Stewardship and the local school

Schools of all types benefit from local investment, stewardship, and community care

This article originally appeared in the Summer 2026 issue of Thinking Minnesota magazine.

At the close of the 18th century, the French intellectual elite, the philosophes, produced documents proclaiming the universal rights of man. These proclamations of sweeping, abstract philosophical principles became the foundation of a regime of blood and terror, with school curricula and structure, religious liberty, and personal political conscience all falling under the shadow of the guillotine.

In his work “Reflections on the Revolution in France,” British philosopher Edmund Burke argued that the French philosophes had misunderstood human nature in attempting to proclaim sweeping philosophical concepts that purported to pertain to the whole of the French nation. The philosophes, Burke claimed, failed to see that principles governing society cannot originate at a national level. A national philosophy cannot be imposed top-down by a committee in the capital and taught by government emissaries in secular national schools. The philosophes misunderstood the basic principle that social stewardship is inherently localized. A society wherein each individual does their part for others is a society that ultimately provides universal respect and benefits for all. Burke writes:

To be attached to the subdivision, to love the little platoon we belong to in society, is the first principle (the germ as it were) of public affections. It is the first link in the series by which we proceed towards a love to our country and to mankind.

For Burke, every person must “tend their own garden” with care. A citizen’s primary responsibility is not to overthrow, vote out, or vote in national figures, but to serve her neighbor. This is not a dismissal of national politics, but a more accurate identification of where change begins. Burke claims that humans learn to love one another through particulars. Faithfulness in local matters, he claims, will progressively lead to a strong society. The country with no broken windows will have no broken politics.

Burke’s vision of local stewardship and “little platoons,” so central to the development of Western conservatism, is reflected in the development of the American education system. Our system prioritizes local school district control in everything from hiring decisions to curriculum choice. The schools are designed with the assumption that there are “little platoons” to support them.

The Burkean vision of community-supported schools is lovely, but visions require action to become reality. Data from recent years suggests that local school involvement in America is strong, but waning. According to 2023 data published by the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), only 36 percent of K-12 students had a parent or other family member who volunteered or served on a school committee. Generally, families were somewhat engaged, with 74 percent attending a school or class event, but the willingness to show up for a piano recital did not translate into a desire to volunteer. It also only occasionally translated into largesse: a 2025 EdChoice poll conducted by Morning Consult found that less than a third of parents made charitable monetary contributions, like a check for classroom supplies, to their child’s K-12 schools. (On the bright side, of those who donated, most gave over $100, and a quarter gave over $500.)

Perhaps families simply do not want to navigate school bureaucracy — NCES data suggest that parental satisfaction with their child’s school is declining. In 2016, 54 percent of parents were “very satisfied” with their child’s high school; in 2023, only 49 percent felt the same way. When more than half of all parents have an uneasy relationship with one of the primary entities tasked with launching their child into adulthood, it warrants attention.

Teachers are also feeling adrift. A 2026 EdChoice poll, conducted by pollster Morning Consult, found that only one in four teachers felt that public education was going well nationwide. Fifty-three percent of teachers felt that education was going poorly in their school district, alongside 45 percent of parents who felt that their school district was on the wrong track. Fewer than a third of teachers were positive about their students’ academic progress. This isn’t surprising, given that school leaders consistently report a lack of family support and connection.

In the face of such mounting discontent, some have argued that the proper solution is to withdraw from publicly funded schools altogether. In “The Benedict Option,” Rod Dreher argues that Americans should self-segregate into a version of little platoons — ones that sail like Noah’s Ark to ride out what he views as a coming cultural storm until the world can be remade once more. Dreher is right that America’s public school system is dysfunctional, and its inability to serve all students has rightly led many families to choose other educational options. However, the case for splintering into millions of locally enclosed escape pods is difficult to accept. This perspective is at odds with Burke’s assessment that love for one’s neighbor can transform society. The escapist vision also fails to value the accomplishments of America’s public school system and does not recognize the hope for what it could be. Yes, perhaps Burke’s idealist social vision has not yet come to fruition, but that means that policymakers should put more, not less, effort into parental engagement and involvement.

Why is America’s priority of public education so unique?

Publicly funded, universally accessible schools are a recent historical social accomplishment. The assumptions of the ancient world were very different. Alexander the Great received an incredible education from his tutors (including Aristotle), but he was in the minority of wealthy aristocratic youth. The Greeks were the first to begin the great march toward the democratization of education, but the process would take millennia more to develop into modern mass education.

Learning without mass schooling

Societies that prized higher learning have not always required formal schooling for everyone. At the height of the monastic tradition in the Middle Ages, monasteries served as local centers of learning and preserved much of the West’s intellectual heritage. In that sense, Thomas Cahill’s claim that Irish monks “saved civilization” is not entirely overstated.

Even so, this was not popular education in the modern sense. Knowledge remained concentrated within a small, educated class rather than broadly shared across the population. Ireland and other European societies could not easily spare their young farmhands for scholarly study, which limited access to learning for ordinary people.

With time came new possibilities in education. The pursuit of knowledge could become decentralized, and theological and philosophical developments had concurred that large-scale education of the individual was desirable. Charity schools, then public schools, arose from Enlightenment principles entwined with Christian assumptions.

While the religious element would eventually pass away from America’s educational consciousness in favor of religiously neutral schools, initial public education (including in Minnesota) was administered by the religiously devout. The first public school system in America came from Massachusetts Puritans, who required communities with 50 or more households to hire a schoolteacher to teach male and female students to read and write. The Puritans even raised a tax to fund these efforts. The Massachusetts Law of 1647 was nicknamed the “Old Deluder Satan Act,” so named because literacy would empower students to avoid devilish pitfalls.

The democratic impulse of the Greeks flowered in the New World’s priority of public education. A representative democracy like America is deeply reliant on social assumptions about personal responsibility and well-informed voting. The idealist favors publicly funded education because liberal education frees the mind and soul, while the cynic points out that smart people pay more taxes and foolish people cast foolish votes. Both the idealist and the cynic conclude that America’s insistence on publicly funded, fully accessible schools is a social cornerstone and is in the best interest of all citizens of a democracy.

This brings us to the humble neighborhood school, once a one-room log cabin and now a school district governed by a locally elected school board. The schoolhouse is thought of as a partnership between parents and the government, which acts in loco parentis until the afternoon bell rings. But is a successful school district a product of local stewardship, or is it purely subject to the whims of national elections?

The answer is that both can matter. Contrary to what many might think, school reform previously had a significant bipartisan consensus. Although national policies carried differing levels of public support, 2002’s No Child Left Behind Act and 2015’s Every Student Succeeds Act were the product of across-the-aisle reformers.

America’s national early aughts school reform increased real learning for students. When school reform began to make waves in the 1990s, national assessment scores in mathematics and reading were low. Between 2002 and 2015, as measured by the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), the average American fourth grader increased their mathematics ability by 2.8 grade levels. Fourth-grade reading ability also increased by 0.9 grades. Eighth graders gained 2.2 grades of knowledge in math and 0.7 grades in reading. All that changed after 2015, and especially after the COVID-19 pandemic. The average eighth grader today scores similarly to that of a student in the late 1990s in mathematics and is at a many-decade low in reading.

There are many reasons for this decline, but one conclusion stands out: educational progress has been made and can be made again. Wise national policies come and go, but parents and community members are not powerless victims in the face of generalized trends.

What does local stewardship of a school look like?

Yes, state and national policy matter. But parents and communities can create strong little platoons in their school district, regardless of national elections.

A 2019 American Psychological Association review of 448 independent studies on parental involvement in schools found that parents really matter for a student’s academic development. Parental involvement can enhance a child’s academic motivation and engagement, and parental leadership in a child’s academic world can signal that their education is both their responsibility and within their control. This contributes to academic achievement, school engagement, personal motivation, and emotional well-being. Family and parent involvement, from homework help to working as a classroom monitor, dramatically impacts a child’s behavior, confidence, and academic achievement for the better. The ripple effects of that child’s increased engagement and happiness reverberate across the school, improving the classroom environment for everyone.

Burke would argue that loving one’s “little platoons” includes serving the local school district. There is no denying that local school involvement can be frustrating, but it is a necessary good, both for one’s own child and for others. Service is a blessing, an act of virtue, and an assertion of an upright character. Donations, volunteer work on field trips, or time as a substitute teacher can bring significant value to a school and to the life of the volunteer.

Smart district policies and wise district leaders can make an enormous difference for students.

Eastern Carver County school district has a universal expectation of grade-level proficiency and has invested significant resources in data-driven, personalized learning. As measured by Harvard’s 2025 Education Scorecard, students in the district now achieve almost half a grade’s worth of learning higher than comparable peer districts in reading, and about 1.3 additional years in mathematics, despite statewide declines in actual math and reading learning. Unfortunately, chaotic district leadership also impacts the student experience. Minneapolis Public School District, currently facing a $50 million deficit for the upcoming school year, has had many high-profile leaders quit, be terminated, or otherwise face administrative discipline over the past few years. With leadership unable to create solutions to the decade-long problem of shrinking enrollment and subsequent empty buildings, mathematics state test proficiency scores have hovered at 35 percent, and the reading proficiency at around 40 percent since the COVID era. Compare Minneapolis with the much larger, much more diverse Dallas school district, which has been the birthplace of state reforms and has raised student test scores higher during the same time.

District leadership matters so much that parents should consider formal leadership in a local school. One way to do so is through a district advisory committee. All Minnesota school boards must establish an advisory committee to ensure active community participation in all phases of planning and in improving instruction and curriculum that affect state and district academic standards. Whenever possible, parents and other community residents must comprise at least 2/3 of advisory committee members. These committees tend to be understaffed, so parents will not have to campaign or advocate to join.

There is also service on a local school board, which requires election. School boards often make splashy headlines through flavor-of-the-week culture war issues, obscuring their essential nature. Local school board service ensures that a voice for students, not for national political causes, directs the district toward academic achievement. An October 2025 Fordham Institute paper found that school board members of all political affiliations tend to assess their school district as much higher than their community would rate it, perhaps because of institutional blindness. Students deserve fresh faces in leadership, devoted to a clear-eyed vision of academic success.

That paper also found that one-third of all students nationally have school boards that do not represent them politically. A high majority of students tend to be disproportionately represented by moderates, liberals, and/or Democrats, which is, of course, acceptable in left-leaning districts but illustrates a worrying lack of representation for other types of students.

Parents, community members, and current or future school board members should consider browsing American Experiment’s School Board Toolkit or Parental Toolkit, online resources that direct would-be local stewards toward practical, simple policy measures that support academic achievement.

Schools of all types (including public, public charter, private, and microschools) benefit from local investment and stewardship. A rising tide lifts all boats.

Burke would be encouraged by the idea that Minnesotans take pride in loving their neighbor through self-sacrifice. The state is well prepared to invest in its schools, as Minnesota is known for its spirit of charity and volunteerism. As the nation celebrates its 250th birthday and the new school year slowly approaches, Minnesotans should consider how they can best steward their local school.