A publication of the Association of California School Administrators

Uniting through the divide

Restoring focus in polarized schools

By Dr. Jason Hasty | September | October 2025

Across the United States, school and district leaders are confronting an unprecedented storm of ideological and political polarization. From coast to coast, debates over issues such as critical race theory (CRT), the California Healthy Youth Act, and revised federal regulations around Title IX have transformed school board meetings into battlegrounds. The pressure is not just local or cultural — it is deeply financial and institutional.

Many education leaders fear that the consequences of these conflicts could extend to the loss of crucial federal funding. Lawsuits and public clashes now erupt not just between parents and school districts, but between the federal government and some of America’s most elite educational institutions. As policy battles escalate in Washington, D.C., and statehouses, administrators across the country are asking: Will my district lose funding for Head Start, Title I, or other lifeline programs that have helped close achievement gaps for our most vulnerable children for decades?

This fear is not unfounded. Funding for programs like Head Start and Title I, cornerstones of educational equity, has come under threat amid the growing politicization of education (Blume, 2022). Even as district leaders strive to meet legal requirements and serve all students, the risk of losing vital resources is ever-present, intensifying the already immense pressure of the role.

In this climate, leaders are walking a tightrope of fear. Each decision — curricular, financial, or operational — may draw scrutiny from vocal factions, legal advocates, and policymakers. The cost of a misstep can feel existential, not only for a leader’s career but for entire school communities and the children who depend on them.

Yet, at the end of the day, leadership requires rising above trepidation. We must resist the urge to freeze or blindly comply without intention. Instead, effective school and district leaders must remain decisive and clear-eyed, keeping students’ needs at the forefront, no matter how contentious the environment. Our charge is not to serve political interests, but to safeguard educational opportunity and well-being for every child.

And more importantly, we need every adult in our communities — parents, educators, board members, civic leaders — to come together in a common vein. Our shared purpose is to lift up our children, to prepare them to become the next generation of productive Americans, carrying forward a legacy of greatness. When we unite around this mission, even the most divisive issues can be reframed as opportunities to model collaboration, compassion, and hope for our students.

The evidence for polarization in America’s schools is unmistakable, and it is escalating. A Harris Poll, commissioned by the National Alliance for Public Charter Schools, found that 91% of public school teachers feel caught in the “culture wars” over issues such as curriculum content, book bans, student rights, and equity initiatives—despite most indicating they just want to focus on teaching (National Alliance for Public Charter Schools & The Harris Poll, 2023). In addition, a 2024 RAND Corporation analysis found that two-thirds of U.S. teachers self-censor discussions of political and social issues—even in areas lacking restrictions—highlighting the chilling effect that heightened polarization is having on classroom instruction (RAND Corporation, 2024).

These divides are often fueled by highly publicized controversies. For example, debates over CRT have erupted in districts from Texas to Virginia, resulting in heated school board meetings, staff resignations, and even lawsuits. In Loudoun County, Virginia, clashes over curriculum and student rights drew national media attention and protests so intense that police were called to clear the room (Associated Press, 2021). Similar scenes have played out in Florida, where CRT bans led to teachers removing materials from classrooms, and in California, where the implementation of the California Healthy Youth Act has spurred lawsuits and protests both for and against comprehensive sex education (Blume, 2022).

At the policy level, revised federal Title IX regulations designed to protect LGBTQ+ students have sparked immediate and vocal reactions from districts, parents, and advocacy groups nationwide. While some districts have embraced the changes with new policies and inclusive practices, others have faced protests and threats of litigation from community members who feel their values are under attack (Blad, 2024). These disputes are not limited to any one region or type of community; they represent a national challenge that cuts across geography, demographics, and political lines.

The cumulative effect of these conflicts is profound: Teachers are teaching with caution, administrators are making decisions under intense scrutiny, and students are witnessing adult discord that can erode the sense of safety and community in their schools. As researchers at the UCLA School of Education & Information Studies warn, the growing partisanship and polarization in schools are undermining the mission of public education and threatening the social contract that underpins America’s diverse democracy (UCLA School of Education & Information Studies, 2023).

Three strategies for navigating ideological differences The pervasiveness and intensity of these divisions have created a new political norm for today’s schools — one where leaders are required to balance competing values, navigate complex legal landscapes, and maintain the trust of deeply divided communities. The stakes are enormous. Inaction or indecision can threaten funding, community stability, and the well-being of the very students we are called to serve.

In the face of such challenges, it is more important than ever for school and district leaders to have clear, actionable strategies that not only address conflict but also reaffirm our core commitment to student learning and safety. We cannot afford to let polarization paralyze us or distract from our mission. Instead, we must lead with clarity, compassion, and courage — putting the needs of students above all else.

With this in mind, the following three strategies offer a roadmap for navigating ideological differences while preserving the integrity of our schools and the promise of public education:

In this climate, leaders are walking a tightrope of fear. Each decision — curricular, financial, or operational — may draw scrutiny from vocal factions, legal advocates, and policymakers.

1. Lead with transparency and consistency In moments of conflict, transparency alone isn’t enough — leaders must also demonstrate that they have genuinely listened to and sought to understand all perspectives. This means not only explaining the “what” and “why” behind decisions, but also openly acknowledging the validity of differing concerns. By sharing how all voices were considered, leaders show respect for the entire community, even when consensus isn’t possible (ASCD, 2023).

For example, when adopting a new health curriculum, be sure to host listening sessions for both supporters and critics, publish summaries of feedback, and address specific concerns in your communications. This approach won’t resolve all disagreements, but it signals that everyone’s perspective matters.

2. Foster inclusive dialogue and civil discourse Effective conflict navigation starts with the belief that everyone brings a valuable perspective, even if it’s contrary to our own. Leaders who actively seek out voices from across the spectrum and facilitate dialogue aimed at shared goals (such as student safety or academic achievement) are more likely to identify areas of overlap. Speaking to these shared values, rather than just defending a position, builds trust and can help bridge divides. The goal is to find and uplift common ground, and to do so in a way that negates alienation and prevents any group from feeling excluded (National Association of Independent Schools, 2024).

For example, if faced with controversy over library books, an effective superintendent can form a committee with parents from diverse backgrounds, teachers, and students, and start by identifying each member’s shared beliefs, like the importance of student choice and age-appropriateness. This will help the group find agreement on key guidelines. The leader’s role is to keep dialogue focused on these common principles, preventing alienation of any side.

3. Center every conversation on student well-being When disagreements escalate, leaders should consistently reframe the conversation around students, our universal common ground. Inviting all stakeholders to articulate what “success for students” looks like often uncovers surprising agreement. Skillful leaders name and uplift these commonalities in every communication, reducing polarization and making it clear that the focus is collective, not divisive. The goal is to unite the community around the core mission, not to alienate those who see things differently (UCLA School of Education & Information Studies, 2023).

For example, the leadership may be faced with a heated debate over social studies curriculum, a school principal may pause the discussion and ask each participant, “What do you most want our students to know and be able to do by graduation?” The resulting list may include critical thinking, empathy, and civic engagement — values that everyone could endorse. This shared foundation can guide the rest of the process and lower the temperature of the debate.

In closing, while the ideological divides in our schools and communities may seem wider than ever, the charge of educational leadership remains constant and clear. The pressures and conflicts of today’s climate are real, but they do not define who we are or what our schools can become. If we remain anchored to the values that brought us to this work — putting students first, leading with compassion, and holding an open heart to every perspective — we can weather any storm.

Our task is not to eliminate disagreement or to erase differences, but to create learning environments where all students feel valued, safe, and empowered to succeed. By standing firm in our belief that every child has the potential for greatness, and by modeling empathy and resilience in the face of conflict, we lead our communities forward — one courageous conversation, one decisive action, and one student at a time.

As leaders, let us rise to meet this moment with clarity of purpose and unwavering hope, knowing that our greatest legacy will be measured not by the debates we win but by the lives we lift.

References

Associated Press. (2021, June 23). Protests erupt at Loudoun County school board meeting. https://apnews.com/article/loudoun-county-school-board-protests

Blad, E. (2024, May 9). District responses to new Title IX regulations. Education Week. https://www.edweek.org/policy-politics/title-ix-schools-lgbtq-rights

Blume, H. (2022, August 10). Lawsuits over California Healthy Youth Act. Los Angeles Times. https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2022-08-10/california-sex-education-lawsuits

National Association of Independent Schools. (2024). How polarization affects independent school communities. https://www.nais.org/articles/pages/research/nais-research-how-polarization-affects-independent-school-communities

RAND Corporation. (2024). Teachers limit classroom discussions of political and social issues due to fear of public backlash. https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RRA1108-10.html

UCLA School of Education & Information Studies. (2023). Study: Increasing partisanship undermines education for a diverse democracy. https://seis.ucla.edu/news/study-increasing-partisanship-undermines-education-for-a-diverse-democracy

Jason Hasty, Ed.D., is assistant superintendent of Business Services in the Beverly Hills Unified School District.