Hall Pass: Your Ticket to Understanding School Board Politics, Edition #174

By

Ballotpedia staff

Welcome to Hall Pass, a newsletter written to keep you plugged into the conversations driving  school board governance, the politics surrounding it, and education policy. 

In today’s edition, you’ll find:

  • On the issues: The debate over President Donald Trump’s (R) school discipline executive order 
  • In your district: Open enrollment policies
  • School board filing deadlines, election results, and recall certifications
  • New Nation’s Report Card shows declining scores in math, science, and reading
  • Extracurricular: education news from around the web
  • Candidate Connection survey

Reply to this email to share reactions or story ideas!

On the issues: The debate over President Donald Trump’s (R) school discipline executive order

In this section, we curate reporting, analysis, and commentary on the issues school board members deliberate when they set out to offer the best education possible in their district. Missed an issue? Click here to see the previous education debates we’ve covered.

On April 23, President Donald Trump (R) issued an executive order titled “Reinstating common sense school discipline policies.” The order states, “The Federal Government will no longer tolerate known risks to children’s safety and well-being in the classroom that result from the application of school discipline based on discriminatory and unlawful ‘equity’ ideology.” The order says federal guidance issued under Presidents Barack Obama (D) and Joe Biden (D) in 2014 and 2023, respectively, by the U.S. Departments of Education and Justice encouraged schools to keep violent or disruptive students in classrooms rather than expel or suspend them. The 2014 guidance stated that “racial discrimination in school discipline is a real problem” and outlined the investigative process schools may go through if accused of violating Title IV and VI of the 1964 Civil Rights Act. The 2023 guidance further reinforced that schools can be held liable under the Civil Rights Act for discriminatory discipline policies.

Trump’s order states, “As a consequence of these policies, teachers and students are suffering increased levels of classroom disorder and school violence.”

A letter signed by 40 members of the National Center for Youth Law’s Education Civil Rights Alliance argues that Trump’s order ignores the evidence that Black and Native American students are more likely to be punished—or punished more harshly—than their white counterparts for the same misbehavior. The organization says discriminatory disciplinary policies reduce marginalized students’ chances of succeeding in school and adulthood, and calls for schools to continue the work of making schools both safer and more inclusive.  

Manhattan Institute Policy Analyst Carolyn D. Gorman argues that federal discipline guidance under Obama and Biden did not help to make schools safer. Gorman says that holding students accountable for their behavior increases classroom safety, reduces disobedience, and helps schools get resources to the students that do misbehave. Gorman says schools should establish clear policies that allow students to demonstrate progress. 

Education Civil Rights Alliance Responds to Executive Orders Targeting Discipline Reform & Disparate Impact | Education Civil Rights Alliance, National Center for Youth Law

“Prior to the Trump administration, investigations of discipline disparities by the U.S. Department of Education, Office for Civil Rights have often revealed direct evidence of different treatment, where school staff have punished students for the same behaviors differently based on their race. Specifically, Black and Native American students are often punished more harshly or frequently than their white peers, even though they are no more likely to misbehave. In other cases, the policy of removing a student from school for subjective, minor infractions, such as suspensions for attendance or dress code violations, can have a disparate impact on students of particular identities that cannot be justified because there are far more effective and less harmful ways to address the minor misconduct. These practices can have a disparate impact on students in ways that can lead to lower grades, lost classroom time, pushout from school altogether, and other long-term consequences, especially for students of color and students with disabilities.”

The Case for School Discipline | Carolyn D. Gorman, City Journal

“The Trump administration’s latest executive order lays the groundwork for ending this failed school-discipline policy for good. It not only rescinds the Biden-era guidance but goes further, reaffirming that schools must comply with federal civil rights law by addressing misconduct based on students’ behavior—not their race.

“The executive order also directs the Department of Education to provide schools with model discipline policies that take a ‘common sense’ approach—policies that ‘protect the safety and educational environment of students, do not promote unlawful discrimination, and are rooted in American values and traditional virtues.’

“Properly understood, discipline is not merely punitive; it is also constructive. Removing violent or disruptive students from classrooms protects their peers, while documenting misconduct can help trigger appropriate interventions, such as placing problem students in specialized settings.”

In your district: Open enrollment policies

We want to hear what’s happening in your school district. Please complete the very brief survey below—anonymously, if you prefer—and we may share your response with fellow subscribers in an upcoming newsletter.

K-12 open enrollment allows students to apply to attend public schools outside of the one they have been assigned to based on their home. Depending on the policy, students in states with open enrollment laws can apply to schools within their district, a different district entirely, or both. 

While states set limits or requirements on open enrollment policies, many details of policy and implementation are left to local school boards and superintendents.

What has been your district’s experience with open enrollment policies? 

Click here to respond!

You can read our previous reader surveys and responses here. 

School board update: filing deadlines, election results, and recall certifications

In 2025, Ballotpedia will cover elections for more than 30,000 school board seats. We’re expanding our coverage each year with our eye on covering the country’s more than 80,000 school board seats.    

The next major wave of school board elections will occur on Election Day, Nov. 4, in at least 15 states. Stay tuned for more on Ballotpedia’s coverage of November school board elections.

New Nation’s Report Card shows declining scores in math, science, and reading

On Sept. 9, the U.S. Department of Education’s National Center for Education Statistics released the latest National Assessment of Education Progress (NAEP) scores. The assessment, officially known as the “Nation’s Report Card,” covered eighth grade science and 12th grade math and reading. 

The results showed that, on average, scores in all three subjects declined in 2024 compared to 2019. 

Since 1969, Congress has required the U.S. Department of Education to test students on different subjects. A representative sample of fourth- and eighth-graders take the NAEP exam every two years, while 12th-graders take it every four years. Owing to the pandemic, the last time 12th-grade students took the exam was in 2019. The U.S. Department of Education released fourth- and eighth-grade math and reading scores in early January. Read Hall Pass’ coverage of those results here. 

Average scores decline while achievement gaps expanded

Eighth- and 12th-grade science and math NAEP scores are reported on a 0-300 scale, while 12th-grade reading is reported on a 0-500 scale. Additionally, students are grouped into categories, or “Achievement levels,” based on how they score—Basic (or below), Proficient, and Advanced.  

  • Eighth-grade science: The average score fell four points compared to 2019 but was largely unchanged from 2009, when the U.S. Department of Education debuted a new framework. Compared to 2019, scores declined for all five percentiles (90th, 75th, 50th, 25th, and 10th). Thirty-five percent of eighth-graders scored proficient or above in 2019, compared to 31% in 2024. In 2024, 38% scored below basic, whereas 33% did so in 2019. 
  • 12th-grade math: The average score fell three points from 2019, five points from 2015, and three points from 2005. Students in the 90th percentile scored no different between 2019 and 2024 and two points higher than in 2005. Students in the 10th percentile, on the other hand, scored four points lower than in 2019 and five points lower than in 2005. Twenty-four percent of students scored proficient or above in 2019, a figure that declined to 22% in 2024. Forty-five percent scored below basic in 2024, up from 40% in 2019. 
  • 12th-grade reading: Students on average scored two points lower than in 2019 and 10 points lower than in 1992, when the U.S. Department of Education debuted this particular test. Scores declined relative to 2019 for all percentiles. Scores declined relative to 1992 for all students except those in the 90th percentile. Twenty-nine percent of 12th-graders scored proficient or above in 2024, compared to 31% in 2019. Thirty-two percent scored below basic in 2024, up from 30% in 2019. 

According to the 74’s Chad Aldeman, “across a range of tests, grade levels and subject areas, the scores of the lowest-performing students have fallen dramatically, while the scores of the highest-performing students have been flat or close to it.”

A roundup of reactions to the latest NAEP scores

Learning and literacy specialist Dr. Lymaris Santana cautions against interpreting the latest NAEP results through a partisan lens.

“It is tempting to read NAEP results as a red versus blue report card. After all, Democrats hold full control in 17 states while Republicans control 23. Yet the data does not follow partisan lines. Blue states like Massachusetts and New Jersey continue to rank among the highest performers, despite their own recent decline in scores. Red states like Mississippi and Tennessee show notable improvement, but everywhere, the lowest performing students are falling further behind.”

Fred Bauer, a writer based in New England, writes that the NAEP scores are an indictment of two education trends he calls social-justice pedagogy and tech-centered instruction.

“The pandemic turbocharged two educational approaches already regnant in US educational policy. Much has already been written about the incorporation of tech into learning, but the post-2020 period also saw the infusion of the “equity” agenda into America’s classrooms. Not only have progressive activists tried to eliminate tracking based on academic performance from public schools; they have also worked in tandem with both state and federal policymakers to push for “restorative justice” approaches — which prioritise “mediation” meetings and cooperation between students and teachers — to school discipline that make it harder to remove disruptive students from the classroom.”

The Wall Street Journal Editorial Board attributes declining NAEP scores to a variety of factors, including student social media usage, rising absenteeism, and declining standards.

“Wisconsin, Illinois and New York have lowered their standards for rating proficient on state tests. Massachusetts, once a public-education leader, has eliminated state tests—as if comparative results might be upsetting.

“Cultural factors may also contribute to declining scores. Classroom behavior has worsened in recent years. Children are spending more time on social media after (and sometimes during) school and less time reading for pleasure. Absenteeism has increased. More than 30% of seniors reported missing three or more days of school in the last month, according to the NAEP report.”

Harvard education professor Martin West writes that NAEP scores have been declining for more than a decade in most subjects, ruling the pandemic out as the biggest culprit. He argues that technology, and particularly cellphones, is the most likely factor behind declining scores over time. 

“To my knowledge the only candidate that checks all those boxes is the rise of smartphones and, in particular, the advent of social media platforms targeting youth. The timing fits. Phones distract students from math homework just as much as they do from reading. Surveys show that disadvantaged students spend the most time on their devices, while motivated students of all backgrounds may be able to use them to enhance their learning. New York University psychologist Jonathan Haidt has argued convincingly that these technologies are a key driver of our current crisis in youth mental health.”

Nicholas Ferroni, a 22-year high school teacher, told Newsweek students are less engaged in the classroom because of cellphones. 

“Because of cellphone use and screen time, students are reading less, writing less, thinking less, and there is only so much a teacher can do in a 40-minute class period. I do everything I can to enhance the skills that students need to thrive, but unless they are nurtured and encouraged outside of school, it is a losing battle.”

Harvard education professor Andrew Ho writes that the gap between the 2019 and 2024 NAEP scores means we can’t say if student scores have increased or declined since the pandemic. 

“What do I see in high school NAEP results? Missing data. Why can’t we tell if this is pandemic decline or recovery? We haven’t measured since 2019. Why can’t we see bright spots? No state data. NAEP is critical. We need a strategic high school NAEP initiative to learn from states and districts succeeding with kids this age.”

Before the latest NAEP scores were released, former NCES Associate Commissioner Dan McGrath made back-of-the-envelope projections based on previous results. McGrath was pleasantly surprised when scores were more positive than he anticipated.

“However, in the context of other post-pandemic results we’ve seen, these results are kind of, sort of good. Why did 12th-graders seem to weather the pandemic better than earlier grades? I don’t know. Perhaps they had the skills and maturity to enable them to learn better on their own or in remote and hybrid settings. Or maybe some of the lower achieving students left before grade 12? Why was 8th grade science less affected than math and reading? Maybe because science instruction tends to ramp up through the middle grades, which would be post-pandemic for these students? I don’t know. In any case, it’s a tribute to schools, teachers, students, and families that these results were not as bad as one might have expected.” 

Extracurricular: education news from around the web

This section contains links to recent education-related articles from around the internet. If you know of a story we should be reading, reply to this email to share it with us! 

Take our Candidate Connection survey to reach voters in your district

Today, we’re looking at two survey responses from the two candidates running in the general election for District 2 on the Issaquah School District school board, in Washington. 

Chinmay Nagarkar is a software engineer whose campaign slogan is “No Talent Left Behind.” Natalie Anderson is a manager, and her campaign slogan is “Rooted in Community. Focused on Our Children’s Future.” 

Issaquah School District is the 22nd largest in Washington, with roughly 19,000 students. It is located southeast of Seattle. 

Here’s how Nagarkar answered the question, “What areas of public policy are you personally passionate about?”

“I’m passionate about education policy grounded in reality—not divisive controversies. When making choices, I try to be aligned with Natural Law, keeping with the example set by the United States Constitution. With enrollment shrinking and bonds failing, we must earn back voters’ trust and return to basics: academic rigor, strong CTE programs, support for both gifted and struggling students, and budget decisions that reflect community trust. I believe public education can thrive again—if we listen to families, respect taxpayer investment, and focus on real outcomes. My goal is to make schools work for every child and every household, whether they plan for college or a trade.”

Click here to read the rest of Nagarkar’s responses. 

Here’s how Anderson answered the question, “What areas of public policy are you personally passionate about?”

“I’m passionate about public policies that expand access to Career and Technical Education (CTE) and support multiple pathways to success after high school. Not every student’s path includes college, and we must invest in programs that prepare them for skilled trades and workforce opportunities. I also care deeply about equity in education, ensuring underrepresented schools like those in Renton receive fair resources. In addition, I believe in the power of volunteerism, engaging families and community members in our schools builds stronger, more connected learning environments.”

Click here to read the rest of Anderson’s responses.

In the 2024 election cycle, 6,539 candidates completed the survey, including over 500 school board candidates. If you’re a school board candidate or incumbent, click here to take the survey.