The leader of the Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education was resolutely optimistic last week about educational outcome data and state funding, even if much work remains.

The data points towards doubt.

Within the state’s education reporting, warning signs proliferate:

Vulnerable populations are falling behind. Averting such outcomes is the stated goal of our education laws, strategic policy and executive vision.

Speaking with the Banner, Acting Commissioner of Elementary and Secondary Education Russell Johnston described himself as “grateful,” “appreciative,” “confident” and “hopeful” about the direction of the state’s K-12 education system.

But, when pressed about our achievement gaps, he acknowledged, “We’re not declaring victory at this point.”

Massachusetts lost ground on education equity last year and fell short in its own accountability system. Wide achievement gaps worsened for English language learners and students with disabilities, as they have for a decade.

Racially, only Black and Asian students exceeded their 2019 scores, albeit from very different starting points. Statewide, only one subgroup of students hit a test-based achievement target for 2023: Native Hawaiians and Pacific Islanders in grades three through eight on math assessments.

During the conversation, Johnston reconciled optimism with determination. He objected to any characterization that achievement gaps weren’t an urgent problem.

“I’m excited about a lot of the positive things that are happening in our schools,” he said. “And yet there is still more that needs to be done.”

Johnston cited one datapoint that gives reason for hope. Chronic absenteeism — the number of students missing 15 or more days in a year — decreased from 25% of students in 2023 to 20% in 2024.

Attendance, Johnston said, is a “key indicator” of education opportunity.

“We’re turning the needle in the right direction as it relates to student attendance,” he said.

But attendance counts for little in Massachusetts’s District and School Accountability system. Federal requirements dictate that the system must give “much greater weight” to test scores, student’s growth, English proficiency and graduation rates than additional indicators like chronic absenteeism or advanced coursework, a 2018 summary reads.

Chronic absenteeism counts for 10% or less.

Before 2018, Massachusetts measured test scores and student growth exclusively. Today, the conceptually objective measures of learning can count for 60% to 90% of school and district accountability. In January, the Board of Elementary and Secondary Education weighed watering down test scores further. They ultimately did not.

Johnston offered praise for state leaders when asked if we had enough funding to close gaps.

“I appreciate the funding that’s available,” he said, directing thanks to Gov. Maura Healey “for fulfilling the promise of the Student Opportunity Act.”

That promise is about reducing achievement gaps. So said Commissioner Jeff Riley in February 2020, presenting the new planning process.

“This bill recognizes that we have some serious opportunity and achievement gaps in student performance,” Riley said. “It’s a progressive bill and in theory it gives more money to districts that have needy kids.”

At that time, DESE was already downplaying expectations of unencumbered new funding.

The presentation read, “DESE acknowledges that all districts are facing rising costs associated with their core operating budgets.” Invoking the “spirit of the SOA,” it asked them to prioritize new programs.

The SOA requires districts to direct new money toward programs that research shows can improve student learning, ideally helping subgroups furthest behind. The first set of three-year plans were due April 1, 2020, though some plans trickled in through January 2021.

Johnston, then the senior associate commissioner, gave a presentation about accountability.

“We are going to monitor success with metrics and targets,” said Johnston. “The statute calls for both.”

Distinguishing between metrics — the “measuring tools” like MCAS scores, teacher diversity or higher education persistence — and targets — the “numerical value associated with the metric” — Johnston encouraged districts to rely on DESE for targets.

He said, “In the plans that you submit to us in April, and this is what’s important, we want to see from you just the name of the metric. You will not provide us with targets.” Johnson reasoned that School Year 2020 was the baseline, justifying a delay in calculating targets until data arrived.

But neither targets nor accountability for reaching them appear in 2023 SOA Progress Updates for the largest beneficiaries of Chapter 70 money.

When asked, Johnston pledged to verify whether such targets were ever provided. His recall was uncertain.

“Our agency has a strong record of creating targets,” he said. “When we say we’ve needed to create targets, we’ve created targets.”

For the next round of three-year SOA plans, published in August, DESE committed to providing districts with targets — only now with a new measurement: the lowest performing student group. Devised as a cross-category catchall of students with needs, the measurement omits both firstand second-year English language learners from the group. Currently, test scores only omit first-year ELLs.

But English language learners were a priority for almost every major SOA-beneficiary. Thirty-seven school districts got about 80% of the new SOA funding, submitting a longer plan and detailed budget. Twenty-seven districts with longer-form plans identified English language learners as a priority subgroup. Another six prioritized a “high needs” subgroup that includes ELLs. The other four prioritized ELLs or high needs students in their 2020 plans, but their 2023 update does not appear, or is incomplete, in the state’s dashboard.

The state’s 2024 accountability target data reveals every key high school accountability target was missed in 2023. Black students were behind in ELA and math. Students with disabilities were closer to their target in math, but not ELA, than all students. Asian, multiracial and white students were at or closer to both targets than average.

Statewide downward trend defied by some

For Black achievement, Barnstable, Canton, Lynn, Lowell, Pittsfield and Weymouth beat both targets, as did Greater New Bedford. Black students at the Regional Vocational Technical school improved in math and ELA since 2019, as they did at Greater Fall River and both namesake public school districts. Black high school student scores advanced in Avon, Billerica, Blue Hills Regional Technical, Brookline, Cambridge, Pittsfield and Waltham.

High School English language learners beat both MCAS targets in only two districts: Braintree and Greater Fall River. ELL student MCAS scores in 2023 surpassed 2019 substantially in Attleboro and Milford, as well as for vocational schools like Northeast Metropolitan, South Middlesex and Southeastern.

Students with disabilities performed best at Minuteman Tech and in Lexington, Lincoln-Sudbury, Wayland and Winchester.

These districts had already elevated targets, a few of which were hit.

In some wealthier districts, ELL student scores declined by double-digits in both key tests since 2019: Acton-Boxborough, Ashland, Beverly, Belmont, Medford, Newton and Woburn. But, together they educated fewer ELLs than frugal Framingham, where test scores also dropped.

Broadly, the widest MCAS achievement gaps worsened last year. ELL students, 15 points behind in English Language Arts before high school, scored 29 points behind their high school peers. Students with disabilities are nearly 20 points behind from start to finish. Low-income students are 11-12 points behind. In Math, gaps are similar, if slightly smaller.

For racial achievement gaps, which risk reinforcing stereotypes, do the math yourself.

Numbers hardly tell the whole story. Our latest targets step up from the 2022 MCAS baseline, lowering the bar where performance lagged.

Expectations vary across districts, too. For instance, the ELA target for Hispanic achievement at Essex North Shore was a 515.6 average on the MCAS, while Lawrence only needed 484.2. Neither was hit.

MCAS Scores range from 440 to 560.

For his part, Johnston remains optimistic that 2024 data will tell a different story, though he didn’t elaborate.

“We are going to have more information about the 2024 data at our board meeting in September,” he said.