This week, Whiteboard Notes Associate Editor Julia Pasette-Seamon is filling in for Ben to share a special announcement from the Center for High School Success.

"It's hard to be a ninth grader."

This line comes from Tara DeBois, deputy director of the Center for High School Success. It is consistent with my own ninth grade experience too.

I struggled to adapt to the rigor of high school. The one thing I felt like I had going for me was that I loved to write and felt like the skills associated came naturally to me. You can imagine my surprise (and dismay) when my fall report card came back with a big fat F in English.

Two decades of research starting with the University of Chicago Consortium on School Research shows that, academically, I was on the brink. Turns out, whether a student finishes freshman year “on track” (with enough credits to get to 10th grade and no more than one semester F in a core course) predicts graduation better than test scores, race, or family income. 

Thankfully, teachers and administrators noticed me floundering and helped me get the support I needed before it was too late. The only reason that happened, though, was because someone was paying attention, made the choice to intervene, and acted quickly. 

The Center for High School Success just opened a first-of-its-kind opportunity designed to help other districts do the same.

Applications are now open for its inaugural 9th Grade Success Accelerator, which launches in January 2027. Up to 10 districts will be selected for 18 months of training, side-by-side coaching, data analysis support, and peer learning to help them establish sustainable ninth grade success practices—all fully funded through philanthropic support from MacKenzie Scott. 

This model is time-tested. CHSS has worked with more than 300 high schools in 100+ districts since 2018, with results that show up in on-track rates, attendance, dual credit, and teacher morale. You can see the results of their work with Aurora Public Schools in Colorado in the video below. 

If you lead a district: Submit your expression of interest in joining the Accelerator by October 30. The cohort will be announced December 15, and the work will kick off in the new year.

If you don't lead a district: You probably know someone who does. Forward this newsletter to a superintendent, a school board member, or a chief academic officer who might want to apply.

The ninth graders who started high school last month will graduate—or won't—in the spring of 2030. The districts that apply in the next six weeks could spend the next 18 months making sure it's the former.

On September 16, the Florida State Board of Education approved an amendment to the state’s internet safety rule, adding requirements for how district and charter school boards govern AI instructional tools. The board also approved a new AI governance rule covering the 28 institutions of the Florida College System.

Florida is not the first state to regulate AI in schools. Tennessee required district AI policies by the start of the 2024-25 school year. Ohio’s deadline passed on July 1, 2026. Idaho, Maryland, Oklahoma, and Virginia have all since added requirements of their own. [K-12 Dive]

All five states told districts to write new AI policies. Only Florida sets requirements in statute, requiring a parental opt-in by default and data protections no district can waive. 

The new amendment states that districts may not deploy AI “designed, marketed, or configured to”:

Notably, tools may not subject students to undisclosed behavior monitoring, social scoring, or psychological profiling. Interaction records must be retained for at least 30 days. Districts must prioritize vendors that store and process data inside the U.S.

Florida’s new rule also elevates parental direction. Parents must opt their child in to AI use, and every family that declines gets a "substantively comparable" non-AI alternative. The policy is grounded in parents' "primary right" to direct their children's education.

The rules are not yet in effect. Both were approved for adoption, but they still require filing with the Department of State, and districts will have until July 1, 2027, to comply.

School districts manage billions of dollars in federal, state, and local funds with rigorous accountability, but a separate category of money—the fees, fundraisers, and activity funds that flow through schools every day—has operated largely outside that system. New research suggests that gap is wider, and more consequential, than most district leaders realize. 

On September 24, we’ll break down why school-level funds remain so difficult to govern, what the data reveals about where confidence breaks down across the chain from district office to classroom to family, and what district leaders can do to get ahead of a problem that is no longer small enough to ignore.

🗓️ September 24, 2026 at 1 p.m. ET

💡 Featured Panelists

On Monday, Rep. Tim Walberg (R-MI) and Sen. Jon Husted (R-OH) introduced bills in the U.S. House of Representatives (H.R. 20351) and U.S. Senate (S. 5392) to limit how many international students compete in varsity college sports. 

The Training and Education for American Members in University Sports and Athletics (TEAM USA) Act would amend the Higher Education Act to require that international student athletes make up no more than 20% of any given varsity team’s roster, with Title IV eligibility on the line for institutions out of compliance. According to Rep. Walberg, the bill is intended to preserve roster spots and scholarship opportunities for American citizens and strengthen the American Olympic athlete development pipeline. The law, if passed as written, would take effect on July 1, 2029.

This is the first federal proposal of its kind, and is now up for committee consideration in both the House and Senate. States including Idaho, Ohio, and Oklahoma have tried to legislate this issue in the past, but those efforts have stalled out. [Inside Higher Ed, subscription model]

This week, the U.S. Senate cleared the final procedural hurdle before holding a vote on the Protect College Sports Act. The bill would establish sweeping federal guidelines on player eligibility, athlete compensation, and student transfers, among other changes. The Senate is expected to hold a final vote on the Protect College Sports Act next week; if passed, the bill will be considered by the U.S. House.

Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX), who co-sponsored the bill with Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-WA), said that it would provide uniform governance to the rapidly shifting—and increasingly lucrative—world of college sports. The NCAA, which regulates athletics at more than 1,100 colleges and universities in the U.S., backed the legislation, and a long list of institutions, associations, and coalitions have shared their support. Opponents argue that the bill would disempower athletes and restrict their potential compensation. Sen. Chris Murphy (D-CT) said that the bill “[protects] a system of exploitation” and favors monied interests in college sports over the athletes themselves. NAACP President and CEO Derrick Johnson was even more direct when providing his perspective on the issue: “Sharecropping is over. We should not ask athletes, particularly Black athletes, to generate revenue on the football field or basketball court and they share in none of the revenue.” [PBS News; The New York Times, subscription model]

Check out W/A Jobs, which features 3,594 career opportunities from 330 organizations across the education industry. Hiring? For $250/month or $1,000/year, organizations can post an unlimited number of jobs with no per-job fees.