By Keith J. Nelson, Ph.D.
A 96.5% graduation rate sounds impressive. But when barely one in four 11th graders meets mathematics standards, Riverside parents need to ask a much more important question: What is that diploma actually worth?
Riverside Unified School District (RUSD) has much to celebrate—or so its graduation statistics would suggest.
The district reports an impressive 96.5% graduation rate. Parents hear that number and reasonably assume their children are receiving the education necessary to succeed in college, build careers, and compete in an increasingly demanding economy.
But the district’s academic performance tells a very different story.
According to RUSD’s own 2025–26 student performance dashboard:
- Only 50.3% of 11th-grade students met or exceeded English language arts standards.
- An alarming 27.1% of 11th-grade students met or exceeded mathematics standards.
Districtwide assessments across grades 3–8 and 11 paint a similarly troubling picture. Approximately 47% of students met English standards, while only 34% met mathematics standards.
Let that sink in.
We have a school district reporting graduation rates approaching 100%, while a substantial majority of its 11th-grade students cannot demonstrate grade-level mathematics proficiency on California’s standardized assessments.
The graduation and assessment measures do not track precisely the same students, and proficiency on one examination is not the sole measure of readiness. Nevertheless, the enormous disconnect deserves far more attention than another congratulatory announcement about graduation rates.
Are we celebrating educational achievement—or merely the distribution of diplomas?
The Hidden Cost of Graduating Students Who Are Not Prepared
For students and their families, this is far more than an embarrassing statistic.
It is a financial and educational crisis.
Consider the student who completes 12 years of public education, receives a high school diploma, and enrolls in college believing that diploma represents an adequate academic foundation.
Then reality arrives.
College-level mathematics requires skills the student has never fully mastered.
English composition demands reading comprehension, analysis, and writing proficiency beyond what the student can comfortably demonstrate.
Instead of advancing confidently toward an engineering, business, computer science, healthcare, or other marketable degree, the student must devote additional time and effort to mastering academic foundations that should have been established before graduation.
Historically, colleges placed enormous numbers of underprepared students into remedial mathematics and English classes, often without credit toward their degrees.
California has since changed that system. State universities and community colleges now generally emphasize direct enrollment in college-level courses, sometimes with additional academic support.
Those reforms have reduced many of the old remedial-course barriers. But they have not eliminated the underlying problem of students arriving academically underprepared.
And changing the placement system does not magically create the knowledge students were supposed to acquire in high school.
Academic deficiencies do not disappear simply because the education system changes how it classifies them.
A student who struggles with foundational mathematics may face difficulty in accounting, statistics, engineering, economics, computer science, or other degree requirements.
A student lacking strong reading and writing skills may struggle across virtually every academic discipline.
Additional academic support, repeated courses, reduced course loads, or changes in academic direction can extend the time required to graduate.
For students already confronting substantial college costs, that can mean more tuition, additional living expenses, delayed entry into the workforce, and potentially greater student loan debt.
The damage may also be less visible but equally significant: a student may abandon a promising degree or career because the necessary foundational preparation was never provided.
Imagine discovering that your dream of becoming an engineer is slipping away—not because you lack intelligence, motivation, or ambition, but because your public education failed to give you the mathematical foundation needed to succeed.
The student bears the consequences of an education system’s failure long after the district has celebrated another graduating class.
Parents Deserve More Than Graduation Statistics
RUSD should be proud of students who graduate.
But graduation should represent meaningful academic achievement, not simply the successful completion of administrative requirements.
The district’s responsibility is not fulfilled when a diploma is handed across a stage.
It is fulfilled when students leave prepared to pursue higher education, meaningful employment, technical training, entrepreneurship, or another productive path.
Not every student needs a four-year university degree. Our community desperately needs skilled tradespeople, technicians, healthcare professionals, entrepreneurs, and workers trained for modern industries.
But every student deserves strong foundational skills in reading, writing, mathematics, reasoning, and problem-solving.
California’s own College/Career Indicator attempts to measure preparation beyond the graduation rate, using multiple pathways that recognize academic and career accomplishments.
That is an important distinction. A student can satisfy graduation requirements without necessarily demonstrating proficiency on standardized academic assessments, just as a student can demonstrate career readiness through pathways that do not require traditional college preparation.
RUSD’s trustees should be examining all these outcomes, not selectively promoting whichever number generates the most favorable publicity.
Parents deserve transparent answers:
- How many RUSD graduates demonstrate college-level readiness in mathematics and English?
- How many enroll in college but struggle to complete introductory courses?
- How many require additional academic support after high school?
- How many complete a college degree, certificate, apprenticeship, or recognized career pathway?
- What measurable improvements has district leadership achieved in actual academic proficiency?
These are not unreasonable demands.
They are the fundamental performance measures of an education system entrusted with our children’s futures and supported by taxpayers.
School Board Trustees Must Represent Students—Not Special Interests
This brings us to the responsibility of the RUSD Board of Education.
School board trustees are not elected to be cheerleaders for district administrators, protect institutional relationships, or advance personal political careers.
They are elected to represent the public and ensure that students receive the education taxpayers are funding.
That responsibility requires independence, transparency, financial oversight, and the willingness to challenge established practices when results fall short.
It also requires the courage to question powerful special interests—including employee unions.
Teachers perform an essential public service. Dedicated educators deserve respect, the resources necessary to teach effectively, and fair employment conditions.
But the interests of a labor organization and the educational interests of students are not automatically identical.
Unions exist to represent their members in employment matters.
School board trustees exist to represent the public and oversee the education of children.
Those are fundamentally different responsibilities.
When employee organizations provide substantial financial or political support to school board candidates, voters should scrutinize whether those relationships create conflicts between political loyalty and independent oversight.
Campaign support does not, by itself, prove improper influence. But the public has every right to demand transparency and to judge trustees by their willingness to hold every part of the education system accountable.
The question is simple: When difficult decisions must be made, whose interests come first—the students or the organizations that helped elect the trustee?
One Question Every Trustee Should Ask the Teachers’ Union
Imagine a school board meeting where the teachers’ union representative approaches the microphone.
Instead of another predictable exchange of political rhetoric, imagine an independent trustee asking:
“Since our last board meeting, what measurable actions have your organization and its members taken to improve student achievement in Riverside Unified? What specific progress have we made in mathematics, reading, and college readiness?”
That is a question worth asking.
Not because teachers alone are responsible for every educational outcome. Administrators, district leadership, families, policymakers, and the board itself all share responsibility.
But because every organization participating in public education should be prepared to explain how its work contributes to better results for students.
The same accountability should apply to the superintendent, district administrators, curriculum leaders, and the trustees themselves.
Every board meeting should bring us closer to answering one fundamental question:
Are our students learning more, becoming better prepared, and developing the skills necessary to succeed?
If student proficiency remains inadequate, then continuing the same practices, celebrating the same statistics, and maintaining the same political alliances should not be acceptable.
Students Need Advocates, Not Political Career Development
Riverside families should demand trustees whose primary ambition is improving public education.
School board service should never become merely another steppingstone toward higher political office or an opportunity to cultivate relationships with organizations capable of financing future campaigns.
That concern is particularly important when trustees must negotiate budgets, approve labor agreements, evaluate administrators, and establish educational priorities.
An independent board must be willing to demand measurable progress even when doing so creates political discomfort.
It must challenge ineffective programs, scrutinize spending, examine instructional outcomes, and insist that academic proficiency—not public relations—remain central to district priorities.
Students deserve trustees willing to ask difficult questions.
Parents deserve honest answers.
Taxpayers deserve measurable results.
And teachers who are genuinely improving educational outcomes deserve recognition and support.
The Real Graduation Test Comes After High School
The ultimate measure of educational success is not how many students walk across a graduation stage.
It is what happens afterward.
Can they succeed in college-level coursework?
Can they enter a technical training program with the foundational skills required?
Can they pursue careers in fields that offer financial independence and upward mobility?
Can they read critically, reason mathematically, solve complex problems, and compete in a rapidly changing economy?
When nearly three out of four tested 11th graders fail to meet mathematics standards, we should not be satisfied with congratulatory graduation statistics.
We should be demanding answers, corrective action, and measurable academic improvement.
RUSD does not need another generation of trustees who confuse institutional stability with educational success. It needs independent leadership willing to put students ahead of politics, public relations, and special interests.
Parents, your children’s futures are at stake.
A high school diploma should be a foundation for opportunity—not a costly surprise when the real academic demands begin.
It is time to stop measuring success by the number of diplomas awarded and start measuring success by the futures those diplomas make possible.
