
01
Nearly 15 Years After Student Discipline Reform, School Suspensions in Mass. Are Falling. Are Emergency Removals Taking Their Place?
The gist: Massachusetts schools are using fewer suspensions, but emergency removals rose from nearly 1,500 to more than 3,900 between 2018 and 2025, raising concerns that students are still being pushed out of class.
Big pictureThe shift matters because missing school is linked to weaker academic results, dropping out, and later contact with the justice system. Advocates say emergency removals may sidestep rules requiring schools to try counseling, mediation, or restorative justice, while educators say they lack the staff and training to use those alternatives.
Explain like I'm 5Schools are sending fewer children home through regular suspensions, but they are using a different emergency option much more often. It is like closing one door while opening another for removing students from school.
Why it matters nowThe latest state data show emergency removals increasing every year since 2022, even as suspensions continued to fall through 2025. The debate now centers on whether districts are using removals as a workaround or responding to more serious student behavior.
Three things to know01Removals bypass a hearing
Administrators can immediately remove a student for severe behavior for up to two days before the legally required hearing takes place.
02Gateway districts lead increases
The 26 Gateway City districts reported more than half of the state's emergency removals in 2025 despite educating only 28 percent of public school students, and their removals rose 78 percent as suspensions fell 23 percent.
03Disparities remain pronounced
In 2025, students with disabilities faced emergency removals at more than three times the rate of other students, while Black students faced them at more than four times the rate of white students.
Trusted source
The 74 ↗

02
‘It wouldn’t be Head Start anymore:’ Providers blast federal proposal to alter preschool program
The gist: The Trump administration has proposed cutting back Head Start’s national standards, a move providers warn could make the program vary widely from state to state.
Big pictureHead Start serves about ==716,000 young children== through roughly $12 billion in federal funding and has long used shared rules to provide education, health support and family services. Supporters of the proposal say local programs need flexibility, while providers fear that fewer national requirements would weaken the program’s broader mission.
Explain like I'm 5Head Start is more than a place for children to spend the day: teachers also watch for problems, help families and prepare children for school. The proposal would let local leaders make many more of the rules, so Head Start could look different depending on where a child lives.
Why it matters nowThe administration released the proposal this week, beginning a process that could change requirements on staffing, full-day care, language instruction, expulsions and developmental screenings.
Three things to know01Staffing rules could loosen
Current standards require one staff member for every four infants and toddlers and for every eight to 10 preschoolers, but the proposal would leave those ratios up to states.
02Language policy would change
Programs would generally have to teach only in English, although tribal programs could be exempt when using instruction to further tribal heritage.
03Family requirements would shift
The proposal removes classroom oral-health guidance and adds requirements for engaging fathers and teaching parents about marriage and healthy relationships.
Trusted source
Hechinger Report ↗

03
New Mexico Judge Orders Meta to Pay $567M for Youth Harm Abatement Fund
The gist: A New Mexico judge ordered Meta to pay $567 million for a fund aimed at addressing harms to young people, but Meta says it will appeal.
Big pictureThe ruling adds financial consequences and required changes to a state case accusing Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp of misleading the public about risks to young users. It reflects growing pressure on technology companies over children’s mental health and safety online.
Explain like I'm 5A judge says Meta must put money into a special fund to help fix problems linked to its apps for children and teens. Meta disagrees, like a student saying the teacher got the story wrong, and plans to appeal.
Why it matters nowJudge Bryan Biedscheid issued the order after the case’s written closing arguments, following a March jury verdict that found Meta violated New Mexico’s Unfair Practices Act. Meta has said it will appeal the ruling.
Three things to know01Two financial orders now exist
The latest $567 million abatement fund is separate from the $375 million in damages ordered after the March jury verdict.
02Oversight lasts five years
Meta must provide written reports twice a year describing its progress on the court-ordered measures.
03The case involves public warnings
The jury found Meta misled the public about the mental-health risks and potential sexual exploitation of underage users on its platforms.
Trusted source
The 74 ↗