PODCAST | “Freedom to Learn:” Classic Learning Test vs. College Board
Michael Torres on Disrupting the SAT/ACT Duopoly, Policy Barriers, & the Fight for Assessment Choice.
The Classic Learning Test is disrupting the standardized testing status quo. Michael Torres, CLT’s Director of Legislative Strategy, recently joined the Freedom to Learn podcast to explain how this fast-growing exam is quietly challenging the SAT and ACT duopoly by offering a rigorous alternative with longer reading passages, no-calculator math, and a focus on true college readiness.
Michael traces CLT’s 10-year rise from a niche option for homeschool and classical school students to widespread adoption in public systems, starting with Florida in 2023. We discuss expanding recognition across major university systems, U.S. service academies, and the shifting state and federal policies that are embracing the CLT and reshaping college admissions. Our conversation explores how the College Board is fighting to protect its control over education, how exams influence what gets taught in classrooms, and why CLT is pushing for “assessment choice” as a natural extension of school choice.
Please follow or subscribe to Freedom to Learn on Spotify, Apple Podcasts, YouTube, or wherever you get your podcasts. New episodes are released every Thursday.https://open.spotify.com/embed/show/6sRoyg1hCK9yuImmII6nh4
This conversation has been edited for length and clarity.
CLT is shaking up the standardized testing landscape. You all provide a classical alternative to the SAT and ACT. What does that mean?
Michael Torres: That’s a great question. The Classic Learning Test is a college admissions exam, nationally standardized and nationally normed, just like the SAT and ACT. You’ll see it assesses reading, writing, and math, just like the other two exams.
But the differences come in how we assess those things. So in the reading section, you’re going to see reading passages from classic works of literature, philosophy, and science, everything from Socrates to Frederick Douglass. You’ll see Albert Einstein and Isaac Newton. Something from the founding era is usually on a test form. The reading passages will be longer, somewhere around 600 to 700 words. A student will have to spend 10 minutes reading St. Augustine or something from the Federalist Papers and then answer five to seven questions on that passage.
Then, in the math section, students will not be allowed to use calculators. We want to know if a student is numerate, if they actually know how to do math, not if they’re good at taking numbers and plopping them into a calculator and regurgitating what the computer tells them. On the CLT, they’ll have to do everything from Algebra I, Algebra II, Geometry, Trigonometry, all by hand, to get those answers.
So the question is, why? Why did we create this test that has students reading St. Augustine and Socrates rather than just going to the SAT and ACT? The reason is, our founder, Jeremy Tate, was a public school teacher in New York and then a college counselor in Maryland, where he was preparing students for college. To do that, they have to do well on the SAT and ACT. In recent years, the last few decades, those two tests have changed dramatically. In 2015, in particular, they were both aligned to Common Core. That changed the reading sections and how they did math significantly. The schools he was working with didn’t like the changes that were made, but they had no choice. Those were the only two options. And he saw how those changes percolated down into the education of the students in 10th, 11th, and 12th grade. Those tests influence what happens in the classroom. He thought there needed to be an alternative choice that validates the sort of education that students are getting, that their parents are choosing for them. And that’s especially grown to be the case as school choice has expanded across the country.
That’s one of the foundational reasons why the CLT exists. It’s to provide an assessment that, one, holds students to a very high standard. The test is very difficult. And two, doesn’t force every homeschool student, private school student, classical charter school student, and the various different types of schools that are coming up to conform to the College Board’s standard — a single company that has this massive, massive control over what college-bound students have to do to prove their readiness for college.
That massive control could not be overstated. I’ve just gone through the college admissions process with my 12th grader, and my 9th grader has already taken the PSAT 10.
I’d like to know a little bit more about what the last 10 years have looked like. You all just had your 10th anniversary last year, right?
Michael Torres: When Jeremy had the idea to start the exam, he asked his friends and colleagues, “What do you think about creating a new exam?” And almost everybody he asked thought he was nuts. They told him he was crazy. And most people, he said, actually asked him if that was illegal. They think of the ACT and SAT as being part of the government, being required; their public schools force kids to take it, so you can’t make a new test.
But it is a free country. You can make a new test, but you can’t really use that test in many cases. If you’re a private school student going to a private university, you can, because in the private education world, you can do what you want. But if you’re a public school student and you want to go to a public university, there is a mountain of regulatory and statutory places where the SAT and ACT are written down by name.
So, those first several years were defined by our growth within the private education and homeschool education world. It was used almost exclusively by those students to go to liberal arts private colleges who recognized that CLT was an excellent resource for them to not only recruit students, but find those students that are going to be excellent in their classrooms. So that’s where it really started growing, just by word-of-mouth. We’ve never had a humongous marketing budget. We’re not going to see billboards. There’s no Princeton Review. You’re not seeing SAT and ACT all over classrooms. It’s really a word-of-mouth growth situation.
That really changed in 2023 when Governor DeSantis in Florida had, as you might remember, a little bit of a fight with the College Board at the time. So his staff ended up finding out that CLT existed. We’re the first new college admissions exam company to start since 1959, when the ACT started. No one else has even tried since. They asked if we would want to come and bring some competition to the marketplace in Florida. So, we did.
We had to create something called a concordance report. The Department of Education there said, “Great, that’s interesting. We could work on a bill, but you have to create this report proving that a CLT score can align, or be ‘concorded’ with, an SAT and ACT score.” We created one of those reports, contracted with some PhDs, submitted it to the department, and they said, “Great, it works.”
We created a new technical manual for them, as well. That allowed the legislature to pass a law to let the CLT graduate students from public high school—where they have a test requirement in Florida—qualify for dual enrollment and qualify for publicly funded scholarships. They included CLT as an accountability exam for their school choice program. And then, separately, the Florida Board of Regents allowed CLT to be used as an admissions exam in Florida.
Florida has a Bright Futures scholarship for graduates coming out of high school, where, if they perform at a certain level, they’re going to college for free in the state. So that’s a significant opportunity for CLT to be part of that process.
Michael Torres: Yes, it was huge, and lots of states have similar programs. So that’s one of the key policy areas we end up having to deal with as we go into more states beyond.
So, a 10-year history, and a big breakthrough in 2023.
Michael Torres: Since then, we’ve done a series of predictive validity tests, which are post facto. They look back and see how those students do after they get into college.
We did one with Grove City College that showed the CLT was 5% more predictive than the SAT. Franciscan University in Ohio just published one showing CLT was 6% more predictive for their students. And then we worked with about six colleges in Texas on a similar review of the CLT, and they found that CLT was 10% more predictive than the SAT. So, if you average them together, we’re looking at somewhere around 6-8% more predictive than the SAT, looking at students who’ve taken it and gone to college.
You have an incredible number of students now that you’ve moved beyond those smaller, often faith-based schools that were the early adopters, and you have a state university system in Florida using CLT. It’s not just Florida, though, right? Arkansas is another example.
Michael Torres: Exactly. One of the big things we had to figure out at CLT was that we’re getting a lot of traction among homeschool students. Private school students are really finding out about this. Liberal arts colleges really like recruiting our students. But how do we offer this as an opportunity for students in public schools and in public universities? The answer to that is politics and public policy, unfortunately, because SAT and ACT are written by name into state law and regulation in almost every single state in the country.
Florida was our first time doing that. The state government asked us to come in and see if it would work out, and it has worked wonderfully. We went from zero public school students in the state to nearly 100,000 in a year. We didn’t market it. We thought maybe 5-10,000 students would use it. But the desire among students, college counselors, school districts, charter schools to have that a new option for their students is humongous.
We’ve gone to other states to see if they wanted to do at least part of what Florida did, showing that as a proof case: “We have done this. We work with 60 of the 67 school districts in Florida. We can do this in your state as well.”
Arkansas is a great example. Governor Sanders and Secretary Oliva added CLT to the Arkansas Access Act last year, which was a major reform of their higher education system. Part of that included adding CLT as an option for their students to go to the University of Arkansas system. In a separate bill, they also added CLT and SAT as an option for students to choose in public high schools. So, rather than the state being an ACT state mandated by law, they gave students the ability to choose which test was best for them in high school. So they can choose SAT, ACT, or CLT and use any of those three to go to the University of Arkansas.
Similar to that, we have had adoptions by the University of Indiana system, the University of North Carolina system, the University of Georgia system, University of New Mexico, University of Oklahoma, and University of Mary Washington, where you are a trustee. A few other public universities are starting to independently come and ask about bringing CLT on, but those are some of the biggest ones, along with the U.S. Service Academies.
Some of them have come through policy change, some have come through Boards of Regents, some have come through the admissions office at the University of Oklahoma. The admissions office decided they wanted to start recruiting CLT students. So, it’s been a little different in each place.
I think that there’s a narrative that you have ‘tough guy’ governors like DeSantis forcing this onto the K-12 systems and universities. But you’re describing a wide array of states that all have different governance models and different approaches. And you’re talking about a governor in Arkansas being supportive, but then a legislature passing a bill. Multiple parties involved, multiple paths towards embracing this.
The University of Mary Washington is very much a shared governance model; the University Faculty Council had to vote to adopt the CLT. They saw the value, and they voted in favor of it, and then the Board of Visitors recently accepted their recommendation. All of that is good news, and all of that’s happened since 2023?
Michael Torres: Yes, it’s been a very busy two years. As I said before, it’s really been word-of-mouth. We’ve had state lawmakers call us up and say, “Hey, we’d like to work on a CLT bill.”
I’d love to highlight Rep. Ritter and Rep. Newman in Ohio, who decided they wanted to sponsor CLT legislation for Ohio. We’re still working on that with them. It’s in the Senate education committee now. But if it weren’t for state lawmakers deciding, “Hey, we’ve got a lot of classical schools starting in Ohio and a lot of students who might enjoy or be interested in taking a test that is beyond the Common Core-based SAT or ACT, why don’t we make sure that’s an option for them?” Because those two tests are built into the system in Ohio, just like they’re built into the system everywhere else.
So, the only way that’s going to happen is if a representative like Ritter decides that he wants to help make that change in Ohio. It’s been Governor DeSantis or Governor Sanders, or it’s been Representative Ritter or other state lawmakers.
Another great one, Representative Slater in Tennessee, has sponsored CLT legislation we just got passed a couple of weeks ago. He’s been a consistent champion of ours for years. So it’s really just happened step-by-step as more state lawmakers have recognized, “Hey, we’ve accidentally written a private company into our law over the course of decades because they’ve lobbied for it.” And now, there are 15 or 20 places where SAT or ACT are written in there.
We should give students the choice. Just like we’re giving them the choice of the location to go to school with school choice programs, we should give them the choice to choose what tests they’re using to go to college.
We aim to hold students to a very high standard, but because the test matters, that provides intense validation and proof of concept for the choices that students and families are making for where they’re going to college without forcing them to take that student out of that pedagogy, out of that school, and then go conform to the College Board’s model to prove to the rest of the world that, “Hey, that’s a nice education you have over there. It’s a cool thing you’re doing with your classical school or your little micro school, but go prove yourself with the College Board’s model.”
We are proof of concept that you don’t have to do that. You can make the educational choice that you’re making and then prove that you’re ready to go to college using the CLT, ACT, or SAT, whichever one you would like to use.
In an era of the demographic cliff, which means that people stopped having as many babies in 2008, and the population moving through K-12 and into higher education is dropping significantly, it would be really unwise to cut off a portion of that population as they’re moving through. In fact, it would be very wise to welcome them and have this perspective of, “Okay, you were homeschooled, or you went through a classical education charter or private model, we want you. And here’s how we’re going to communicate to you that we want you. We’re going to offer the CLT, which aligns with your experience in K-12.”
I hope that folks who are grappling with the demographic cliff will welcome this as an option and a recruitment tool. That might help that particular university or college to keep their numbers up, because it’s going to be rough in higher education in the next few years.
Michael Torres: It is indeed, and there are several colleges we work with where they so value those cohort students that they see CLT as a great mechanism to do that. Pepperdine, the University of Dallas, Samford, and the University of Austin in Texas have made a CLT score and automatic admissions metric as a mechanism to encourage homeschool students and classically-educated students to look at their school as a good option for them, rather than the local school they may have looked at before.
That’s a key way they’re trying to hold back the future of that demographic cliff by finding students who are coming through CLT. I think a lot of public universities are starting to recognize that as well.
What would have been some of the biggest barriers to adoption that you’ve encountered?
Michael Torres: That’s a big question. I would say the biggest barrier is the College Board’s absolutely massive lobbying budget. We don’t have an army of lobbyists, but every time we land, the College Board and ACT’s lobbyists are sitting behind us, and there’ll be five or six of them. Lobbyists often have a lot of influence. They’re there for a reason. So that’s the biggest barrier and the, I’ll just say “untruths” that the College Board is willing to promulgate as they attempt to restrict CLT or maintain their monopoly or duopoly in a certain state.
The willingness of lawmakers on both sides of the aisle to listen to them, thinking that the College Board is some sort of objective source of truth, when they’re just a private company that makes a billion dollars a year off contracts with local governments and state governments, primarily. Changing that perspective is one of the most important things.
They come and say, “The concordance they created, it’s not valid. CLT is a test of classical curriculum. It’s not a standardized test.” They’ll say things like that. Being able to get on the ground and explain to a lawmaker that, yes, this is an equally, if not more rigorous, exam that is used by 340 colleges nationally. We do have a valid concordance. We have to overcome that lobbying barrier on the ground, and that’s one of the biggest hurdles.
Thankfully, there’s been a very big surge of state lawmakers, secretaries of education, assessment staff at departments of education, policy directors in governor’s offices who say, “Wait a second. Maybe we have been improperly creating a monopoly in our state and should allow for choice. Let’s have a real conversation.” That’s when we have a golden opportunity to expand testing choice in that state.
We’re never asking to kick out the SAT or ACT. We’re not asking for our own monopoly. Oftentimes, what we’re asking for is to allow for all three, plus any other nationally recognized standardized assessment, that might be used in the future for college admissions.
What we’re asking for is a marketplace filled with competition. It has not been competitive, and the results have been obvious over the last couple of decades.
I’m wondering if the companies have viewed you more as a threat because we have been in this era of ‘test optional’ for a while now. Maybe their control, their dominance over the system, in both high school and college, has abated. What’s your take on that?
Michael Torres: I’m halfway agreeing with you for a couple reasons. One, the most high-performing students still submit test scores. There was a temporary dip in the number of test takers for SAT and ACT during the pandemic. Then it slowly built back up as students recognized that, if I’m getting a decent score, I should still submit it. That’s the case for the vast majority of college-bound students who are going to even a decently selective college. They’re usually submitting their test score.
Even so, the College Board and ACT have both started diversifying their business models outside of college admissions testing. More than half of the College Board’s revenue, about $500 million a year, comes from the AP program. That comes mostly from school district contracts and state-level contracts. For example, the state of Texas has a $40 million contract with the College Board to subsidize AP courses. The state of North Carolina spends tens of millions of dollars subsidizing AP courses.
When you say subsidizing, that means paying for the students’ exams, or is there more to it than that?
Michael Torres: They pay for the cost of the student exams. Oftentimes, the state will pay for part, the school district will pay for part, and then the student will pay $10 or $20 to take the exam. It’s to maximize the number of students participating in that advanced course. We’re making an alternative to the AP called Classical Baccalaureate, which we can get into more.
But to stay on this question, they really expanded that. They saw that as one of their bigger revenue streams, and it has exploded in recent years, growing by hundreds of thousands of students a year entering into the AP program. ACT, on the other hand, has really expanded things like WorkKeys, things that have to do with technical assessment, things of that nature, focusing a little less on the ACT as much as those other products.
But then, as we have really come into the marketplace and state lawmakers, Boards of Regents have started to recognize CLT. I think there’s been a bit of panic because the energy that we’re seeing with their lobbying effort, especially this year, has ramped up significantly.
I think they were resting on their laurels a little bit, looking to expand into other things. But now that we’re coming and trying to bring some competition to this marketplace, they’re recognizing, “We have to compete. Our way to stay where we are is to make sure that no one else is legal, to keep the CLT illegal in as many states as possible.” And that’s their best course of action at this point.
Just the way you phrase that, “keep CLT illegal,” exposes how ludicrous this is. You are asking for a ‘, and CLT.’ You are asking to add something, and they are overreacting to a ridiculous degree. We’ve been talking a lot about state policy and the actions that can, and have been, taken at the state level. You mentioned CLT is now accepted by the service academies. That sounds like a federal development.
Michael Torres: Yes, last year, there was a push from the DoD/DoW to include CLT as an option. Secretary of War Pete Hegseth decided that he wanted the military academies to explore using CLT. We ended up having a series of meetings with each of the service academies, admissions offices, and the folks who make the ASVAB. Over the course of about four or five months, we finally were able to get approval administratively to be an option for students to use to earn admission to the service academies which require tests.
Now, students can use a CLT score, SAT score, or ACT score, which is wonderful. Subsequent to that, after even more review by the DoW, we were approved to qualify students for ROTC scholarships. That was a big deal as well, because students all over the country participate in ROTC, and a big portion of how they do that is scholarships funded by the DoW, and we can now qualify them for that as well.
To ensure that that is not undone by a future administration, Representative Mary Miller in the House and Senator Jim Banks in the Senate have been working on something called the Promoting Classical Learning Act, which would effectively add the portion that’s in administrative law into U.S. code so all three exams are treated equally for admissions to the service academies — basically ensuring that this choice isn’t taken away from students a year or two after it was given to them.
Education bills typically do not make their way through Congress these days. Little does, but there is a defense bill that pushes through. So would it be part of that?
Michael Torres: Yeah, I imagine it might be rolled into something like the NDAA or maybe some other larger package that ends up getting through Congress. Most things, as I understand, end up in a large package. We are working as much as we can with folks in D.C. and hoping that it gets rolled into the NDAA.
States are looking at federal waiver opportunities, they’re looking at ways to comply with ESSA, the federal education law, when it comes to assessments. How does CLT play a role in that?
Michael Torres: Yes, there are a couple of ways. One, ESSA requires that states put together an accountability metric, the way that schools get their A-F grade rating. We’re having an increasing number of conversations with departments of education about CLT being added as one of those testing options for the college and career readiness portion of those metrics.
Louisiana was the first state to do that. Secretary Cade Brumley added us to the new Grow, Achieve, Thrive accountability program for public schools there. That was our proof of concept for that. Indiana has since added us to their new accountability program. We’re talking with more states about doing the same.
Another way is the testing requirements that are in ESSA. Every state has to assess students in English and math in 11th grade. That is primarily done by state-made exams, but can also be done by a college admissions exam. ESSA gave flexibility to states to include a college admissions exam. Most states contract with the SAT or ACT, so we’ve been in talks with a couple of states about the CLT being added. They would submit the CLT to the feds for peer review, and the U.S. Department of Education would do a peer review and get back to them. I imagine it would take a little while.
The other step is waivers. What we’ve heard from the department and from others close to them is that they’re seeking states to submit waivers just like the ones that Iowa has sought with regard to federal funding and how that can be spent. Waivers with regard to testing requirements are something they’re also interested in looking at. Idaho and Oklahoma have both been the first states to put together drafts of those waiver requests. All it would do is allow 11th-grade students to choose the SAT, ACT, CLT, or ASVAB, or some other assessment that matches their college or career preferences. Not a very radical change, but it’s something that, unfortunately, states have to ask the federal government for permission to do, either by getting a peer review done or by getting a waiver. That’s something lawmakers are just starting to learn about.
We have to talk about how assessment choice aligns with school choice or education freedom. What’s the role that you all are playing?
Michael Torres: As you know, there have been a lot of legislative efforts in Tennessee and Texas, and other places, to expand or create new ESA programs. We at CLT are humongous fans of school choice. I worked on school choice in Pennsylvania in a previous part of my career. So, it’s exciting and very wonderful to see that students are getting the option to choose different locations to go to school through these school choice programs. But part of those programs usually includes an accountability metric of some sort.
One thing we hope that states do is avoid forcing the public school test onto private school students or homeschool students who participate in a school choice program. It’s been considered by several states. A lot of lawmakers don’t see it initially as a big deal. They think, “Okay, we’ll just have everyone take the same test, and then they all have the same metric.” A couple of states do that. Indiana is one of them, and Wisconsin is another. I think Iowa is the third. A few states, as they’ve been negotiating over their programs, thought about doing it. Texas thought about including STAAR, but thankfully, that didn’t happen.
So, why? Why not have everyone take the same test? The reason is that what is put on the test ends up getting taught in class. This has been proven time and again through research. There have been dozens of studies that show that what is put on state exams forces teachers and administrators to change what happens in class so that they can prove themselves on that exam to whoever’s looking at it, whether it be the state government, parents, or any other accountability source.
The reason we care about that so much is because if you create a school choice program and then force every student who’s participating in that program to take the public school test, you are effectively forcing that private school participating in that program to teach to that test.
Otherwise, the students aren’t going to do as well. That school might not teach to public school standards. They’re going to have to start learning what are those public school standards and [ask,] “How do we make sure our students perform well on that so that when policymakers see the results, they’re not shocked that the student isn’t as great as the public school student at taking the public school test?”
What we ask for is assessment choice. Let the students take a recognized standardized exam that matches the pedagogy of the school that their parents have chosen for them, provides validation of that education that they’re choosing, as well as a valuable and usable metric of success for that student to prove that the choices they made have resulted in a good education.
We’ve been successful in either asking our partner schools in the state or working directly with lawmakers to help craft those bills. I’d love to highlight Secretary Oliva again in Arkansas and the folks in Florida, as well. They’ve put together wonderful menus of assessments for schools to choose from, and it’s worked out perfectly as they’ve created two of the best school choice programs in the country.
Classical Baccalaureate program — let’s touch on that as we wrap up.
Michael Torres: This really gets to what happens on the test, happens in class, as well. One of the primary reasons why we ended up getting invited to Florida and why the CLT exists in the first place is the AP program and how it influences what happens in schools. Millions of students a year now participate in Advanced Placement and take AP courses. But there are two problems with them that have been evolving over the recent years.
One, grade inflation. There was a report published by the Fordham Institute recently, highlighting that in several of their most popular courses, it’s become almost twice as easy to earn a passing score. The passing rate on the U.S. Government exam went from 25% to almost 50% in a year, right during the pandemic. And that coincides with the massive number of new test takers and students participating in the program. They’re looking to democratize it; they want beyond advanced students, and want every student participating in that program. But they don’t want to get criticized for failing so many students because the tests are so hard, so they’re making it easier to pass.
Another thing is the content of the exams. We all remember the wokeness issue during COVID, and the AP Black American History course got a lot of headlines over that. But that hasn’t really abated, and it’s not restricted to that one course. I can give a couple examples.
In the AP World History course, for example, the only way that patriotism is presented to students is as a mechanism to control the colonized. How Europeans controlled colonized African states was through patriotism and getting them to fight for them on their behalf. Similarly, in that course, students are taught that a great example of free trade was the opium trade in China when Britain brought opium to China. There’s no other mention of free trade as an example.
There are examples of how students are graded on their essays. They have students advocating for expansions to the teaching of LGBTQ issues in elementary school, and that got them a wonderful grade on their exam.
I could go on and on in the examples of ideological bias on the AP exams, but when you combine that with the grade inflation, we came to believe that now is the time to show proof of concept that there is a need and a desire for an alternative to the AP program. That’s where Classical Baccalaureate will come in. We’re working with a lot of our K-12 and college partners to create what will be an alternative to IB and AP. You can use an a la carte version and take a CB course in U.S. history similar to AP, or you can take the whole course and get a degree similar to what you would get with the IB course. That’s being piloted now in a few of our schools, and it’ll launch officially in the fall.
I’m looking forward to following those developments. Michael, what’s the myth about the classical learning test that bothers you the most that you’d want to dispel today?
Michael Torres: I think one of the most important ones is that it’s a test only for classical students. About 70% of our test takers are from public schools now, as it’s grown. Obviously, classical schools are the first ones to call and the first ones to want to use this test because it really validates the type of education that they’re providing to their students. But it is a test for everybody. If you want your students to be reading Socrates, Frederick Douglass, or Isaac Newton in their test, or proving that they can do math by hand and not just on a computer, then the CLT is the test for you. We’re seeing a lot of states and public school districts wanting to hold their students to a high standard, wanting to present them with wonderful, rich reading passages, and encouraging them to be better readers. And the CLT is the way to do that.
How can people follow CLT developments?
Michael Torres: Go to cltexam.com, or you can find Jeremy Tate on Twitter. He’s our CEO and is very prominent on Twitter. Feel free to find me on Twitter as well, or shoot me an email. I’d love to chat with you.
Learn more about the Classic Learning Test:
- The Classic Learning Test Takes Aim at the SAT–ACT Duopoly, Education Next:
- The SAT’s Trust Fall: Legacy standardized-testing firms are cutting rigor to please students
- Advanced No More: The College Board has politicized and watered down its AP exams. It’s time for an alternative
- Education Freedom Requires Assessment Choice
Related
PODCAST | “Freedom to Learn:” “In classical schools, students learn how to use their minds well.”
Kathleen O’Toole on Classical Education, AI, & Rescuing a Lost Generation. What if the real education crisis isn’t falling test…