Now, what DO these results tell us? 1. They tell us that 1,198 students in 171 ordinary Salvadoran public schools participating in this program were independently assessed using an internationally comparable instrument. And their results in reading, mathematics and science were comparable with the average results of students in Germany and Sweden. That is a fact, supported by an internationally recognized OECD assessment and reported by the World Bank. 2. They tell us that achieving those levels of performance in Salvadoran public schools is POSSIBLE. This is perhaps the most important finding. For decades, we have been told that transforming education takes generations. That poverty determines educational outcomes. That our public schools simply cannot compete with schools in developed countries. Yet here we have Salvadoran children, attending Salvadoran public schools, taught by Salvadoran teachers and supported by AI tutors, inside our existing public education system, obtaining results comparable with students in some of the world’s most developed countries. Does that prove that every Salvadoran student is already performing at that level? Of course not. But it proves something enormously important: There is nothing inherent about being Salvadoran, attending a public school, coming from a lower-income family, or living in a developing country that prevents a child from reaching those levels. 3. It tells us that the conditions associated with these results appear to be replicable. Imagine that the explanation were that we selected 171 elite private schools, filled them with the country’s wealthiest children, and then announced their scores. That would tell us almost nothing about whether the model could work nationally. But that’s not what happened. These are ordinary public schools. The advantages associated with participation in the pilot: better tools, connectivity, infrastructure, teacher support, technology and a different educational model, are precisely the things the Government can reproduce. That doesn’t guarantee the same results when we scale. But it gives us a very good reason to try. 4. It tells us that expanding the program is worth doing. A pilot is not supposed to prove that something already works everywhere. If it did, it wouldn’t be a pilot. A pilot asks a much simpler question: “Does this approach show enough promise under real-world conditions that we should expand it and test whether the results can be reproduced at a much larger scale?” The answer from these results is clearly yes. The World Bank itself described the results as promising and encouraging evidence ahead of the expansion of the reform. 5. The real test begins NOW. Going from 171 schools to more than 1,000 schools is much harder. Going from 1,000 schools to every public school in El Salvador will be harder still. Scaling introduces new problems. Some schools have weaker infrastructure. Some have worse connectivity. Some teachers will adapt faster than others. Some communities face greater social and economic challenges. And implementation quality can decline as a program becomes larger. All of that is true. And that is exactly why we are scaling progressively. The next question is not whether 171 schools can do it. We now know they can. The question is whether 1,000 can. Then whether several thousand can. And ultimately whether an entire national public education system can. That is what we intend to find out. 6. And yes, the future national PISA results that will be published in 2029 will matter enormously. Those will tell us something different. PISA for Schools tells us what is happening in the schools participating in this reform. National PISA will tell us what is happening across the country. Those are different questions, and serious people should not confuse them. 2/2🧵👇🏼