EduCon 2026

The "abundance" agenda, popularized by Ezra Klein and Derek Thompson's book of the same name, advances the argument that progressives have lost both momentum and credibility by focusing more on inputs (money spent) than tangible accomplishments. In Pennsylvania, Governor Josh Shapiro has made "getting [stuff] done" a rallying cry, while publications like the Philadelphia Citizen excoriate the democratic establishment for failing to turn more spending into better results.

It's not hard to translate the Klein and Thompson’s critique to public education. From special education to Title I, an enormous amount of time, money and energy are directed toward regulatory compliance. More often than not, accountability follows policy adherence more than results. At its worst, this produces institutional cultures where following policy trumps solving actual problems or, as Klein and Thompson detail, building stuff.

Regulation is the means through which we structure work toward goals or outcomes. And yet far too often it seems to serve divergent, or even contradictory, ends. How can we design policies, systems and practices that keep the main thing the main thing, while making better use of our resources and empowering people and systems to solve problems?

This is not a debate about the intention behind IDEA, Title I or a host of other policies. It’s not even really a debate about the abundance agenda. It really comes down to a simple question: can we do better, and what might it look like if we did?