180-day rule makes for odd allies

It’s infrequent that House Republicans and leaders of the Santa Fe Public Schools agree on anything. This week, however, has demonstrated politics sometimes does make strange bedfellows.

On April 18, 60% of New Mexico’s school districts — including Santa Fe — filed a lawsuit against the Public Education Department for mandating 180 instructional days beginning next school year.

New Mexico House Republicans have been banging the drum on this very issue for more than five months because this new rule is unworkable, unfunded and could lead to fewer teachers in the most rural parts of the state. In fact, House Republicans objected to the proposed rule when it was first proposed in 2023 and just weeks ago, asked PED to delay implementation until the 2025-26 school year.

The lawsuit essentially says the education department violated state law and enacted the 180-day mandate contrary to decades of legislative intent to allow school districts to determine how many instructional days to schedule each year.

This 180-day mandate should never have happened. My colleagues and I — along with thousands of parents, students, teachers, and administrators — have been calling on PED and Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham to rescind the rule. It will have zero impact on statewide student performance. We even passed legislative language that prohibited the Public Education Department from enforcing this new rule during the 2024 legislative session, but the governor vetoed it.

The governor and PED simply do not want to hear what their constituents and lawmakers are saying. In other words, the executive has ignored elected legislators and school board members, school districts, teachers, parents and students for so long that the only option districts had was to file a lawsuit.

Many may be asking: “What’s the big deal? Our proficiency rates are terrible. Isn’t more class time a good thing?” These are the fallacies the Lujan Grisham administration wants the public to believe — that the rule will require more class time and will have a significant impact on student learning across the state. The governor has characterized districts’ opposition to the new rule as “a pathetic attempt to avoid accountability for delivering a high-quality education.” The executive, in fact, is making a pathetic attempt to mislead the public.

The new policy doesn’t require more class time — it will only result in more school days that are shorter. And while our proficiency rates are unacceptable, the rule will have little impact on student achievement because it targets only around 4% of New Mexico’s students. Even if all these students achieved proficiency, the statewide proficiency needle barely moves.

More class time is good if it is done in a way that has proven benefits — that was what the Legislature intended when it mandated more instructional hours in 2023. On the contrary, this new rule will negatively impact schools across the state that rely on a four-day schedule, creating budget shortfalls for most districts statewide, and likely causing an exodus of teachers we critically need in rural communities.

Rather than admit they made a mistake, PED and the governor pressed on, ignoring clear directives from the Legislature to abandon the policy that is now being litigated. This type of action causes a lack of confidence in governmental institutions. The Public Education Department, instead, should be working with our schools to identify real reform that supports learning, not unilaterally implementing hollow promises.

My colleagues and I will continue to fight for the districts and students adversely affected by this rule and look forward to “our” day in court.