upvote
> As the state struggles being ranked 47 in education

That's wild. I would have never guessed Oregon to be that low somehow. I could have seen some poor southern states maybe or West Virginia.

Wonder what data you found? I found https://worldpopulationreview.com/state-rankings/public-scho... and it's 40th with a downtrend. Not sure how reliable that is though.

reply
Linear rankings like this are often misleading because the difference of 10 spots on the list may be very minor in absolute terms.

I don't think there's a single factor. Oregon is fairly rural, poor, and has a huge substance abuse problem, which likely factors in. It's probably the same thing that's happening in Nevada.

reply
It's sadly true that Oregon schools are underperforming, but the idea that spending money on public land is somehow removing money from schools is an uninformed trope. Public funds are usually earmarked for specific uses; it's not just one big slush fund.
reply
That is certainly a large part of it.

1. There's no standard grades (we don't use A through F like everyone else).

2. Teacher's cannot tell you averages in your class/grade so you don't know how well your child is doing compared to their average peer.

3. Attendance doesn't matter.

4. Grades don't matter, you can fail and still pass.

5. The push for "emotional growth centers" in schools created an unfit learning environment in many schools. Teachers are unable to stop problematic kids or remove them from the class. Kids feel unsafe when problematic kids are having a meltdown.

6. The average number of instructional hours in Oregon is well below other states because things like "teacher conferences" are counted as full school days even though there's no school.

The list goes on and on.

Yes-- the funds are earmarked for another use. However, that doesn't prevent the state from making changes and adjusting where funds are allocated. Let the people vote on it.

reply
I originally mentioned "grades don't matter" in my comment but removed it cause I wasn't fully informed on how it works.

But wow... that is truly insane and worse than I could have imagined. If I had kids I wouldn't even consider raising them in Oregon schools.

reply
Also 2 years back the teachers strike in November for funds that... weren't there... that was pretty damaging to my argument to get my kids out of private and into public (we ended up moving to WA in the end).
reply
>some poor southern states

Just for your curiosity - the remarkable progress in Mississippi really challenged my similarly held bias.

https://www.nytimes.com/2026/01/11/us/mississippi-schools-tr...

reply
Paywalled but I remember hearing about that elsewhere. In a nutshell they started holding kids back if they don't pass the grade. Is that accurate?

Honestly seems smart. Letting kids pass even if they're failing does a disservice to everyone involved: the teachers who are trying to get through to them but can't, and the kids themselves who enter the adult world at a huge disadvantage.

reply
There's more to it. It really sounds like it's worked well, at least at elementary age (which I can only assume is super important). The approach is based on:

- focus on "science of reading" approach for young children: "the key idea is that teaching strategies should align with a wide body of cognitive research on how young children learn to read. That research, amassed over decades, shows that in addition to a broad vocabulary, children need to understand phonics, or the relationship between letters and the sounds of spoken language."

- "Mississippi also made other changes, like investing in pre-K, and holding back third graders who cannot read well, one of its most debated policies."

- "raised academic standards and started giving each school a letter grade, A to F."

- "Mississippi also measures how much students progress toward proficiency. Schools get credit if students show improvement — and double credit for the improvement of students in the bottom 25 percent."

- "The Mississippi Department of Education sends literacy and math coaches into low-performing elementary schools, with the goal of teaching teachers, not children. And state officials vet and approve curriculum used by the vast majority of districts, unusual in a country that prizes local control of schools."

reply
Oregon is also extremely rural - Portland is the most populous city in the state by far, and its e.g. far smaller than all cities in the Houston/Austin/Dallas/SanAntonio metroplex. There's important cultural factors that impact its education too, like historic underfunding, poor education spending priorities, and out of touch unions (many days off, striking mid year for funds that aren't there). But I always felt the rural-ness impacting wider education trends was very under represented in discourse.
reply
The number bounces around a bit, but 47/48 is widely found.

https://wallethub.com/edu/e/states-with-the-best-schools/533...

reply
Wow, that’s some interesting points awarded. 1.1 points/100 for having police officers in all schools!
reply
Yeah this is the study people use when they want to rank Oregon 47/50

But as you mentioned it includes random things like “road safety” in the education rankings. 20 points of the “education” ranking are all “safety” related.

“WalletHub” may not be the best source of unbiased stats.

That said, Oregon does have education issues and there’s a lot we could do to improve. My understanding is that two of the big issues are high rates of absenteeism and short school years. These two come together to lead to less time in the classroom

reply