Using the logic of this explainer site to address the Mississippi Miracle

In 2013, the state of Mississippi passed the Literacy-Based Promotion Act and, over the following decade, achieved remarkable gains in NAEP fourth-grade reading—rising from near the bottom to nearly the top of the state’s NAEP ranking, ahead of almost every other state. The Mississippi law emphasized an early focus on reading, beginning with pre-K, and required students in the early grades to meet a reading standard before advancing.

Thus far, no improvement for the eighth grade, but Mississippi reasons that the new law was not fully in place when the eighth graders were in pre-K.

In general, ten years is a long time across the pre-K–12 pipeline. That is a ten-year bloc of time students will never get back. Whether the Mississippi K–12 results will be lasting for subsequent fourth grades—and whether they will extend to the eighth grade—only NAEP assessments will tell. But in any case, kudos to Mississippi for its administrative effort.

Reality check: incremental vs. innovation: Rather than incremental change, Jamie Dimon urges the use of innovation—societal innovation—for sudden, unlimited-in-scope, and lasting change.

Either students maximally benefit during those once-in-a-lifetime years or they do not. Jamie Dimon urges the replacement of that incremental constraint with the dynamic of innovation and acceleration—as measured by the same hard-number metrics.

The future for a new cohort of K–12 students is here: innovation. It’s 2026.

Light-years beyond the technological and educational frameworks of early 1900s America, and far beyond the era when NAEP began formal assessments in the early 1970s—K–12 students must achieve well above any temptation to settle for minimum NAEP proficiency.

Concurrently, and as a best practice, even the most widely held assumptions must be evaluated and continually reevaluated. For instance, minimum NAEP proficiency must be considered not as a goal, but merely as a reference. Further, to capitalize on their strengths and to be competitive, K–12 students must seek performance in the upper deciles of NAEP. That is, the true competitive minimum is the highest decile a student can achieve.

So, back to the Mississippi Miracle. Will its fourth-grade K–12 gains continue? And will more fourth graders increasingly reach the levels where they deserve to be—and are capable of being?

Further, is it the excitement and attention surrounding the statewide Mississippi effort—and resulting excitement during execution—that is the primary driver of the increase in fourth-grade reading results? And if so, is this an example of the Hawthorne effect, in which those gains may fade in future fourth-grade cohorts as those drivers diminish?

To see the Hawthorne effect, click the U.S. Department of Education link and scroll to the subtitle “The elephant in the room has a cousin, Hawthorne.”

And for the eighth-grade cohort—far different from fourth graders—if their results do begin to show comparable improvement, will those gains likewise fade for subsequent eight-grade cohorts?

As noted, NAEP assessments will answer those questions. However, as Jamie Dimon might point out, and as beneficial as such improved administrative processes, rules, regulations, and codifications into state law may be, this admirable effort by Mississippi is incremental, as was the Texas Miracle before it (see NCLB, No Child Left Behind). That is, both the Texas Miracle and NCLB were administrative, not innovation.

50 states—50 labs—and an appropriately legislated central hub for innovation

Random K–12 efforts across the 50 states carry immense potential—especially if coordinated through federal central-hub legislation designed for that purpose. Not every early positive indicator will survive further testing, as illustrated by the Texas Miracle, where premature celebration may have helped influence the launch of the No Child Left Behind Act.

Another reality is incrementalism. Left in the wake of decades of incremental, largely administrative state and federal efforts is a lesson echoed by Jamie Dimon’s logic: pursue innovation relentlessly and as a high priority. K–12 student performance may be the poster child for that lesson.

Meanwhile, the verdict is still out on the “Mississippi Miracle,” though positives will almost certainly emerge—even if only as another reminder that early learning is critical.

Not only Texas and Mississippi—there are 50 laboratories at work simultaneously, each capable of brilliance.

Legislate a means to capture it.

Feed those efforts to a central K–12 performance hub that is Congressionally legislated to focus on true innovation, while simultaneously monitoring and sharing state and central hub efforts—doing so across all 50 states. An ongoing joint state–federal synergy could emerge—potentially unmatched in hard-number performance results for all K–12 students and all metrics, far beyond a single metric such as NAEP assessments. Innovation must serve as an all-metrics-at-once rapid-response—no clunkiness of ten-year losses.

With this conceptually simple but bold shift in federal strategy, innovation can be the change agent for national K–12 student performance. Results will be verifiable by metrics such as NAEP, the SAT, ACT, international programs such as PISA and TIMSS, the Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery (ASVAB), the HSe4Metrics cap rate, and the platform’s internal metrics.

America’s K–12 solution must be a powerfully legislated central hub working in combination with all 50 states—in the example of Mississippi.