U.S. News & World Report has released its 2026-2027 Best High Schools rankings, giving families a fresh, data-driven snapshot of top-performing public, charter, and STEM high schools across the country. The new edition evaluated about 27,000 eligible public high schools, with nearly 18,000 schools ultimately ranked at national, state, and local levels.

At the state level, Massachusetts again led the nation, with 47% of its high schools landing in the top quarter nationally. New Jersey followed at 44%, with Maryland close behind at 43%. Metro-area results also highlighted standout regions with high concentrations of top-ranked schools, including San Jose-Sunnyvale-Santa Clara, California (60%), McAllen-Edinburg-Mission, Texas (59%), and Milwaukee-Waukesha, Wisconsin (56%)—each with the highest shares of ranked schools placing in the top 25% nationwide.

Charter and STEM schools were a major storyline in the 2026-2027 release. While California (96) and New Jersey (50) led the nation in the number of ranked STEM schools, charter schools claimed 23% of the national top 100. U.S. News pointed to Arizona’s BASIS charter network as a key example of that performance, noting it secured three of the country’s top five STEM schools and placed 12 campuses in the overall national top 100.

U.S. News said the rankings are based on six performance indicators, including state assessment achievement, graduation rates, and college readiness measures such as AP and IB participation and performance. The methodology was implemented with RTI International using data from the 2023-2024 school year.

Source: U.S. News & World Report

📰 Enjoying STM Daily News? Join the conversation!

💬 Leave a comment, share your thoughts, and subscribe to our newsletter for the latest stories, updates, and “News You Can Use This Moment!” delivered to your inbox.

Stay connected with STM Daily News!

Hilary Smith, University of Denver

Lactose intolerance makes drinking milk or eating ice cream a literal pain. For some people, eating a dairy treat can lead to bloating, nausea and diarrhea. You might’ve experienced its effects yourself. If so, you may think of lactose intolerance as a defect rather than the norm.

But did you know that most people in the world today are lactose intolerant – and that the condition itself was invented in the 1960s?

“Surely you mean discovered, not invented,” I hear you saying. I don’t. As a historian who has traced the origins of nutrition-science ideas, I have chosen the word “invented” on purpose.

Inventing lactose intolerance

Variations in people’s ability to digest lactose first came to scientists’ attention after American dairy producers found a way to rid themselves of a postwar milk surplus. To offload what they couldn’t sell, they looked to the government to intervene. And it did, buying the excess and embedding it in school lunches and other places with publicly funded meals.

Suddenly, many people who had not habitually drunk milk were consuming it regularly, including not only some Americans but also people overseas. Part of that same milk surplus found its way into school lunches in places such as Japan and Taiwan in the 1950s as the American government began to sell milk to allies during the Cold War.

Many of the groups drinking milk regularly for the first time did not like it. In fact, it made them feel sick. Intrigued, scientists set up experiments to figure out why. In a 1966 study comparing how Black and white people incarcerated in Baltimore metabolized lactose, researchers found that Black participants had lower levels of lactase – the enzyme that breaks down lactose – in their guts.

To the white scientists conducting this study, the trouble that the Black prisoners had digesting milk looked like an “inborn error of metabolism.” They assumed that the normal human state was lactose tolerance and that the lactose intolerant had inherited a genetic mutation.

It was only after years more work with research participants of many races that experts realized that, as one National Institutes of Health official put it in 1981, “lactose intolerance is a normal physiological condition, shared by every adult animal except for certain ethnic and racial groups in man.” People of northern European descent, it turned out, were the weird ones. It was their ancestors who had passed down a genetic mutation – one that made them able to digest milk after infancy.

In short, what scientists discovered in the 1960s was that different bodies process milk differently. What they invented was the idea that lactose intolerance is a defect. Accepting that framing would mean nearly two-thirds of the human population – the estimated prevalence of lactose intolerance worldwide – is defective.

Instead of acknowledging that dairy-free diets can be healthy, people innovated ways to overcome this supposed disability so everyone could consume more.

Nutritional imperialism

Lactose intolerance is one example of what I call nutritional imperialism: a way of thinking that treats white diets as the norm and everyone else’s as an aberration.

Nutritional imperialism was common in the 20th century, when scientists thought that not only milk-rich but also meat-heavy diets were best; they considered diets outside of the United States and Europe too vegetarian. Some also argued that wheat flour, not rice, ought to be the universal staple.

Advertisement

The same bias applied to bodies. Besides faulty lactose digestion, nonwhite bodies were accused of other failures, too, such as aldehyde dehydrogenase deficiency, an inability to digest alcohol quickly. The less technical term for this may be more familiar: Asian flush.

Such differences might have been thought of as variety, just another way of being human. Instead, each became a deficiency.

Many people today have inherited and perpetuated this way of thinking without knowing it, including those who are deemed deficient by it. In 1959, the director of Japan’s nutrition bureau declared that “rice-eating peoples” such as the Japanese were “resigned and passive” and could correct this by imitating Western diets and switching to wheat.

Today, the most prominent scientist promoting the idea that Asian flush is a disease is a geneticist of Taiwanese descent who started a research consortium to study “the most common human enzymopathy in the world.”

The Chinese Nutrition Society placed a tall glass of milk next to its 2022 Food Guide Plate – never mind estimates that the vast majority of Han Chinese, the largest ethnic group in China and worldwide, are lactose intolerant.

Turning sickness back into difference

Science that pathologizes difference helps racism persist.

In recent years, white supremacists have embraced the concept of lactose intolerance as a distinguishing debility of nonwhite people. Social media users have copied and pasted a map of the geographic distribution of lactose tolerance originally published in the scientific journal Nature into racist chat threads on the online discussion forum 4chan.

In 2017, internet trolls disrupted an anti-racist art installation with neo-Nazi chants and messily downed jugs of milk to accentuate their white identity.

Turning a lactose-digestion difference into a deficiency has done more to reinforce narratives of racial hierarchy than to improve public health. So here’s a suggestion: If you enjoy eating dairy, keep doing it; if you don’t, don’t – and know that there is nothing wrong with you.

Hilary Smith, Professor of History, University of Denver

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Advertisement

📰 Enjoying STM Daily News? Join the conversation!

💬 Leave a comment, share your thoughts, and subscribe to our newsletter for the latest stories, updates, and “News You Can Use This Moment!” delivered to your inbox.

Stay connected with STM Daily News!

Finding the Right SUV for Your Lifestyle

(Feature Impact) You’ve likely heard the phrase “bigger is better,” but when it comes to vehicle shopping, that may not actually be the case. While what’s new, popular or different can certainly play a role in car buying decisions, knowing how you actually live can help you choose the right vehicle for your lifestyle.

Watch this video to learn more

“SUVs and crossovers dominate the market today, and it’s easy to gravitate toward the newest and biggest models,” said James Bell, head of corporate communications for Kia America, “but the right vehicle isn’t what’s trending; it’s about your daily commute, your weekend road trip and hauling kids and gear. For a lot of drivers, a smaller, more affordable SUV like the KIA Seltos is simply a better fit.”

From length of work commutes to whether you’ll be hauling sports gear, family members or other cargo on a regular basis, figuring out the right fit comes down to identifying your daily habits.

“Start by being honest about how you use your vehicle every day,” Bell said. “A lot of drivers overbuy, paying for space and features that they rarely, if ever, use. The right SUV can save money without sacrificing comfort or functionality.”

For example, the 2027 Kia Seltos is available in five trim levels and offers best-in-class interior room and max cargo room as well as a 10-year, 100,000-mile industry-leading limited powertrain warranty, making it an option for car buyers with both extended commutes and hauling capacity needs. Plus, for weekend warriors, the turbocharged X-Line model comes equipped with multi-terrain all-wheel drive.

To explore your options and find an SUV to fit your needs, visit Kia.com.

SOURCE:

Kia

🚗 Stay in the driver’s seat with the latest automotive news, vehicle reviews, industry updates, recalls, and buying tips. Share your opinions in the comments and subscribe to the STM Daily News newsletter for the latest Consumer Corner Automotive stories delivered straight to your inbox.