Hall Pass: Your Ticket to Understanding School Board Politics, Edition #106

By

Samuel Wonacott

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

In today’s edition, you’ll find:

  • On the issues: The debate over smartphones in school 
  • School board filing deadlines, election results, and recall certifications
  • Ballotpedia Director of Research Josh Altic discusses enrollment and attendance zone drawing policies
  • Extracurricular: education news and numbers from around the web
  • Candidate Connection survey

Reply to this email to share reactions or story ideas!

On the issues: The debate over smartphones in school 

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.

Today, we’re looking at arguments for and against proposals to ban smartphones in schools.

Anthony Vaccaro writes that such efforts distract from more important issues. Vaccaro says smartphone bans would be difficult to enforce, cause anxiety for students, and reduce their feelings of independence. He also says schools should prepare students to responsibly use smartphones outside of classroom contexts.

The Washington Post Editorial Board writes that smartphones have almost completely negative effects on students and very few benefits. The Board says banning smartphones in schools would reduce distractions that prevent learning, would promote meaningful, in-person interactions, and reduce cyberbullying.

Banning cellphones in schools is not so simple | Anthony Vaccaro, Washington Post

“Though a smartphone ban in educational settings might seem like a solution, it is a distraction. … Enforcing bans would be burdensome. These policies increase negative sentiments and tensions between teachers and students. Student-teacher connection is an important factor in predicting engagement and educational success. Also, decreasing confidence in self-independence is a major factor in increasing rates of adolescent anxiety. Banning smartphones reinforces this lack of a sense of independence in educational settings, and could lead to parents feeling less confident in giving independence to adolescents. … Do we want to prepare students for the world, or for the confines of the classroom? A world without smartphones, and their facilitation of both on-demand information and their distraction, is not a world our children will live in. A nuanced approach to facilitating and managing smartphone use in educational settings might be difficult to figure out, but it does not pretend that we can simply close the Pandora’s box of technology in our daily lives.”

Schools should ban smartphones. Parents should help. | The Editorial Board, Washington Post

“In 2024, these efforts should go even further: Impose an outright ban on bringing cellphones to school, which parents should welcome and support. In educational settings, smartphones have an almost entirely negative impact: Educators and students alike note they can fuel cyberbullying and stifle meaningful in-person interaction. A 14-country study cited by UNESCO found that the mere presence of a mobile phone nearby was enough to distract students from learning. It can take up to 20 minutes for students to refocus. … Cellphones are a technology that seemed benign, if not marvelous, when first popularized in educational settings — one more tool with which to navigate an increasingly digital world. But new information has since emerged, and the earlier assumptions are crumbling under the weight of experience. … In the face of today’s evidence, one could plausibly argue that children shouldn’t have access to smartphones at all. But at least keeping the devices out of schools? It’s an idea whose time has come.”

In your district: Spending ESSER funds 

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.

Between March 2020 and March 2021, Congress allocated roughly $190 billion to schools through three rounds of Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief (ESSER) Fund grants. Congress authorized this aid in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, and gave districts wide latitude to spend on facility maintenance and expansion, technology upgrades, professional development for teachers and staff, mental health support, tutoring services, and more. 

The deadline for districts to commit the last round of ESSER funds to projects is September 2024, and funds must be spent by the end of January 2025 (states can request an extension). 

Tell us about your district’s experience spending ESSER funds. 

Click here to respond!

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

In 2023, Ballotpedia covered elections for over 9,000 school board seats in more than 3,000 districts across 34 states. In 2024, we’ll cover elections for more than 10,000 seats. We’re expanding our coverage each year with our eye on the more than 13,000 districts with elected school boards. 

Election results from the past week

New Jersey

On April 16, Ballotpedia covered general elections for three seats on the Newark Public Schools school board and a special general election for one board seat.

In the regular general elections, incumbents Helena Vinhas, Vereliz Santana, and Dawn Haynes defeated six other candidates. Preliminary results show the candidates received between 22.2% of the vote and 20.7%. The next closest candidate, Debra Salters, received 11.3%.

The winning candidates ran as the “Moving Newark Schools Forward” slate. Haynes and Santana ran as part of the same slate in 2021 and 2018. That slate has won all elections to the board since 2016. In last year’s elections, Newark Mayor Ras J. Baraka (D) endorsed the slate. 

Incumbent Kanileah Anderson ran unopposed in the special general election. Anderson also ran as part of the “Moving Newark Schools Forward” slate. 

According to Chalkbeat Newark’s Jessie Gómez, “If the leading candidates hold on to win, the nine-member board would be composed entirely of members who ran for election as part of the ‘Moving Newark Schools Forward’ slate.” 

Turnout in the election was 2.77%.

Newark Public Schools is the largest district in New Jersey, with an estimated enrollment of more than 41,000 students.  

Upcoming school board elections

Ballotpedia is covering elections in 50 districts on May 4, including elections in the Dallas Independent School District, the state’s second-largest by student enrollment. 

We’ll have more on these Texas elections in the coming weeks. 

Ballotpedia Director of Research Josh Altic discusses enrollment and attendance zone drawing policies

Last August, we previewed a research project Ballotpedia conducted on district boundaries and attendance zones—the dividing lines that help determine for most students the schools they attend. In the U.S., most K-12 students attend schools primarily based on their residential address. 

Two sets of geographical boundaries largely determine school attendance:

  • District Boundaries: These define the jurisdiction of about 13,000 school districts in the U.S., influencing factors like property tax rates and school board representation.
  • Attendance Zones: These are the boundaries within each district that specify which school within a district a student attends based on their residence.

These boundaries affect nearly every facet of K-12 public education, including racial and socioeconomic segregation, equity, community, competition-driven school performance, and education quality and accessibility. 

The project investigates how attendance zone boundaries are drawn in 45 of the largest districts across 17 states, and examines open enrollment policies that allow students to transfer to different schools or districts.

Open enrollment policies make students’ home addresses less of a factor in determining where they attend school. However, not all students can take advantage of open enrollment policies because many of the best schools are full.

School boards are generally responsible for approving attendance zones, but others, such as superintendents, advisory commissions, or committees, often draw the maps. The reasons for adopting specific maps vary by district, with some school boards prioritizing community, natural neighborhoods, and transportation routes, and others focusing on equity and diversity.

Ballotpedia Director of Research Josh Altic conducted the study. Last week, he joined Local Elections Manager Doug Kronaizl to discuss his findings and what they mean for school quality and educational equity on On the Ballot, our weekly politics podcast. 

Here are excerpts from the conversation between Josh and Doug. Click here to watch the whole conversation on YouTube. New episodes of On the Ballot come out every Thursday. Subscribe on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or wherever you listen to podcasts.  

This transcript has been edited for length and clarity.

Doug Kronaizl: “To start, could you give us a general look at this research project and what we’re trying to uncover?”

Josh Altic: “Sure. So the basic premise was to look at the policies at both a state level and district level that determined how school districts allocate students to different schools. How do you decide which school your student gets to go to? And across the spectrum of policy, there’re lots of different issues—whether parents have a choice or whether attendance is determined entirely by where they live.

What that choice entails in terms of whether you can go across to different districts or to different schools within your own district. And then also how much access you have to various programs that give you different options. What are the bureaucratic hurdles you have to overcome? So we were mostly interested in taking a first stab at looking at those district -specific policies, because they’re kind of a black box. There’s not a lot known or compiled about how these lines are drawn, who determines them, and what policies go into drawing them.”

DK: “What is the difference between a school district boundary and an attendance zone?”

JA: “There’s two different sets of lines that determine what school your child can go to. One of them is an actual political jurisdiction—the school district. So that’s like a city boundary or a county boundary. It represents a lot of different government authority, government jurisdiction, including taxes, including a variety of different facets of that government’s authority. But that also determines which schools are in your district and oftentimes which schools your student can go to. 

But then within a district, especially large districts that have multiple schools, there are lines drawn that solely determine which school your child can go to. So those are the attendance zone lines. And those are different from the district boundaries. The attendance zone lines cut up a school district into a bunch of different pieces and determine which piece you are a part of.

We were interested in sort of two policy areas. One—what are the policies that allow you to cross those lines? That’s called open enrollment. You have inter-district open enrollment, where you cross from one school district into another school district, usually a neighboring school district, and go to a school outside of your district. And then there’s intra-district open enrollment, where you cross those attendance zone lines within your district. 

DK: “In the districts we examined, what did we learn about those attendance zone policies and how they work?”

JA: “Yeah, so every state we looked at gave the school board the authority over student allocation. And so in all 45 districts, the school board does have the final say. It was interesting, though, that two of the school districts we looked at were under desegregation orders. And so the court actually drew those maps. But those were the only exceptions. 

In 98% of the districts we looked at, the school board was responsible. But what we saw, which I thought was interesting, is that the school board wasn’t always the one who was actually making the practical decision. They were often just presented with a map and they rubber stamped it. Maybe they’d give a consideration or maybe they went back and had someone change it. 

But for the most part, what you had was some combination of superintendents or committees. Even in the same state, you might have a parent advisory committee draw up one map, while in another district, the superintendent would draw it. So there’s a lot of variation in terms of who’s actually making those decisions. And so that was one of the most interesting things coming out of the research.”

DK: “You mentioned that the goal moving forward is to take in as many more states as possible? Are there any other policy aspects that you want to catalog?”

JA: “Yeah, one of the goals with this small pilot was to just prove feasibility. Could we actually find these policies or dig up the old meeting documents that had the practices from the previous rezoning? Being able to find that for all the 45 districts was really encouraging. 

We could do a thousand districts. And so going back to the open enrollment side, one of the patterns we saw or that has been purported and that was born out in this particular research, even though it was a small sample size, was this pattern of large urban districts that have open enrollment. They’ve opted in to open enrollment. They’re fine with it. 

But then what you have is a smattering of surrounding suburban districts, often with the preferred schools, and they have opted out of open enrollment. They don’t want students coming from other districts. They’re saying, no thanks, we’ll just keep our own students. And that of course relates to inter-district open enrollment. Seeing if that pattern kind of bears out over a much larger sample would be really interesting.”

Extracurricular: education news and numbers 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 survey responses from incumbent Dana Schallheim and Erica McFarland, two candidates running in May 14 primaries to represent districts in Anne Arundel County Public Schools in Maryland. 

Schallheim is one of three candidates running to represent District 5 on the Anne Arundel County Board of Education. She was first elected in 2018. Tareque Farruk and LaToya Nkongolo are also running. Schallheim is the only candidate who has taken the survey. 

McFarland is one of four candidates running to represent District 3. Jamie Hurman-Cougnet, Julia Laws, and Chuck Yocum are also running. McFarland is the only candidate who has taken the survey. 

Anne Arundel County Public Schools is the fourth-largest district in Maryland, with around 85,000 students.

Here’s how Schallheim answered the question, “What are your preferred strategies for faculty, staff, and administration recruitment?”

“Our excellent teachers require better pay. Over the last five years I have substantially increased teacher pay & restructured salary scales which moved us from 19th to 4th for new teacher salary in MD, supported “grow our own” programs to encourage our students to pursue careers in teaching & recruitment efforts nationally & internationally, career ladders that incentivize teachers to stay in the classroom, & student schedules that increased planning time for all elementary school educators.

This year we’ve seen a 13% increase in our applicant pool, with the largest class of teachers of color our district has had in years. We’ve filled dozens of vacancies in our teaching staff. Additionally, we’ve improved our outreach, recruiting candidates at 70 job recruitment fairs during the 22-23 school year in 11 states, DC, Puerto Rico, and the HBCU national virtual job fair, partnering with nearly 30 colleges and universities.”

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

Here’s how McFarland answered the question, “What are your preferred strategies for faculty, staff, and administration recruitment?”

“I am very interested in supporting a Grow Your Own Educator program. Programs like this attract prospective teachers in our own communities through partnerships between school districts, colleges, and community organizations. Besides providing wrap-around services and financial support, it encourages diversity in the workforce that reflects the diversity of the student population.”

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

If you’re a school board candidate or incumbent, click here to take the survey. If you’re not running for school board, but there is an election in your community this year, share the link with the candidates and urge them to take the survey!

In the 2022 election cycle, 6,087 candidates completed the survey. 

The survey contains more than 30 questions, and you can choose the ones you feel will best represent your views to voters. If you complete the survey, a box with your answers will display on your Ballotpedia profile. Your responses will also appear in our sample ballot.