The Politics of Disruption and the Ongoing Impact on Local Education Politics

Purpose: This research examines how national actors, like Moms for Liberty (M4L), used the politics of disruption to challenge existing school leaders and reshape local education politics. Research Methods: Using a comparative case study approach, we examine school board meetings in 15 districts (156 meetings) to understand how the presence/absence of nationalized issues and national groups shape local education politics. We compare four case types: M4L-endorsed candidates win the majority of board seats (three cases), M4L-endorsed candidates win a minority of board seats (three cases), Nationalized-Issue presence (six cases), and comparison cases (three cases) with neither nationalized issues nor M4L present. Using an observation protocol, we track changes in engagement, tone, and rules/processes across three time periods: “pre-period” (late 2019 to early 2020), “contentious period” (summer of 2021 through 2022 elections), and “post-period” (after the 2022 elections). Findings: The politics of disruption motivated new actors to engage in board meetings. Attendees engaged in ways that broke with long-standing behavioral norms, mirroring the current style of national politics. Negativity, insults, and even threats to elected leaders grew in frequency, leading to polarization and an us-versus-them atmosphere. To quell the disruption, boards rigidly applied old and new rules in ways that fueled the narrative of unresponsive boards. Implications: This article contributes to the growing body of literature on the nationalization of local education politics. Although increased engagement and accountability from the community might be a positive outcome, our findings show how the politics of disruption can sow distrust and effectively stymie regular governance procedures.