Addressing the Root Cause of Oregon's Failing Schools: Research Fraud
How to move Oregon Public Education from "Debased-Research" to "Research-Based"
The Oregon State Capitol was a busy place this past Tuesday as legislators from around the state came together for Legislative Days. Approximately every two to three months, lawmakers make the trek to Salem for committee meetings, conversations with constituents and lobbyists, and other legislative work. There was a line to get through security in the morning, and the halls were already full of people waiting to meet with legislators or attend a committee meeting.
My recent trip to Salem was brief and focused on one critical issue: tackling the root cause of our struggling public education system—research fraud. Before jumping into the fraud, let’s review what those in charges are telling us the problems are.
Narrative versus Reality
The current narrative from school district leaders, teachers unions, and our elected officials is that we’re dealing with a funding problem. They regularly use phrases like “fully funding education”, yet we’ve been steadily and significantly throwing more money into our school system for years.
Adjusted for inflation, Oregon has increased the spending per student by over 46% from 1999 to 2021.
After fluctuating in the first 14 years, you see a sharp, steady rise since 2013. Given the influx of money from the pandemic and Oregon’s Corporate Activity Tax, we likely will see the trend continue when the figures for 2022 and beyond are released. If you’re wondering how Oregon funding compares to other states, you can see for yourself in my U.S. Public Education Dashboard. For reference, Oregon per student spending is above California and the U.S. Average, but is below Washington.
So what are the results of this rising funding? Declining achievement for our students. Below is a snapshot from my Oregon Student Assessment Results dashboard, which uses data from the Oregon Department of Education on annual assessments.
As you can plainly see in the dashboard, student achievement was on a slight downward trend until the COVID-19 pandemic hit, which resulted in a significant drop across the board. As the Oregonian reported earlier this year, Oregon was the only state that hadn’t shown any improvement in reading or math skills since the pandemic.
What is at the root of our unique struggles in Oregon? Research fraud of course!
I first wrote about Oregon’s research fraud in June 2023, after I had done some initial fact-checking of the Oregon Department of Education’s (ODE) research report on high-school graduation requirements. Shortly thereafter, I teamed up with Dr. Bruce Gilley, Professor of Political Science at Portland State University, to do a comprehensive review of their research (see our exec summary and our full report). I then published two additional articles covering fraudulent research in ODE’s 2016 Chronic Absenteeism Statewide Plan and the 2021 Ethnic Studies Advisory Group Report.
Elected Officials’ Surprising Disinterest in Harm to Students
You would think our elected officials would be concerned by this, especially since those three reports had been mandated in laws passed by the Oregon legislature. For example, I brought this up during an October 7 2023 public meeting held by Representative Courtney Neron, Chair of the House Education Committee. I later met with Rep Neron and her Chief of Staff, Marcella Martinson, to discuss this further. However, Rep Neron has taken no action to address this critical issue. This is especially troubling given her background as an Oregon teacher for many years.
It shouldn’t take new legislation to ensure our state agencies produce and share factual research, but this glaring 'loophole' demands a solution. We also need to establish clear jurisdiction and a reliable process for reporting cases of fraud. Over the past 12 to 15 months, I’ve been repeatedly redirected, with every agency and office claiming it’s someone else’s responsibility to address these issues. This broken system needs repair, and it’s become evident that new legislation is the way forward.
How You Can Help Save Oregon Schools
The rest of this article is a ‘legislative fix’ I’ve developed, and I encourage you to not just read it, but send it to your representatives and urge them to take action. If you don’t know who your current representatives are, you can easily look them up on their Find Your Legislator web page.
Ensuring our public agencies produce factual research is not a partisan issue—it’s something everyone should agree on. Whether you're a Democrat, Republican, or independent, we can all agree that integrity in public research is essential. This is about holding our institutions accountable and restoring trust, not about advancing any party's agenda. Oregon schools are worth saving, and it’s time for everyone, regardless of political stripes, to step up and make that happen. As always, I welcome your comments and feedback.
Note: The legislative concept and draft below is also available as a downloadable PDF here.
Oregon Legislative Concept & Draft: “Public Research Integrity Act”
Problem Statement
This proposed legislation addresses the growing concern over fraudulent research produced or disseminated by public officials in Oregon. Such research, which includes falsified data, manipulated conclusions, and omitted facts, undermines public trust, misguides policymaking, and diverts resources from critical state priorities.
By creating strict penalties and incentives for whistleblowers to report fraudulent practices, the law seeks to uphold the integrity of research used to inform public policy and governance. The legislation ensures accountability, transparency, and adherence to evidence-based standards, safeguarding the public from the harmful consequences of deceptive practices in government research and communications.
Proposed Solution
The proposed legislation, the "Public Research Integrity Act," establishes a comprehensive framework to combat fraudulent research by public officials in Oregon.
Criminalizes the creation, dissemination, and approval of deceptive research or documentation, imposing penalties for violations, including classification as a Class A felony and permanent disqualification from public office.
Introduces mechanisms for whistleblower protections and incentives, offering compensation to eligible individuals or organizations who report fraudulent activities.
Ensures robust investigation processes led by the Oregon Department of Justice, with transparency in findings.
Mandates the use of standardized definitions for research-related terms across agencies to enhance consistency and accountability.
This multi-faceted approach promotes transparency, deters misconduct, and reinforces public trust in government practices and policies.
Cost / Benefits
The proposed "Public Research Integrity Act" is expected to have minimal implementation costs, primarily associated with establishing a mechanism within the Oregon Department of Justice to receive and investigate complaints. These costs can be offset by fines collected from individuals or agencies found guilty of violating the Act, with a portion allocated to compensating whistleblowers to offset their costs for identifying the fraud and to reward them for providing a valuable service to all Oregonians.
The benefits, while challenging to quantify in monetary terms, are significant. By deterring fraudulent research, this legislation aims to reduce wasteful spending, prevent misguided policies, and ensure public funds are allocated based on accurate and reliable information. This will lead to more effective governance and better outcomes for Oregon’s citizens, particularly in areas like education, where fraudulent research has resulted in many harms against students and staff alike. The Act ultimately fosters public trust in government processes and reinforces the accountability of public officials to the people they serve.
Examples of Research Fraud
These are just two examples of research fraud in Oregon. These articles identify the instances of fraud, primarily by the Oregon Department of Education, and how they have led to misguided programs, practices, and content that are causing issues in our public schools today.
In September 2022, the Oregon Department of Education (ODE) delivered a research report on high-school graduation requirements to the legislature in response to Senate Bill 744 (2021)
ODE’s report misrepresented evidence, made unsubstantiated claims, and contained plagiarism
When the legislature didn’t take immediate action on their report, ODE bypassed them and went to the State Board of Education in late 2023 to implement some of their misguided recommendations
This report continues to influence legislation and policy decisions and has not yet been retracted
This December 2016 “Chronic Absenteeism Statewide Plan” and its related research report were created in response to House Bill 4002 (2016)
Like the previous example, there were many falsehoods, biased statements, and fraudulent representations of research
Chronic absenteeism has continued to get worse in schools around the state, which is no surprise given the plan was not research-based but instead manipulated by its authors to implement radical, unproven programs and practices
Draft Bill for “Public Research Integrity Act”
An Act Relating to Fraudulent Research by Public Officials; Creating a New Crime; and Prescribing Penalties
SECTION 1. Short Title
This Act shall be known and cited as the "Public Research Integrity Act."
SECTION 2. Findings and Purpose
The Legislative Assembly finds that:
The integrity of research, reports, and guidance issued by public agencies and officials is essential to maintaining public trust and ensuring effective governance.
Fraudulent research undermines legislative priorities, deceives stakeholders, and erodes public confidence.
To protect the public and uphold transparent government, it is necessary to establish strict penalties for public officials who knowingly engage in fraudulent research practices.
The purpose of this Act is to create criminal penalties for any Oregon public official who knowingly creates, participates in the creation of, or disseminates fraudulent research in official reports, guidance, or documents intended to inform public policy, agency action, or legislative mandates.
SECTION 3. Definitions
As used in this Act:
"Public official" means any person elected or appointed to any office, position, or employment within the state government, including but not limited to state agencies, departments, commissions, boards, and authorities, as well as employees of local government entities.
"Fraudulent research" means any research report, analysis, study, guidance document, agency plan, or other official documentation or communication that:
a. Is intended to mislead or deceive others by containing material misrepresentations, falsified data, or intentionally manipulated conclusions.
b. Omits relevant facts or data with the intent to mislead.
c. Is created or disseminated with the knowledge that it does not accurately represent the evidence or information required to address legislative priorities or agency responsibilities.
SECTION 4. Prohibited Conduct
It shall be unlawful for any public official to:
a. Knowingly create, authorize, or contribute to the creation of fraudulent research as defined in Section 3(2) in response to:
i. Reports or analyses requested by legislation or by a legislative committee.
ii. Agency plans or documents aimed at addressing priorities or requirements set by the legislature.
iii. Guidance documents intended for agency staff, local agencies, or the public.
b. Participate in, or knowingly approve, the dissemination of such fraudulent research or documentation.
SECTION 5. Criminal Penalties
Any public official who violates Section 4 of this Act shall be guilty of a Class A felony.
Upon conviction, the official shall be subject to penalties provided for a Class A felony under Oregon law, including but not limited to imprisonment, fines, and a permanent ban from holding any public office within the State of Oregon.
SECTION 6. Additional Remedies and Enforcement
Any agency or individual directly affected by fraudulent research may seek an injunction or other equitable relief from a court of competent jurisdiction to prevent the dissemination or reliance on such research.
Nothing in this Act shall preclude additional administrative penalties or civil remedies as permitted under Oregon law.
SECTION 7. Severability
If any section, subsection, sentence, or clause of this Act is held to be invalid or unconstitutional, such decision shall not affect the remaining portions of this Act, which shall remain in full force and effect.
SECTION 8. Effective Date
This Act takes effect on [date], and applies to all actions of public officials occurring on or after that date.
SECTION 9. Reporting and Investigation
Reporting Allegations:
Complaints or tips regarding violations of this Act shall be submitted directly to the Oregon Department of Justice.
Investigation Authority:
The Department of Justice shall conduct preliminary assessments of complaints to determine if a violation may have occurred.
If the complaint is substantiated, the Department of Justice shall initiate a formal investigation and may involve other relevant agencies as needed.
Confidentiality and Whistleblower Protection:
The identity of individuals reporting suspected violations shall be kept confidential, and any person providing information or testimony shall be protected from retaliation.
Public Disclosure of Findings:
Upon completion of an investigation, findings shall be reported to the public unless confidentiality is required by law.
SECTION 10. Standard Definitions for Consistent Use by State Agencies
To ensure clarity and consistency in government research practices, the following terms are defined and shall be applied uniformly across all public records, research reports, agency plans, guidance documents, and official communications by state agencies and public officials:
Research-Based:
Definition: Refers to practices, programs, interventions, or educational strategies that are directly founded on or derived from scientific research or evidence, establishing a direct link between research findings and the approach.
Example: A "research-based" teaching method is developed based on educational psychology studies, demonstrating its effectiveness in improving student learning outcomes.
Order of Process: Conduct research → Develop lessons → Implement in classrooms.
Research-Supported:
Definition: Indicates that there is empirical evidence or scientific studies supporting the effectiveness of a particular approach, practice, or intervention. This does not imply direct development from research but that existing research validates the approach's use.
Example: A "research-supported" program is created independently but validated by studies showing its effectiveness in meeting educational goals.
Order of Process: Create lessons → Validate through research → Implement in classrooms.
Research-Aligned:
Definition: Refers to programs or practices that generally align with principles or strategies recommended by relevant research. This term does not imply a direct evidence base or specific empirical support for the program itself.
Example: A "research-aligned" curriculum incorporates strategies research suggests are effective, even if the curriculum itself has not been the subject of specific studies.
Order of Process: Review untested research → Develop lessons → Implement in classrooms (with students as the initial subjects).
These definitions shall be utilized in all communications and documentation related to educational programs, practices, and interventions to maintain transparency, uphold standards, and ensure a shared understanding across all public agencies in Oregon.
Additional Components for Further Consideration
This section highlights supplementary ideas that should be considered when drafting the full legislative bill. While the core legislative concept is kept straightforward, these components provide valuable detail to address potential gaps, enhance transparency, and mitigate risks.
1) Appeals Process: Establish a mechanism for reporters to appeal if they believe the Oregon Department of Justice has failed to meet required timelines, issued an incorrect ruling, or mishandled the process. This ensures an additional layer of accountability and fairness.
2) Justification for Financial Incentives: Include a detailed rationale for financial incentives. Reviewing and validating research is often time-intensive, requiring meticulous verification of information from potentially hundreds of citations in a single report. Financial incentives offset these costs, encouraging individuals and organizations to undertake this vital work.
3) Penalties for False Reports: Introduce penalties for submitting false reports of research fraud, particularly when done maliciously or with the intent to disrupt legitimate research. These penalties could include fines or compensation to the authors of the research for costs incurred in defending their work.
4) Public Reporting of Fraud Investigations: Require the Oregon Department of Justice to maintain a publicly accessible database of research fraud reports. This should include the date of the report, the research in question, examples of the alleged fraud, the agency's status on the investigation, and the final outcome. Reporters should have the option to remain anonymous or have their name/organization listed publicly.
5) Expedited Review for Related Reports: Establish a process for expedited review when fraudulent research is identified in reports that share similarities with others issued by public bodies across the country. Reporters could link their findings to previously identified fraudulent reports to streamline the review and investigation process.
Thanks for writing this, Jeff. You're spot on with your diagnosis of the problem. ODE and other state agencies have politicized the research process to support their pre-held policy preferences, to disastrous ends. FWIW, I don't think we should criminalize bad research, because defining what is "bad" or fraudulent or misleading research is hard and will be used primarily by the people who have created Oregon's mess to prolong Oregon's mess by prosecuting people, including people who agree with you and me, over research with which the people who run our state disagree.
Thank you for this. I am a mom in southern Oregon. I and a few others are trying to push our school board to do better for our kids. I would love any advice you may have on how we at the local level can facilitate change.