San Antonio students struggle to recover from COVID
Students in Texas K–12 public schools are on average about half a grade behind pre-pandemic achievement levels in math and nearly one third of a grade level below in reading, data shows.
Why it matters: The Education Recovery Scorecard provides an in-depth look, at the district level, of where Texas students' academic recovery from COVID stood last spring, before federal relief funding expired.
How it works: The data, released last month, marks the third year of reports from researchers at Harvard and Stanford universities.
The big picture: Texas ranked 31st among states for its recovery in math, but it did much better — ranking No. 8 — for its reading recovery.
Elizabeth Rodriguez, a fourth-grade teacher at Agnes Cotton Academy in San Antonio ISD, told the SA Report that students may be scoring better in reading because it's an "easier subject to teach."
"We all kind of know how to read, and we can support our kids in that," she said. But parents may be less familiar with math material, she added.
Between the lines: Across Texas, more students are chronically absent, meaning they missed more than 10% of classes in a school year.
In 2019, 11% of Texas students were chronically absent. That figure stood at 21% in 2023.
Zoom in: Recovery is not equal across local districts.
Students at San Antonio ISD are more than one grade behind 2019 math achievement levels.
Those at Northside ISD, the city's largest district, are about three-fourths of a grade level behind in math.
The bottom line: "The rescue phase is over," Tom Kane, director of Harvard's Center for Education Policy Research, said in a statement.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Maravai LifeSciences (MRVI) Undergoes Leadership Overhaul Amid Transition
Maravai LifeSciences Holdings, Inc. (NASDAQ:MRVI) is one of the 10 best healthcare penny stocks to buy according to analysts. On June 26, William Blair reaffirmed its 'Market Perform' rating for Maravai stock. The key factor influencing this move is the leadership changes at Maravai. A scientist performing a blood test on a patient using life sciences tools & services. Maravai has undergone a complete leadership overhaul since December last year. In December 2024, the company brought in Andy Eckert as the new independent Chairman of the Board. Later, Maravai installed Bernd Brust as CEO, replacing Trey Martin. Then, on June 25, a new press release indicated that Rajesh 'Raj' Asarpota would assume the position of Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer, effective June 30. According to William Blair, Brust and Asarpota are joining Maravai's top-level management when the company is undergoing 'a challenging operational transition period.' The analysts noted that the company 'faces approximately $66 million in headwinds in 2025 from declining COVID-related revenues.' As such, the analysts are optimistic that the fresh hands at Maravai's helm will inject more momentum into the transition. Maravai LifeSciences Holdings, Inc. (NASDAQ:MRVI) is a life sciences company. It provides specialized products that support the development of vaccines, drug therapies, diagnostics, and cell and gene therapies. Its operations span two segments: Nucleic Acid Production and Biologics Safety Testing. While we acknowledge the potential of MRVI as an investment, we believe certain AI stocks offer greater upside potential and carry less downside risk. If you're looking for an extremely undervalued AI stock that also stands to benefit significantly from Trump-era tariffs and the onshoring trend, see our free report on the best short-term AI stock. READ NEXT: Goldman Sachs Energy Stocks: 10 Stocks to Buy and 10 Best AI Stocks to Buy According to Billionaire David Tepper. Disclosure: None.
Yahoo
a day ago
- Yahoo
BMI is B-A-D, a new study suggests. Here's a better way to measure weight
When it comes to measuring weight, BMI is the acronym everyone loves to hate. Health professionals have long used body mass index as a quick screening tool to fast-track certain patients into a 'code red' management plan — people whose weight puts them in danger of future health problems. The issue is that BMI measures health risk by calculating height and weight. However, muscle and bone weigh more than fat, so BMI measurements can overestimate the danger for people with a muscular build or a larger frame. Conversely, BMI can underestimate health concerns in older adults and anyone who has lost muscle, according to the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health in Boston. Now, authors of a new study say a different approach to weight measurement may be a more accurate way to predict future health issues. Bioelectrical impedance analysis, or BIA, uses undetectable electric currents to measure not only the percentage of body fat but also lean muscle mass and water weight. The technology works like this: You stand on metal plates on the machine while holding your hands or thumbs on another metal attachment held away from the body. Once started, the machine sends a weak electrical current through the body. Body fat, muscle and bone all have different electrical conductivity, so the machine uses algorithms to determine lean muscle mass, body fat percentage and water weight. 'We found body-fat percentage to be a stronger predictor of 15-year mortality risk in adults between the ages of 20 and 49 than BMI,' said Arch Mainous III, lead author of the study published Tuesday in the journal Annals of Family Medicine. When it came to deaths from heart disease, people with high body fat as measured by BIA were 262% times more likely to die than people who had a healthy percentage of body fat, said Mainous, a professor and vice chair of research in community health and family medicine at the University of Florida School of Medicine. 'Now remember, using BMI did not flag any risk at all in this younger population, which isn't one we typically consider to be at high risk for heart disease,' said senior author Dr. Frank Orlando, a clinical associate professor of community health and family medicine at University of Florida Health. 'Think of the interventions we can do to keep them healthy when we know this early. I think it's a game-changer for how we should look at body composition,' Orlando said. BMI is measured by dividing your weight by the square of your height. (If you are mathematically challenged like I am, the National Institutes of Health has a free calculator.) In BMI world, a body mass between 18.5 and 24.9 is a healthy weight, between 25 and 29.9 is overweight, between 30 and 34.9 is obese, between 35 and 39.9 is class 2 obesity, and anything greater than 40 is 'severe' or class 3 obesity. People are considered underweight if their BMI is lower than 18.5. Using BMI to measure health risk works — on a population level. Countless studies have shown that a greater BMI really does correlate with developing chronic diseases of all kinds — cancer, heart disease, type 2 diabetes, kidney and liver disease, and more. Where BMI fails is at the patient level. Imagine a patient who is 'skinny fat' — thin on the outside but riddled with globs of fat wrapped around major organs on the inside. Your BMI would be fine even though your health was at risk. 'Those people are more likely to have nonalcoholic fatty liver disease, more likely to have elevated glucose, more likely to have elevated blood pressure, and more likely to have inflammation in general,' Mainous said. All of these health issues can be treated, stopped and in some cases even reversed if caught early enough, he added. While doctors are aware of the issues with BMI, many prefer it 'because it is cheap and easily put into practice,' Mainous said. 'They'd like to use a more direct measurement such as a DEXA scan, but those cost too much and are not widely available, so everyone falls back to the indirect measure of BMI.' DEXA stands for dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry and is the gold standard for body mass analysis. Such machines can cost between $45,000 and $80,000, so patients typically travel to a hospital or specialty center to get the scan, Orlando said. The cost to the patient can easily be $400 to $500 per scan, he said. 'However, we found the newer versions of bioelectrical impedance are pretty accurate, giving some valid and reliable results,' Orlando said. One note — at-home based bioelectrical impedance products are not nearly as accurate, said Dr. Andrew Freeman, director of cardiovascular prevention and wellness at National Jewish Health in Denver. 'They can be affected a lot by how much body fluid you have, how hydrated you are,' said Freeman, who was not involved with the new research. 'At-home measurements will only give a ballpark — the clinic-based machines are more precise.' The new study analyzed data on 4,252 men and women who participated in the 1999 to 2004 federal survey called NHANES, or the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, a yearly checkup of the nation's health. Technicians measured each person's body composition, including height, weight and waist circumference. In addition, all participants underwent a clinic-based bioelectrical impedance analysis, which measures the body's resistance to electrical currents. Researchers then compared that data with the National Death Index through 2019 to see how many people died. After adjusting for age, race and poverty status, the study found a BMI that labeled someone as obese was not associated with a statistically significant higher risk of death from any cause, when compared with those in healthy BMI range. People with high body fat as measured by bioimpedance analysis, however, were 78% more likely to die from any cause, Mainous said. Measuring waist circumference was also helpful, but not as accurate as body mass. Add that to the 262% higher chance of dying from heart disease found by the study, and it's a no-brainer for doctors to use bioelectrical impedance analysis on patients, Orlando said. 'Let's face it, the magnitude of risk this study shows is enormous,' Freeman said. 'It's scary to think that we may have been using a surrogate — BMI — that may not have been all that accurate over the years.' The study shows how better weight measurements could easily become personalized medicine, Freeman added. 'Imagine you came into your doctor's office,' he said. 'They provided your body fat percentage and an individualized risk assessment. They talked to you about exercise and other lifestyle changes and referred you to a nutritionist. 'They gave you an opportunity to make these changes, and then if needed, helped you out with medication. If the medical profession did this and were able to save many more lives, that would be amazing.' Get inspired by a weekly roundup on living well, made simple. Sign up for CNN's Life, But Better newsletter for information and tools designed to improve your well-being.
Yahoo
a day ago
- Yahoo
Researchers warn of catastrophic consequences from rapidly intensifying threat: 'As a species, we have never confronted anything like this'
Sustained higher-than-average temperatures and warming seas are projected to severely disrupt agriculture, CNN reports, and scientists are concerned about how to "ensure future food security" in a changing climate. Americans born today could "live in a world where the U.S. can only produce half as much of its key food crops," CNN's recent headline read. The ensuing reporting focused on a groundbreaking study recently published in Nature — one of the most widely cited scientific journals globally — and the outlet described its findings as "stark." Study authors examined the impacts of rising temperatures through a universally understood and relevant lens: the global food supply. Put plainly, the researchers' calculations were grim: Every 1°C (1.8°F) increase in average global temperatures will result in a worldwide reduction in food production equivalent to 120 fewer calories per person, per day. Study author Solomon Hsiang of the Stanford Doerr School of Sustainability broke it down further when discussing their findings. "If the climate warms by 3 degrees, that's basically like everyone on the planet giving up breakfast," Hsiang warned. It's well-documented that climate-related matters are routinely and misleadingly cast in doubt, framed as a matter of belief rather than settled science. Not everybody lives in a region routinely walloped by extreme weather — such as wildfires or increased coastal flooding — and the issue can seem abstract, localized elsewhere, or more of a problem for the distant future. However, food is a great equalizer, something all humans require to survive — farmers have long been ringing the alarm about the impacts of unpredictable weather and temperatures on crop yields. Professor and food policy expert Tim Lang told CNN that adaptations to fortify the global food supply are halting and insufficient. "The data pile up. The politicians turn a blind eye … Land use is not altering fast or radically enough," he lamented, addressing the speed at which agriculture is adapting to changes in the climate. Do you worry about how much food you throw away? Definitely Sometimes Not really Never Click your choice to see results and speak your mind. "This is a major problem. It's incredibly expensive. As a species, we have never confronted anything like this." Experts reiterated that "adaptation" and "mitigation" were critical steps to safeguard crops in an increasingly unpredictable climate, one in which the United States could lose half its crop yields. Growing your own food is one approach to guard against food supply instability at a personal level, whereas donating to climate-related causes is a good way to make a broader impact. Join our free newsletter for good news and useful tips, and don't miss this cool list of easy ways to help yourself while helping the planet.
