Former President George W. Bush once called it the “soft bigotry of low expectations.”

For years, as K-12 student outcomes have declined, policymakers have sought new ways to improve results. Some have been successful, while others have simply added unrealistic burdens. Still others have sought to simply move the goal posts.

The COVID school shutdowns only made problems worse, as some school districts stopped tracking attendance, eliminated grading, or cut homework.

Unfortunately, news came recently that the state of Idaho is lowering long-term academic goals in an attempt to help narrow achievement gaps. Setting goals is a federal mandate, part of the state’s “consolidated plan.” The new goals are still said to be “ambitious,” but it is a noticeable decline in what should be expected for the investment being made.

Let’s get specific.

The previous goal for the state’s four-year graduation rate was 95% by 2024. Idaho hasn’t come close to achieving that, with the most recent results hovering around 80%. The state’s new plan calls for a slow, steady increase in the rate of about 0.7% each year, hitting 85.9% by 2029.

When it comes to math, Idaho previously set a goal of having more than 60% of students be proficient or higher on the state’s ISAT by 2024. Now, the goal has been re-set: 47.6% by 2030, with even lower proficiency among economically disadvantaged, students with disabilities and English learners. Can a goal of less than 50% really be considered a success?

For English Language Arts/Literacy, the goals have been cut by nearly a third – 58.6% in 2030, rather than close to 70% this year.

Lowering expectations may help make the goals more achievable, but does it really help advance student learning? Research continually shows higher expectations result in more impactful teaching and better outcomes for students.

Idaho spends more than half of its state budget on K-12. Over the past decade, the amount spent at the state level has more than doubled, and there are discussions about yet more increases in the coming year.

During the 2023 session, we wrote that policymakers need to answer several questions before increasing education funding: what amount of spending, per student, will be sufficient and how will we know when we are spending enough? In other words, what is our goal and what are we trying to achieve?

The answers to these questions remain murky, even as we move the goalposts on student outcomes. When you set low expectations, don’t be surprised when you get low results.