Community colleges enroll nearly half of the country’s students and have never been in greater demand. They are under pressure to move students more quickly through remedial or basic-skills courses that can trap them for years and cause so much frustration that they drop out. And community colleges rely on a range of funding sources and charge tuition that is considerably less than that at other higher-education institutions.

Graduation rates at U.S. high schools have hovered around 70 percent for decades. But many urban and rural areas routinely graduate only 40 or 50 percent of their students. The dropout crisis in many cities is acute, with 2,000 high schools producing half of the nation’s dropouts. Cutting the dropout rate and turning around “dropout factories” are among the Obama administration’s priorities. But what strategies work? In collaboration with the Washington Monthly, we looked at how New York City, Philadelphia and Portland, Ore., have fared in their attempts to cut dropout rates.

For-profit institutions have come under fire for saddling students with too much debt and not enough job options, even as enrollment has nearly tripled to 1.8 million since 2000. New federal regulations are aimed squarely at the booming businesses, threatening to cut off student aid if too many graduates default on their loans.

School leadership is central to improving student outcomes, as recent research has shown. But it’s not about the school leader as drill sergeant, or the charismatic leader whose skill-set is impossible to replicate. Instead, it’s about a leader capable of creating conditions in which students and teachers can flourish. It’s about vision, instructional leadership and a strong school culture. Schools that make significant progress are often led by a principal whose role has been radically re-imagined. And while school leadership is essential, there also must be consistent, strong leadership at the district level.

American students’ math achievement nationally has been improving slowly since 2003. But U.S. 15-year-olds fall behind 22 countries on one international test and 12 on another. Math is a frustrating subject for many students and their parents and educators and policymakers agree the U.S. needs to do a better job to remain competitive in an increasingly technical global economy. Poor math skills exacerbate inequities, shut people out of jobs and make it hard for voters to understand complex issues such as the cost of health care and the size of the national debt.

Our littlest learners are receiving some attention in high places, thanks to recent findings in neuroscience, child development and economics, as well as the work of advocates who champion the benefits of early learning and high-quality preschool. Here we look at why early childhood education is on the agenda of politicians, foundations and policymakers – and the many obstacles that remain to providing a high-quality start for all children in the U.S.

Remember the three Rs – reading, writing and ’rithmetic? Get ready to add a fourth: rigor. It’s the buzzword in education. From presidents to principals, billionaires to school board members, governors to teachers, everybody seems to be promising rigor, demanding rigor, or deploring the lack of rigor in American schools. But what does the word “rigor” actually mean? What are the hallmarks a rigorous curriculum? And do students in other countries receive a more rigorous education than U.S. students?

While American students do better in science than they do in math on international comparisons, over time, science scores have not improved, while math scores have risen, and other countries have caught up. In a 2007 test of eighth graders, the U.S. students placed just tenth, behind countries like Japan, England and Russia. That worries experts because of how it can impact everything from the U.S. supply of engineers and researchers to the ability of everyday people to make decisions on things like vaccinations or conserving energy.

Good teachers matter and—as in every other profession—some are better than others. Researchers have even found that the very best teachers can help students overcome many of the effects of poverty and catch up to or surpass their more privileged peers. That’s why there is intense interest now in finding better ways to judge the relative effectiveness of teachers. But how should that be done?