, and staff implementation coaching. Treat storage hardware as one component, not the whole intervention. Help schools spot a weakening routine early and simplify the response, so teachers are not left renegotiating the same rule in every lesson.

Approved to Train Teachers. Not Required to Prove Results

California has set aside $200 million for literacy teacher training. Its newly approved list gives districts 31 programs to choose from.

But approval answers a narrower question than a district might assume.

Reviewers scored programs against 18 criteria. Evidence of effectiveness was optional, not one of those scored criteria, according to the reporting.

Approved programs ranged from 30 to 53 points out of a possible 54. Those are alignment scores, not measurements of improved reading outcomes.

The board removed some low-ranked programs and called for accessible, detailed comparisons. Some applicants were too new to supply effectiveness data.

That does not mean every approved program lacks evidence, or that a new program cannot work. It means the approval label alone cannot settle the effectiveness question.

For a literacy leader, selection should therefore have more than one column.

What does the training cover? What support follows the workshop? What evidence exists, and how closely does it match the teachers and students who would use it?

Then comes the classroom handoff.

A completion certificate records participation. A useful follow-up should help a teacher apply the training, examine student work, and identify where more coaching is needed.

These are proposed checks for local decisions, not additional requirements announced by the state.

For education innovators, practical openings include independent training comparisons, classroom follow-up coaching, and evaluation services that connect professional development with changes in teaching. Make missing evidence visible without treating it as proof of failure.

What Will Count as Ready to Graduate?

New York is preparing to remove Regents exams as a graduation requirement. For students already in high school, the replacement remains incompletely defined.

On September 14, the Board of Regents authorized officials to draft the regulations. It did not give final approval to the new requirements.

Proposed rules are expected in February 2027, with a final vote in June and changes intended for 2027–28, according to the reporting on the graduation transition.

Under that timetable, current ninth, tenth, and eleventh graders would graduate using local assessment strategies. Exactly how schools will judge those students remains unresolved.

Officials described multiple forms of evidence, including classwork, teacher observations and performance assessments. Statewide testing for accountability would continue.

The longer-term model centers on six graduate attributes and is expected to be fully phased in for students entering high school in September 2029.

State assessment official Zach Warner acknowledged that balancing local control with consistent quality remained unresolved: "That's not something we obviously have a full answer on to yet."

The practical challenge is not simply replacing a test with a portfolio.

Someone has to decide whether two reviewers would reach a consistent judgment.

That calls for teacher time as well as a place to store work. A well-designed process would let educators compare sample assessments, discuss borderline work, and explain the decision to students before the graduation deadline approaches.

Families also need a clear distinction between requirements that are final and arrangements still being developed. A changing policy should not become a guessing game for the student choosing next year's classes.

For education innovators, the opening is performance-assessment design, teacher scoring-calibration services, and student evidence portfolios with clear cohort-specific requirements. Keep teachers in charge of the judgment and make the supporting work easy to review.

⚡️More Quick Hits

This week in education:

• NYC opened 2-K for 2,000 toddlers while providers waited for payments — The launch across four boroughs exposed continuing contract and startup-cash delays as the city targets 12,000 children next fall.

• A review of 20 AI learning tools found ways students bypassed the thinking — Instruction Partners observed use in 16 school systems, including students copying answers between tools; these are qualitative analyses, not standardized ratings or measured learning effects.

• California's AB 1159 adds new student-data protections from 2027 — The signed law broadens covered education-technology providers and bars using covered student data to develop or train AI models, without protecting every independently used app.

• More than 200,000 students with disabilities used major or disability-specific voucher programs — EdChoice's 2025–26 figures accompany reporting on a critical distinction: funding a private placement does not carry over the same IDEA entitlements students have in public school.

To stay up-to-date on all things education innovation, visit us at playgroundpost.com.