Vouchers are the school’s choice, not school choice.
Vouchers allow discrimination on special needs kids and any family who doesn’t fit the school’s “values.”

As expected, Gov. Bill Lee and his Republican supermajority in the legislature have filed their latest version of a statewide voucher proposal.

Once again, this new version is jam-packed with all kinds of seemingly nice things tacked on to try and distract people from the fact that this is all a scam designed to defund public education. Lee and his voucher scammers want you to pay attention to the long overdue teacher raises and the newly-dedicated funding source for school construction projects promised in the bill. 

But let’s face it − if they were really serious about the proposals, they would have already done them. They wouldn’t have to tie them to a bait-and-switch scheme to designed to undermine public education and make out-of-state billionaire voucher backers happy. 

Vouchers aren’t improving student school test scores

Here’s what’s underneath all the pretty packaging. Here’s what Governor Lee is not telling you about his voucher scam:

First of all, Lee wants you believe that he wants to expand vouchers statewide because of the success of the pilot program.  However, the pilot program is not a proven success. 

In fact, Lee’s own handpicked education commissioner had to admit before the Senate Education Committee this past January that the academic scores of the students in the voucher program, well, in her own words: “aren’t anything to write home about.” 

In fact, according to the Department of Education’s annual report on the pilot program, the “exceeded expectations” scores for the state’s participating Education Savings Accounts schools only grew by an average of 0.4% in math and 1.2% in English Language Arts − and far less than the margins of public schools. 

So since, the test scores aren’t dramatically improving, the governor wants to direct your attention to how the parents currently enrolled the program are satisfied with it. But again, let’s look at who those parents really are.

Vouchers do not cover the cost of the average private school

The average price of a private school in Nashville is estimated to cost around $12,000. In Memphis, it’s a little under $10,500. So, if you wanted to send to your child to a private school, you’re still going to have to be able pay thousands of additional dollars a year just for tuition. 

That doesn’t include transportation or any other needs. 

So, the people Lee claims he really wants to help − the working people who are struggling to put food on the table − are still priced out. 

For example, according to a 2023 Time magazine article, in Arizona more than 75% of new voucher applicants had never actually attended public school before and not to mention the uncontrolled $1.4 billion hole vouchers caused in Arizona’s budget.  

Vouchers leave out the most vulnerable students

Finally, as the governor gives out these “entitlement” payments to families that can already afford it, our public schools get further left behind. 

Private schools get to pick their students, meaning that many students are excluded, including the most vulnerable who need the most help. 

Vouchers end up excluding most disadvantaged students because they simply aren’t desirable for many private schools.  That includes students with disabilities who use Individualized Education Plans, which this bill expressively says private schools don’t have to continue. 

Vouchers are the school’s choice, not school choice. 

Vouchers allow discrimination on special needs kids and any family who doesn’t fit the school’s “values.”

I would urge people to not be fooled by all of the shiny bells and whistles attached to this new voucher scam bill.  Don’t be fooled by the words the governor is saying − take a good, hard look at what he’s not telling you. 

Vouchers aren’t good education policy or conservative; it’s just a scam to defund your local school to align to a misguided political ideology.

State Rep. Caleb Hemmer, D-Nashville, represents District 59 (part of Davidson County) in the Tennessee General Assembly.

2024 Tennessee Invite

The third day of the 2024 Tennessee Invite saw lots of action, with the unique setup of the meet, the A-finals were contested in a 1-on-1 format that brought many fans to their feet and proved to bring an extra layer of excitement to the meet.  UVA’s Gretchen Walsh built on that excitement to continue her record-breaking streak, shattering her own American, US Open, and NCAA Record in the 100 butterfly with a time of 47.35.

Even though the day might be over, you can relive all of the action with the race videos below. Courtesy of the University of Virginia. 

WOMEN’S 200 MEDLEY RELAY- TIMED FINALS

• NCAA Record: 1:31.73, Virginia- 2023
• 2025 NCAA ‘A’ Cut: 1:36.24
• 2025 NCAA ‘B’ Cut: 1:36.76

1. Virginia A- 1:32.58 A
2. Tennessee A- 1:34.35 A
3. Virginia B- 1:35.89
4. Tennessee B- 1:37.94
5. Kentucky A- 1:39.66
6. Kentucky B- 1::41.35

Race Video:

MEN’S 200 MEDLEY RELAY- TIMED FINALS

• NCAA Record: 1:20.15, Florida- 2024
• 2025 NCAA ‘A’ Cut: 1:23.62
• 2025 NCAA ‘B’ Cut: 1:23.90

1. Tennessee A- 1:21.71 A
2. Tennessee B- 1:25.31
3. Kentucky A- 1:26.75
4. Kentucky B- 1:27.48
5. Virginia A- DQ
6. Virginia B- DQ

Race Video:

WOMEN’S 100 FLY – FINALS

• NCAA Record: 47.42, Gretchen Walsh (UVA) – 2024  47.35, Gretchen Walsh (UVA)- 2024
• 2025 NCAA ‘A’ Cut: 50.52
• 2025 NCAA ‘B’ Cut: 53.34
• 2024 NCAA Cutline: 51.88

1. Gretchen Walsh (UVA)- 47.35 *New NCAA Record*
2. Claire Curzan (UVA)- 49.50 A
3. Josephine Fuller (TENN)- 51.51 B
4. Sara Stolter (TENN)- 52.15 B
5. Maggie Schalow (UVA)- 52.33 B
6. Emily Brown (TENN)- 52.85 B
7. Lydia Hanlon (UKY)- 53.85
8. Maddy Hartley (UKY)- 54.33

Race Videos:

A-Final

B-Final

C-Final

MEN’S 100 FLY – FINALS

• NCAA Record: 42.80, Caeleb Dressel (FLOR) – 2018
• 2025 NCAA ‘A’ Cut: 44.51
• 2025 NCAA ‘B’ Cut: 46.80
• 2024 NCAA Cutline: 45.37

1. Jordan Crooks (TENN)- 43.77 A
2. Spencer Nicholas- 44.41 A
3. Gui Caribe (TENN)- 45.18 B
4. Hayden Bellotti (UVA)- 45.85 B
5. Martin Espernberger (TENN)- 46.29 B
6. Ryan Merani (UKY)- 47.12
7. Simon Lins (UVA)- 47.43
8. Logan Ingerick (UKY)- 48.29

Race Videos:

A-Final

B-Final

C-Final

WOMEN’S 400 IM – FINALS

• NCAA Record: 3:54.60, Ella Eastin (STAN) – 2018
• 2025 NCAA ‘A’ Cut: 4:03.62
• 2025 NCAA “B’ Cut: 4:16.78
• 2024 NCAA Cutline: 4:10.74

1. Leah Hayes (UVA)- 4:01.34 A
2. Ella Jansen (TENN)- 4:06.29 B
3. Ella Bathurst (UVA)- 4:09.53 B
4. Emma Redman (4:11.33)- 4:11.33 B
5. Kate McCarville (TENN)- 4:11.39 B
6. Emily Brown (TENN)- 4:13.17 B
7. Marie Bell (UKY)- 4:17.57
8. Fernanda De Goeij (UKY)- 4:19.56

Race Videos: 

A-Final

B-Final

C-Final

MEN’S 400 IM – FINALS

• NCAA Record: 3:28.82, Leon Marchand (ASU) – 2023
• 2025 NCAA ‘A’ Cut: 3:38.37
• 2025 NCAA “B’ Cut: 3:49.53
• 2024 NCAA Cutline: 3:42.93

1. Levi Sandidge (UKY)- 3:42.52 B
2. Tony Laurito (TENN)- 3:44.06 B
3. Matt Styczen (UVA)- 3:44.95 B
4. Dillon Wright (UVA)- 3:45.45 B
5. Colin Bitz (UVA)- 3:46.13 B
6. Gus Rothrock (TENN)- 3:46.47 B
7. Aidan Crisci (TENN)- 3:47.84 B
8. Jackson Mussler (UKY)- 3:54.39

Race Videos: 

A-Final 

No Race Video Currently Available

B-Final

C-Final

WOMEN’S 200 FREE – FINALS

• NCAA Record: 1:39.10, Missy Franklin (CAL) – 2015
• 2025 NCAA ‘A’ Cut: 1:42.60
• 2025 NCAA “B’ Cut: 1:46.85
• 2024 NCAA Cutline: 1:44.80

1. Aimee Canny (UVA)- 1:42.67 B
2. Camille Spink (TENN)- 1:43.57 B
3. Anna Moesch (UVA)- 1:43.12 B
4. Cavan Gormsen (UVA)- 1:44.85 B
5. Julia Mrozinski (TENN)- 1:45.64 B
6. Sara Stolter (TENN)- 1:46.33 B
7. Lauren West (UKY)- 1:46.46 B
8. Katy Jost (UKY)- 1:48.10

Race Videos: 

A-Final 

B-Final

C-Final

MEN’S 200 FREE – FINALS

• NCAA Record: 1:28.81, Luke Hobson (TEX) – 2024
• 2025 NCAA ‘A’ Cut: 1:31.21
• 2025 NCAA “B’ Cut: 1:35.35
• 2024 NCAA Cutline: 1:32.93

1. Nikoli Blackman (TENN)- 1:32.12
2. Sebastien Sergile (UVA)- 1:32.38
3. David King (UVA)- 1:33.19
4. Joaquin Vargas (TENN)- 1:34.67
5. Jack Stelter (TENN)- 1:35.82
6. Connor Boyle (UVA)- 1:36.54
7. Justin Peresse (UKY)- 1:36.66
8. Caue Gluck (UKY)- 1:36.93

Race Videos: 

A-Final 

B-Final

C-Final

WOMEN’S 100 BREAST – FINALS

• NCAA Record: 55.73, Lilly King (IU) – 2019
• 2025 NCAA ‘A’ Cut: 58.01
• 2025 NCAA “B’ Cut: 1:01.22
• 2024 NCAA Cutline: 59.75

1. McKenzie Siroky (TENN)- 58:00
2. Aimee Canny (UVA)- 58.64
3. Emelie Fast (TENN)- 58.41
4. Emma Weber (UVA)- 58.67
5. Zoe Skirboll (UVA)- 59.23
6. Bridget Engel (UKY)- 59.83
7. Hannah Marinovich (TENN)- 1:00.54
8. Olivia Mendenhall (UKY)- 1:03.08

Race Videos:

A-Final

B-Final

C-Final

MEN’S 100 BREAST – FINALS

• NCAA Record: 49.53, Liam Bell (CAL) – 2024
• 2025 NCAA ‘A’ Cut: 51.02
• 2025 NCAA “B’ Cut: 53.43
• 2024 NCAA Cutline: 51.89

1. Noah Nichols (UVA)- 51.32 B
2. Adomas Gatulis (UKY)- 52.85 B
3. Kevin Houseman (TENN)- 53.10 B
4. Jed Garner (TENN)- 53.30 B
5. Jay Gerloff (UVA)- 53.40 B
6. Jonathan Rom (UKY)- 53.73
7. Grayson Nye (TENN)- 53.79
8. Matt Heilman (UVA)- 53.84

Race Videos:

A-Final

B-Final

WOMEN’S 100 BACK – FINALS

• NCAA Record: 48.10, Gretchen Walsh (UVA) – 2024
• 2025 NCAA ‘A’ Cut: 50.66
• 2025 NCAA “B’ Cut: 53.53
• 2024 NCAA Cutline: 52.28

1. Claire Curzan (UVA)- 49.37  A
2. Josephine Fuller (TENN)- 51.06 B
3. Charlotte Wilson (UVA)- 52.01 B
4. Reilly Tiltmann (UVA)- 52.51 B
5. Lexi Stephens (TENN)- 52.55 B
6. Sophie Brison (TENN)- 53.21 B
7. Grace Frericks (UKY)- 53.47 B
8. Torie Buerger (UKY)- 53.83

Race Videos:

A-Final

B-Final

C-Final

MEN’S 100 BACK – FINALS

• NCAA Record: 43.35, Luca Urlando (UGA) – 2022
• 2025 NCAA ‘A’ Cut: 44.48
• 2025 NCAA “B’ Cut: 47.16
• 2024 NCAA Cutline: 45.56

Results:

1. Harrison Lierz (TENN)- 45.25
2. Jack Aikins (UVA)- 45.84
3. Lamar Taylor (TENN)- 46.32
4. Nick Simons (TENN)- 46.67
5. Will Thompson (UVA)- 46.99
6. Devin Naoroz (UKY)- 47.06
7. Szymon Mieczkowski (UKY)-47.67
8. Max Berg (UKY)- 48.93

Race Videos:

A-Final

B-Final

C-Final

Just 0.88% of Tennessee public school third graders were held back this year under the state’s controversial reading law, despite 60% of the class falling short of a state reading benchmark this spring.

With around 74,000 third graders enrolled in the 2023-24 school year statewide, that works out to 655 students who were retained, according to data from the Tennessee Department of Education. The state reading law took effect last year and led to the retention of 1.2% of third graders in 2023, which came out to 898 students.

The law primarily determines children’s reading proficiency by their English language arts scores on the standardized Tennessee Comprehensive Assessment Program, or TCAP, test.

The 60% who fell short on this year’s TCAP represent roughly 50,000 students. However, that number does not include students who were exempt from being held back. Here are those exemptions, including how many students met them:

• 11,468: Students with disabilities or suspected disabilities that may impact their reading
• 3,511: Students who are English learners with less than two years of English language arts instruction
• 2,596: Students who were held back in a previous grade
• 2,345: Students who had other exemptions determined by their local education leaders

Exemptions were up to the districts to sort out. The remaining students had to successfully take one of the state’s many “pathways” to avoid being held back.

Here’s a look at how those students fared.

Try a TCAP practice test: See for yourself how Tennessee measures third grade reading

How Tennessee third graders moved on to fourth grade

Third graders who scored “below” or “approaching” expectations on the English language arts section of the TCAP had several options to avoid being held back.

Retakes were offered to third graders shortly after the spring TCAP. A total of 3,274 made a passing score and moved on to fourth grade. Another 99 students won an appeal because they faced a catastrophic circumstance around the time they took the TCAP.

Third graders who scored as approaching proficiency had three options to move on to fourth grade. Here’s how many qualified for each one:

• 1,124: Enrolled in summer school, met 90% attendance and showed adequate growth
• 7,426: Opted into state-provided tutoring for the entirety of fourth grade
• 3,262: Scored in the 50th percentile or higher of a state-approved universal reading screener and opted into state-provided tutoring for the entirety of fourth grade
• 2,895: Won a parent appeal and opted into an academic remediation plan in fourth grade, which includes tutoring

‘Not a reading proficiency test’: TN parents, experts question TCAP use in third grade law

Third graders who scored as below proficiency had one option to move on to fourth grade. Here’s how many qualified:

• 3,411: Enrolled in summer school, met a 90% attendance rate and opted into state-provided tutoring for the entirety of fourth grade

Students who qualified for tutoring in fourth grade must meet an individualized growth goal by the end of fourth grade. This growth goal does not apply to two groups who opted into tutoring: Those who won an appeal, or those who scored as “approaching” on the third grade TCAP and scored in the 50th percentile or higher on the third grade universal reading screener.

A total of 1,950 third graders who fell short on the spring TCAP either did not enroll again or had data that has not been reported to the state. The data reflects reports from districts as of Sept. 6, according to the state department of education.

How the Tennessee reading law affected fourth graders

Fourth graders who enrolled in yearlong tutoring to avoid being held back in third grade must pass the English language arts section of the TCAP or hit individualized growth goals set by the state. However, the reading law does not mandate that they be held back if they do not meet those goals.

Instead, it requires the student’s parents or legal guardians, principal and English language arts teacher to determine what’s best. They can either decide to retain the child or promote them to fifth grade with state-provided tutoring in place.

From April: Lawmakers OK bill to put decision on holding back 4th graders in hands of schools, parents

According to the state department of education, here’s how fourth graders enrolled in tutoring this year fared:

• 5,389: Promoted to fifth grade with tutoring in place
• 3,996: Met adequate growth goals
• 1,740: Scored proficient on their spring TCAP English language arts section
• 132: Retained in fourth grade

A total of 906 fourth graders either did not enroll again or had data that was not reported by their district, according to the state education department.

Where can I learn more?

More information on the third grade reading and retention law from the Tennessee Department of Education can be found at tn.gov/education/learning-acceleration.