The 49% of families who reported not being able to access these necessities 鈥� including food, housing, utilities and child care 鈥� marks a 13 percentage-point jump since June and one of the highest rates recorded since the began collecting data in 2020. 

The economic struggles were paired with significant emotional distress among parents, including anxiety and depression. 

鈥淲e’re really seeing for the first time rates that are this high,鈥� said Philip Fisher, director of the early childhood center, which runs the monthly data collection. 鈥淣ever 鈥� even during the midst of the pandemic 鈥� have we seen anything like this 鈥� And the fact that it’s now going into its third month where we see rates around this high suggests that it’s not a one-time anomaly.鈥�

The numbers are a warning sign for the state of families鈥� financial well-being writ large, he noted.

鈥淲e’re talking about half of families now that are saying, 鈥業 can’t afford child care,鈥� or 鈥業’m skipping meals in order to feed my kids,鈥欌�� he added. 鈥淎nd that should be of concern, regardless of your political affiliation or where you live.鈥�

While the latest data is from Sept. 1, more detailed research is available for the month of July. In response to open-ended questions posed that month, parents expressed significant anxiety and upset.

鈥淓very bill feels heavier than the last,鈥� wrote one Tennessee parent. 鈥淚t鈥檚 exhausting to live like this. We鈥檙e not asking for luxury, we just want to be able to meet our basic needs without constant fear.鈥�

鈥淎 huge portion of our monthly budget goes just to keeping a roof over our heads, leaving very little for savings, groceries, transportation, or emergencies,鈥� said one Florida parent. 鈥淭he pressure to stay housed is constant, and it forces tough trade-offs, sometimes delaying bills, cutting back on essentials, or skipping activities for the kids.鈥�

An Oklahoma parent cited the cost of baby diapers and formula as their biggest concern, while another in Alabama wrote about the rising cost of utilities.

The three-month period between June and September marked the highest rates of material hardship for parents since the survey鈥檚 inception, with a record 56% reporting at least one basic necessity being out of reach or difficult to access in August. Since the pandemic started, at least a quarter of families have reported living with this challenge every month.

The spring and summer of 2021 saw a drop in these rates. Fisher said this coincided with the majority of the pandemic relief efforts, including the expanded Child Tax Credit, which increased the maximum credit amount, widened the scope of coverage to include 17-year- olds and allowed some people to receive monthly advance payments. The expansion was credited with cutting child poverty rates nearly

The One Big Beautiful Bill Act approved by Congress and signed by President Trump this summer increased the maximum credit amount though it also cuts other benefits for lower-income families.

The most recent survey numbers were recorded before the ongoing government shutdown began earlier this month, which experts warn will likely exacerbate the pain families were already feeling. Advocates are particularly concerned about programs such as Head Start, the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children, also known as WIC, and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, also known as SNAP, all of which may be at risk if the shutdown continues. 

Several states have that families may lose access to SNAP and funding for 65,000 Head Start seats is in jeopardy if the three-week-old shutdown drags into November.

And even once the government re-opens, many of these challenges will persist, according to Amy Matsui, vice president of Income Security and Child Care at the National Women鈥檚 Law Center.

鈥淏etween the ongoing increase in housing costs and the cost of living, the aggravating impact of tariff policies, we really are seeing everyday costs for families continuing to increase, and it鈥檚 really putting women and children in an impossible situation,鈥� she said.

Matsui also emphasized the extraordinary cost of child care, noting that this administration鈥檚 鈥渟ustained attacks鈥� on programs such as Head Start have only added to this stressor.

Fisher warned that high levels of fiscal strain among parents can lead to a 鈥渃hain reaction of hardship,鈥� which ultimately trickles down to kids.

Indeed in July, about 3 in 4 parents surveyed said their kids were also experiencing emotional distress. Chronic anxiety in kids can have long-term effects on their learning, relationships and health.

鈥淲e know uncertainty and instability for families is very destabilizing and very, very stressful, particularly with young children,鈥� said Ruth Friedman, senior fellow at The Century Foundation and former director of the Department of Health and Human Services Office of Child Care.

鈥淚f parents’ economic conditions are uncertain and more challenging,鈥� she added, 鈥渢hat absolutely has an impact on children’s development and well-being both in the short term, and beyond.鈥�

In Florida, in elementary and middle schools, from bell to bell, recently sailed through the state Legislature.

Gov. Ron聽聽on May 30, 2025. The same bill calls for high schools in six Florida districts to adopt the ban during the upcoming school year and produce a report on its effectiveness by Dec. 1, 2026.

But in the debate over whether phones in K-12 schools 鈥� and 鈥� .

We are experts in and who in Florida in November and December 2024 to learn how they鈥檙e using digital media and the role tech plays in their lives at home and at school. Their responses were insightful 鈥� and occasionally surprising.

Adults generally cite four reasons to ban phone use during school: to improve kids鈥� mental health, to strengthen academic outcomes, to reduce and to help limit kids鈥� overall screen time.

But as our survey shows, it may be a bit much to expect a cellphone ban to accomplish all of that.

What do kids want?

Some of the questions in our survey shine light on kids鈥� feelings toward banning cellphones 鈥� even though we didn鈥檛 ask that question directly.

We asked them if they feel relief when they鈥檙e in a situation where they can鈥檛 use their smartphone, and 31% said yes.

Additionally, 34% of kids agreed with the statement that social media causes more harm than good.

And kids were 1.5 to 2 times more likely to agree with those statements if they attended schools where phones are banned or confiscated for most of the school day, with use only permitted at certain times. That group covered 70% of the students we surveyed because many individual schools or in Florida have already limited students鈥� cellphone use.

How students use cellphones matters

Some 鈥減ower users鈥� of cellphone apps could likely use a break from them.

Twenty percent of children we surveyed said 鈥� that is, notifications from apps that pop up on the phone鈥檚 screen 鈥� are never turned off. These notifications are likely coming from the most popular apps kids reported using, like YouTube, TikTok and Instagram.

This 20% of children was roughly three times more likely to report experiencing anxiety than kids who rarely or never have their notifications on.

They were also nearly five times more likely to report earning mostly D鈥檚 and F鈥檚 in school than kids whose notifications are always or sometimes off.

Our survey results also suggest phone bans would likely have positive effects on grades and mental health among some of the heaviest screen users. For example, 22% of kids reported using their favorite app for six or more hours per day. These students were three times more likely to report earning mostly D鈥檚 and F鈥檚 in school than kids who spend an hour or less on their favorite app each day.

They also were six times more likely than hour-or-less users to report severe depression symptoms. These insights remained even after ruling out numerous other possible explanations for the difference 鈥� like age, household income, gender, parent鈥檚 education, race and ethnicity.

Banning students鈥� access to phones at school means these kids would not receive notifications for at least that seven-hour period and have fewer hours in the day to use apps.

Phones and mental health

However, other data we collected suggests that bans aren鈥檛 a universal benefit for all children.

Seventeen percent of kids who attend schools that ban or confiscate phones report severe depression symptoms, compared with just 4% among kids who keep their phones with them during the school day.

This finding held even after we ruled out other potential explanations for what we were seeing, such as the type of school students attend and other demographic factors.

We are not suggesting that our survey shows phone bans cause mental health problems.

It is possible, for instance, that the schools where kids already were struggling with their mental health simply happened to be the ones that have banned phones. Also, our survey didn鈥檛 ask kids how long phones have been banned at their schools. If the bans just launched, there may be positive effects on mental health or grades yet to come.

In order to get a better sense of the bans鈥� effects on mental health, we would need to examine mental health indicators before and after phone bans.

To get a long-term view on this question, we are planning to do a nationwide survey of digital media use and mental health, starting with 11- to 13-year-olds and tracking them into adulthood.

Even with the limitations of our data from this survey, however, we can conclude that banning phones in schools is unlikely to be an immediate solution to mental health problems of kids ages 11-13.

Grades up, cyberbullying down

Students at schools where phones are barred or confiscated didn鈥檛 report earning higher grades than children at schools where kids keep their phones.

This finding held for students at both private and public schools, and even after ruling out other possible explanations like differences in gender and household income, since .

There are limits to our findings here: Grades are not a perfect measure of learning, and they鈥檙e not standardized across schools. It鈥檚 possible that kids at phone-free schools are in fact learning more than those at schools where kids carry their phones around during school hours 鈥� even if they earn the same grades.

We asked kids how often in the past three months they鈥檇 experienced mistreatment online 鈥� like being called hurtful names or having lies or rumors spread about them. Kids at schools where phone use is limited during school hours actually reported enduring more cyberbullying than children at schools with less restrictive policies. This result persisted even after we considered smartphone ownership and numerous demographics as possible explanations.

We are not necessarily saying that cellphone bans cause an increase in cyberbullying. What could be at play here is that at schools where cyberbullying has been particularly bad, phones have been banned or are confiscated, and online bullying still occurs.

But based on our survey results, it does not appear that school phone bans prevent cyberbullying.

Overall, our findings suggest that banning phones in schools may not be an easy fix for students鈥� mental health problems, poor academic performance or cyberbullying.

That said, kids might benefit from phone-free schools in ways that we have not explored, like increased attention spans or reduced eyestrain.

This article is republished from under a Creative Commons license. Read the .

The published Feb. 5 found that 73% of 1,005 adult respondents were dissatisfied with the quality of public education in the U.S. It鈥檚 the highest dissatisfaction rate since the survey began, and a 5-point increase from last year鈥檚 rate of 68%. In 2001, dissatisfaction was at 57%.

The survey鈥檚 respondents, who were polled from Jan. 2 to 15, weighed in on 31 topics including the nation鈥檚 security, race relations, gun policies and health care affordability.聽

People were most content with America鈥檚 military strength and preparedness, with a 63% satisfaction rate. Overall quality of life, the position of women in the nation and the opportunity for people to get ahead by working hard followed.

The quality of public education fell near the bottom of the satisfaction list. Only the nation’s moral and ethical climate and its efforts to deal with poverty and homelessness ranked lower.

Though the new poll didn’t delve into specifics, a asked why respondents were dissatisfied with K-12 education. The top five answers were poor or outdated curriculum, poor quality education, lack of teaching basic subjects, political agendas being taught and students not learning life skills.

Previous Gallup surveys over the past two decades parents of school-aged children are much more likely to be satisfied with the quality of their own child鈥檚 education than with the nation鈥檚 education system overall. Last year, found that 70% of parents of K-12 students said they were either completely or somewhat satisfied with the education their oldest child received.

In the new poll, Americans鈥� average satisfaction among all the topic areas was at 38%, down from 41% in January 2021 and 48% in 2020, before the COVID-19 pandemic.

The survey found that members of both political parties were also dissatisfied with the quality of public education in the U.S. Only 16% of Republican respondents and 30% of Democrats said they were satisfied.

鈥淎mericans’ persistent low satisfaction with national conditions may be hard for the nation鈥檚 leaders to address,鈥� says. 鈥淗owever, the rank order of concerns resulting from this poll offers [President Donald] Trump and officials at all levels of government guidance on where the public might appreciate them focusing their efforts.鈥�

鈥�I used to be pretty suicidal last summer and I tried to commit suicide about two times.鈥�

Since 2018, more than 36,000 students across the Seattle region have shared their hopes, fears and family secrets in an online questionnaire called Check Yourself. 

鈥�My dog has 鈥� untreatable cancer and my great grandma died a week ago.鈥�

鈥�Some time i harm my self by not eating cause i don’t really like my body.鈥�

Questions peer into students鈥� sexual preferences and romantic lives 鈥� even which gender they鈥檙e 鈥渕ost likely to have a crush on.鈥� It鈥檚 the kind of information a 12-year-old might not tell their best friend.

鈥�Do my parents see this survey?鈥�

Districts promise students their answers to over 50 personal questions will be kept confidential. But a group of parents has been able to obtain reams of sensitive survey data from multiple districts through the state鈥檚 .

One of them, Stephanie Hager, is on a six-year crusade to expose what she considers to be the program鈥檚 lack of privacy safeguards. To prove her point, the former Microsoft program manager said she correctly identified six students based on nothing more than details they provided in the survey and a simple Google or social media search. 

鈥淲e know their school, gender, age on a certain date, grade level, language they speak, their dogs鈥� names, friends鈥� names, race, their unique interests, what sports they play, if they are religious, and anything else they feel like writing in 鈥� plus their whole mental health record,鈥� said the Snoqualmie Valley mother of four, whose son took the survey in 2019.

 鈥淚 can’t imagine any parent saying OK to that.鈥�

Researchers at Seattle Children鈥檚 Hospital and the University of Washington developed the Check Yourself program to better identify students in middle and high school silently suffering from depression, substance abuse or suicidal thoughts. 

Supported by a voter-approved encompasses Seattle, more than $21 million since 2018. The funds help pay for mental health counseling for students and to track trends across the 13 districts that participate. Seven schools in Spokane County, in eastern Washington, and a few districts in Oregon also use Check Yourself.

Backers of the survey have a simple defense: It saves lives.

Valerie Allen, director of social services and mental health in the Highline district, told 社区黑料 of a student who jumped into a pond at a city park in 2022 carrying a backpack laden with weights. The boy went missing after an argument with his dad. The family, Allen said, turned to a school counselor who had started meeting with the student after Check Yourself responses showed he was suicidal. The counselor tipped off police to the pond, the kid鈥檚 favorite spot, where they arrived just in time to save him.

The question of whether results like this justify the potential pitfalls have mired the program in controversy since its inception.

鈥淭he ultimate protection鈥� against privacy risks is not to do the survey, said Evan Elkin, who helped adapt it for schools and serves as executive director of Reclaiming Futures, a project at Portland State University. But, he asks, is ending the program 鈥渨orth the lives that you lose?鈥� Officials said they could not determine the number of suicides prevented due to the survey.

For Hapsa Ali, a 2023 Highline district graduate, Check Yourself came at the right time. She suffered from 鈥渞eally bad social anxiety鈥� and wasn鈥檛 getting along with her mom. Based on her answers, the school connected her to a counselor who regularly checked in on her, texting once a week.

鈥淪he was my safe space,鈥� Ali said.

The clash over Check Yourself falls at the intersection of social forces that have only intensified since the pandemic. are experiencing extreme emotional and psychological stress. While show some improvement since 2021, 30% of 10th graders still say they have persistent feelings of depression and 15% reported thoughts of suicide, according to . 

At the same time, school districts house massive amounts of sensitive personal data and rely heavily on ed tech, making them prime targets for hackers. The Highline district, for example, closed for three days in September because of a . Nationally, more than doubled in 2023. Online mental health surveys also face backlash from activists and , who find them frequently intrusive, inappropriate and removed from school鈥檚 main purpose. 

鈥淪chools are really under a huge amount of pressure to address student mental health,鈥� said Isabelle Barbour, a consultant who developed a school-based mental health program for the state of Oregon. 鈥淏ut when they try to adopt something that can work in their setting, it brings up all of these other pressure points around privacy.鈥�

鈥業 shouldn鈥檛 be seeing this鈥�

The survey, which takes about 12 minutes to complete, leads students through a series of prompts, from simple tasks such as listing their top goals for the year to deeply personal queries like, 鈥淒uring the past year, did you ever seriously think about ending your life?鈥�

Parents get two chances to opt their children out of the screener, and students can also decline to complete it on the day of the survey. But districts reveal nothing that would alert anyone to its potential risks. Quite the contrary. promotes it as a 鈥渟uccessful, proactive approach to providing support to students.鈥� 鈥減ersonalized feedback and strategies for staying healthy.鈥�

In fact, assure parents that only counselors or other 鈥渞elevant鈥� staff can view individual students鈥� responses, which are stored on a 鈥渟ecure鈥� platform by Tickit Health, a Canadian company. To participate in the county-led program, districts must sign an agreement saying they will remove all 鈥減otentially identifying鈥� student data before submitting records to the county, which uses the information to evaluate the program鈥檚 effectiveness and respond to students鈥� needs. Districts promise that county officials and researchers only see.

But an investigation by county ombudsman Jon Stier, triggered by parents鈥� concerns, suggests this hasn鈥檛 always been the case. A report released last summer revealed that in the program鈥檚 early years, county officials were able to connect student names to their responses, although Stier said that practice has ended.

The issue of the survey鈥檚 confidentiality first emerged publicly in 2022, when 10 districts released spreadsheets of student answers in response to a public records request from a . Snoqualmie Valley parents asked districts for additional information, released as recently as February 2024, which they shared exclusively with 社区黑料. 

A handful of districts concealed some personal details. But several redacted little, if anything.

This could put districts in violation of federal , which require districts to gain parental consent or remove all identifying information from records before releasing them publicly. 

Privacy experts say that wiping information such as race, home language and favorite activities from a document in order to make it is no easy task. But without such measures, a combination of answers could identify a student, in the language of the law, 鈥渨ith reasonable certainty.鈥�

Sometimes, just a simple data point can expose a student鈥檚 identity.

During the 2021-22 school year, for example, only one student in the Kent district who took the survey identified as being part of the Muckleshoot tribe, which has about statewide.

Most survey questions are multiple choice. But 13 allow students to write open-ended responses 鈥� and it is these answers that experts say vastly increase the chances of identifying potential students. 

At 社区黑料鈥檚 request, Amelia Vance, president of the Public Interest Privacy Center, reviewed an Excel document with answers from more than 900 students in the Auburn district from the 2021-22 school year 鈥� details that included random factoids like a preference for techno music and proficiency in math, as well as very private revelations such as conflicts at home and incidents of self-harm. 

鈥淚 shouldn’t be seeing this spreadsheet,鈥� Vance said. 鈥淚t feels like everybody’s sticking their head in the sand about what the consequences could be.鈥� 

Districts 鈥榗aught off guard鈥�

Marc Seligson, a King County spokesman, insisted that 鈥渟tudent data security is paramount,鈥� but that responsibility for interpreting privacy laws falls to the districts.

鈥淲e can’t give them legal advice. Each district has their own lawyer,鈥� said Margaret Soukup, the county鈥檚 youth, family and prevention manager, who oversees the program.

She said she was shocked districts released records to parents. 鈥淚 was very upset because I didn’t even think that that was a possibility.鈥�

社区黑料 reached out to the nine King County districts that released records to the public and still use Check Yourself.

Five didn鈥檛 respond, and a spokeswoman for Auburn declined to comment. Conor Laffey, a spokesman for the Snoqualmie Valley district, said officials there worked with the county to 鈥渟afeguard confidential student information鈥� and consulted the district鈥檚 legal counsel before releasing spreadsheets. He declined to elaborate.

Tahoma School District Superintendent Ginger Callison, a former Snoqualmie Valley official, said she didn鈥檛 remember details about past disclosures and is 鈥渃onfident鈥� that in the future, 鈥渘othing will get released that isn鈥檛 allowed or required.鈥�

A Seattle spokeswoman noted that records went through 鈥渕ultiple layers of review to remove potentially identifiable comments within student responses.鈥� But the district didn鈥檛 redact very specific details about some students, like the one obsessed with reptiles who wanted a pet frog and another who speaks English, Russian, Spanish and sometimes Samoan. The district did not comment on why it included such information in the spreadsheet of students鈥� answers.

社区黑料 also contacted , a University of Washington researcher who helped develop the survey and now evaluates the King County program. She said districts are obligated to protect 鈥渢he confidentiality of student information,鈥� but directed further questions to the county.

Parents say the county also bears responsibility for students potentially being exposed. 

Hager, Check Yourself鈥檚 most outspoken parent critic, obtained an email thread through an open records request that shows officials were well aware of the survey’s potential privacy pitfalls. In one email, a former Tickit Health executive warns county officials that if a student 鈥渨ere to enter identifiable information in the free-text sections, theoretically this would be accessible.鈥�

One wrinkle in King County鈥檚 privacy dispute is that Washington has one of the strongest. In 2016, for example, the state Supreme Court upheld over half a million dollars in in a case against a state agency that was slow to turn over records. 

Elkin, from Portland State University, said districts were 鈥渃aught off guard and panicked鈥� when they received the open records requests. 

But the Washington districts are no different than many others nationally that currently find themselves fielding more public record requests than ever before 鈥� often from watchdogs like Hager or activists investigating curriculum materials they believe to be inappropriate. Spurred on by conservative groups like Parents Defending Education and Moms for Liberty, repeat filers dig for lesson plans, teacher training materials and financial records 鈥� particularly those relating to transgender issues and diversity, equity and inclusion.

Allen Miedema, executive director of the Northshore district鈥檚 technology department, said the districts that use Check Yourself could 鈥渄o a better job of letting parents know鈥� about the purpose of the survey.

If staff members failed to conceal student identities, he said, it鈥檚 often because they鈥檙e 鈥渟wamped鈥� with requests for documents and lack clear guidance from state or county officials on what鈥檚 allowed to be included.   

鈥楽urvey gets dark very fast鈥�

School leaders insist the danger is largely hypothetical.

Officials in King County, and from six districts that responded to a request from 社区黑料, said they鈥檝e received no reports of cyberthieves or child predators gaining access to Check Yourself and using results to target students.

They point to internal  showing that students feel more connected to school when they鈥檙e referred to an 鈥渋ntervention鈥� after taking the survey. In focus groups, students expressed 鈥渇avorable opinions鈥� about the screener. In  of almost 400 students referred to a staff member after completing Check Yourself, the percentage saying that an adult at school listens, cares and tells them they do a good job increased. 

鈥淭he tool has been indispensable in pinpointing students who would benefit from urgent extra help 鈥� some of whom we never would have known were struggling,鈥� said Laffey, the Snoqualmie Valley district spokesman.

But that doesn鈥檛 satisfy Hager.

She is among more than 20 Snoqualmie Valley parents who started asking questions about the program after the warned in 2018 that 鈥渕alicious use鈥� of sensitive student data could lead to identity theft and 鈥渉elp child predators identify new targets.鈥�

Hager, who attended school in King County, doesn鈥檛 have to imagine what it鈥檚 like to be preyed on by a trusted adult. In seventh grade, she said she was a victim of sexual misconduct involving a male teacher. 

鈥淚 know the FBI’s scenarios are real,鈥� she said.

She points to students鈥� written reflections on the survey as proof that some find the questions disturbing.

“This survey gets dark very fast especially for a child.”

“Why does it act like I’m constantly breaking the law? I’m 12.” 

Many students expressed particular concern about questions related to sex and gender. One 12-year-old wrote:

“Female but kinda non binary sorta questioning but not? (Don’t tell my parents).”

Seligson, the King County spokesman, said the survey asks such questions because LGBTQ kids 鈥渁re one of our most vulnerable populations.鈥� State data released in 2023 showed that were nearly twice as likely as other students to report 鈥渄epressive feelings.鈥� 

The unease some students expressed about Check Yourself was echoed by several district staffers.

In 2019, an official in the Tukwila district, south of Seattle, wrote in that the survey was 鈥渃ausing considerable angst鈥� and that with many 鈥渧ulnerable鈥� and 鈥渢raditionally marginalized鈥� families, educators didn鈥檛 want to 鈥渃reate unnecessary harm.鈥�

That same year, a Seattle school counselor called it a 鈥渟uper personal survey,鈥� according to an email 社区黑料 obtained through a public records request. She questioned why the district needed the information and whether it would be able to keep it confidential.

鈥楢bsolute data privacy is a fantasy鈥�

To be sure, not all King County parents have a problem with Check Yourself.

Erica Thomson, who works for a cloud communications company, said the notion of 鈥渁bsolute data privacy is a fantasy.鈥�

She has two boys in the Seattle schools, one who is transgender and the other who has ADHD, and appreciates that the program gets her children to open up.

鈥淜ids do not tell parents everything,鈥� Thomson said. 鈥淪ometimes it is because they love their parents too much and do not want them to worry or suffer.鈥�

Some students write that they appreciate the survey experience, which includes targeted recommendations based on their answers. A student who reports using marijuana, for example, will get facts about how it negatively affects memory and mental and physical health.

Ali, the former student who found Check Yourself beneficial to her well-being, had a distinctly nuanced take on her experience.

While praising the personal attention she received from a counselor,  Ali described a 鈥渞owdy鈥� atmosphere in the sixth-period history classroom where she took the survey, with classmates buried in their phones and chatting with friends. It made it difficult to express some of the conflicts she was experiencing at the time. 

鈥淚t was a bunch of juniors just goofing off. I was sitting next to my friend, and she would just ask me, 鈥極h, what did you answer?鈥欌�� she said. The atmosphere, she added, 鈥渇elt like it wasn鈥檛 as serious as it should have been.鈥�

The information is 鈥榯oo valuable鈥�

As King County parents and school officials debate the merits and risks of Check Yourself, other districts have managed to use the program with relative ease.

In Oregon鈥檚 Hillsboro district, students鈥� responses stay on the Tickit platform 鈥� unavailable to outside evaluators or the public at large.

Spokane County officials not only eliminated questions about sexual orientation and romantic attractions, but also removed open-response fields.

鈥淲hy is it necessary for us to have that information?鈥� asked Justin Johnson, who leads community services for Spokane. Additionally, clinicians monitor the administration of the survey in classrooms, allowing the results to be covered by . 

But Soukup, the King County official who oversees the program, said districts there find the write-in answers 鈥渢oo valuable鈥� to do without because students often use them to open up about their problems.

For some King County districts, however, Check Yourself simply proved to be too much.

The Lake Washington district pulled out of the program three years ago and instead contracts with full-time mental health specialists to respond to students鈥� needs.

The intensely personal questions 鈥� and the resulting risk of privacy violations 鈥� also helped push the Bellevue school system to drop it in 2019. 

Officials opted for , and because of their sensitive nature, results are 鈥渃onsidered some of the most privileged data the district has,鈥� said Naomi Calvo, who served as Bellevue鈥檚 director of research, evaluation and assessment until 2023. 鈥淚 didn’t even have access to it.鈥�

Calvo understands why districts jumped to implement Check Yourself and most continue to use it. 鈥淪tudents have needs that were going unaddressed and there is a dearth of options available,鈥� she said. 

But as a mental health professional with a young son at the time, she felt skeptical. 

鈥淎s a researcher, I believe in surveys,鈥� she said. 鈥淏ut I would not have let my child take that survey.鈥�

This story was co-published with .

If you or someone you know is having thoughts of suicide, call or text 988 to reach the National Suicide Prevention Lifeline. Additional resources are available at . For LGBTQ mental health support, you can contact The Trevor Project鈥檚 toll-free support line at 866-488-7386.

Free, confidential treatment referral and information is available in English and Spanish at 800-662-4357, the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration鈥檚 National Helpline.

It found that 49 percent of 1,200 respondents from around the country said schools have a responsibility to ensure students learn about the ongoing effects of slavery and racism in America while 41 percent believe schools should teach students about the nation鈥檚 history of slavery and racism 鈥� but not about race relations today. 

A full 10 percent said schools do not have a responsibility to teach anything about slavery or racism in the U.S., according to the sixth annual conducted by The McCourtney Institute for Democracy at Penn State. 

鈥嬧�婽he results were further broken down by other demographic factors: 79 percent of Black respondents and 77 percent of Democrats and Independents who lean Democratic believe students should, in fact, learn about the ongoing impacts of both slavery and racism. 

The teaching of both topics has been under intense fire with recently moving to prohibit or attempting to dramatically curtail discussion of race and race-related topics in the classroom, often targeting a concept called which explains how American racism has impacted a wide range of systems and institutions. 

Conservatives across the country have renewed their push for removing some texts 鈥� including the the Pulitzer Prize-winning Holocaust graphic novel 鈥� that explain racial and ethnic discrimination. 

鈥淭he public is a little more divided than we thought,鈥� said Craig Helmstetter, managing partner at American Public Media Research Lab, a St. Paul, Minnesota-based group that conducts independent, nonpartisan research and reporting. APM Research Lab reported the poll results and analysis.

The poll, released today, was conducted between Nov. 30 and Dec. 7, 2021. The data was collected online by and has an overall margin of error of plus or minus 3.7 percentage points. 

In addition to questions on race, it also addresses the degree to which people believe parents should influence their child鈥檚 education 鈥� another current flashpoint 鈥� and the teaching of evolution and sex education.

鈥淭here are an awful lot of people who think parents ought to have a substantial amount of influence even though they have no statutory or legal role in setting curriculum,鈥� said Eric Plutzer, a political science professor at Penn State and the McCourtney Institutes’s director of polling. 鈥淭hat was especially pronounced among Republicans and social conservatives.鈥�

Another group, he said, believes these decisions should be left up to people with expertise, including teachers, because of their subject matter knowledge and classroom experience, and state agencies, which have long crafted curriculum standards.

鈥淭hat view was expressed by Democrats and social liberals,鈥� Plutzer said.

The biggest gap between those who thought parents should have the most sway and those who thought teachers should be more influential was on the question of COVID safety, with 46 percent saying parents should have a great deal of influence in that area and 28 percent saying educators should.

The poll considered respondents鈥� gender, age, race, income and political party, among other factors. It also accounted for religion, including affiliation and frequency of worship attendance.

While 90 percent of respondents said schools should teach scientific evolution, half think it should be combined with the teaching of biblical perspectives about creation. A full 10 percent said schools should teach only biblical perspectives.

More than a quarter of those surveyed said they were born again or Evangelical Christians, and their distinctiveness from those of other faiths shows up in several ways:

Just 12 percent believed schools should teach evolution only as compared to 58 percent of other respondents. A full 66 percent of Democrats and those who lean Democratic held the position as compared to 25 percent of those who were Republican or Republican-leaning.

Helmstetter said policymakers should not discount the role of religion in America.

鈥淎lthough there is a long, steady decline in the number of people attending church on a regular basis, it is still an important and significant part of people鈥檚 lives,鈥� he said. 鈥淲e should acknowledge and pay attention to it. There are some pretty big divisions across all of these questions, specifically as it relates to people being identified as born again Christians.鈥�

And while 75 percent of respondents believe sexual education for teens should include the dangers of sexually transmitted infections as well as contraception, a majority said they believe parents of school children should have 鈥渁 great deal of influence鈥� on how sex education is taught. That number includes 72 percent of Republicans, among them Independents who lean Republican, 66 percent of born again Christians and 63 percent of those age 65 or older.

Nearly half of born again Christians think sex education for teens should stop at teaching about STIs and abstinence: 37 percent of Republicans, including independents who lean Republican, held this same view.

Just 22 percent of respondents said local school boards and state departments of education should have significant influence over the teaching of sexual education, an opinion slightly more common among Black Americans and Democrats as compared to other groups.

The survey included a number of open-ended questions that allow respondents to explain their views in their own words: A 63-year-old white woman from Georgia, who does not identify as a born again Christian or Evangelical, said school boards and educators should have a great deal of influence on the teaching of sex education.

鈥淟ocal teachers have a rapport with students and can build a trust with them,鈥� said the woman, who identified herself as Republican.

Plutzer, considering the division on so many issues, said schools looking to make big decisions without including parents might be considered out of touch.

鈥淭here is already eroding respect for expert judgement in many parts of our society including education,鈥� he said, adding a failure to include parents would only make adopting best practices more difficult. 鈥淚t doesn鈥檛 mean the recommendations of those experts is wrong, but it means that if they are resisted, even a good recommendation is not going to be implemented well.”