The education system, notorious for blaming low student achievement and budget challenges on others (money, parents, legislators, etc.), has declared that the declining birth rate is the latest villain. And true to form, it won’t let facts get in the way.
Public school enrollment has been declining since students were sent home during the COVID pandemic, and parents were shocked at what they found. Academic levels were considerably lower than they’d been led to believe, and their children were being indoctrinated in gender transitioning, victimization, and anti-American sentiment in the name of diversity, equity, and inclusion. That wasn’t the case in every district, but it was especially prevalent in many urban and suburban districts.
The budget effect of reduced enrollment is flat or declining revenue because funding is largely based on enrollment, so fewer students means less revenue even though the Legislature has increased the per-student allocation each year. Predictably, administrators and school board members in some large districts are closing schools, cutting programs, and student support staff instead of shrinking the administrative footprint and eliminating ineffective spending.
Hence, the birth rate decline is the primary villain.
Birth rate declines, family formation delays, and the broader “fertility crisis” are real, but districts are whistling past the graveyard if they ignore the changing face of educational trends.
Data shows self-inflicted enrollment declines
Two weeks ago I discussed research that contradicts the birth rate theory on two KCMO Radio shows: “Mundo in the Morning” and “Miranda’s Right.” State Department of Education data show enrollment rose through the 2019-2020 school year, then suddenly dropped by about 14,000 students the next year. It held steady for a bit, but then declined each of the last three years. Enrollment last year was about 23,000 less than the 2019-2020 school year.
I noted that the sudden drop in 2021 suggested that it wasn’t just a birth rate issue; rather, parents were pulling students in reaction to what they learned during COVID.
Those interviews prompted another one on KCTV5, and that’s when the intrigue began.
Two days later, KCTV5 removed the story from its website because management thought it was incomplete and didn’t meet the station’s reporting standards. In other words, some school districts complained about inconvenient facts getting out.
KCTV5 later interviewed USD 232 Superintendent Cory Gibson and Leah Fliter, a lobbyist for the Kansas Association of School Boards; they also interviewed me for the story, but they didn’t mention my research, and Fliter was allowed to refute my argument, saying, “We don’t have any data about folks making that move.”
Of course KASB doesn’t have any data…you don’t track what you want to ignore…but that doesn’t mean parents didn’t like what they saw. Stories abound of students leaving and controversy over DEI and gender-related issues, like here… here… here… here… here… here… here… and here.
It’s no wonder that trust in media is so low when data showing a sudden enrollment decline is ignored but ‘we don’t have any data’ is accepted without question. Even if Ms. Fliter thinks the birth rate and families leaving Kansas are factors, it beggars belief that she doesn’t understand the data clearly showing the precipitous post-COVID decline.
If the birth rate is the primary reason for enrollment decline, as KASB claims, how do you explain enrollment steadily increasing for many years while the birth rate fell? Full-time equivalent enrollment grew from about 442,000 in 2006 to 463,000 in 2015. After a short dip to 460,000 in 2017, enrollment was redefined to count kindergartners as full-time students instead of half-time, and increased to about 476,000 in 2018. Enrollment then held steady through 2020 before plummeting to 462,000 in 2021.
Inaccurate statements on domestic migration and SPED cuts
KCTV also reported that KASB says people leaving Kansas is another factor that’s pushing enrollment lower, but domestic migration data refutes that excuse.
Kansas has had net domestic migration loss (more U.S. residents leaving than moving here) for many consecutive years, but the loss shrank each of the last three years. Kansas had a net loss of 7,185 people in 2022; the net loss fell to 5,284 and 4,775 the next two years, and Kansas had a net loss of 519 people in 2025.
If the loss is the smallest in recent history and KASB wasn’t blaming enrollment declines on families leaving in prior years, how is it suddenly a material factor…especially with no data to back its claim?
KCTV also said special education cuts contributed to budget challenges in its interview with KASB, and that is another fabrication it allowed to stand.
School districts are getting as much special education funding as they want, but it has been steadily increasing. The amounts shown in the adjacent table do not include extra Local Option Budget property taxes that schools collect directly related to special education funding.
Misleading comparison of kindergarteners and seniors
KCTV also interviewed USD 232 De Soto Superintendent Cory Gibson, who attributed his district’s decline to families having fewer children, based on his district having fewer students entering kindergarten than were in the 12th grade the previous year.
That’s true, but Gibson didn’t say that’s routine.
For example, the district had 586 seniors in 2020, and only 458 entered kindergarten in 2021. De Soto and other districts also have net student gains in other grades, and the same pattern exists every year. For example, Johnson County schools collectively had 7,084 students in the 1st Grade in 2026, compared to 6,991 in kindergarten the year prior, resulting in a net gain of 93 students.
So yes, it’s a factor, but not a material reason that districts are struggling with enrollment declines.
Conclusion
There are two morals to this story.
First, media should fact-check everything coming from government agencies and quasi-government entities that want more money from taxpayers and shy away from accountability. It should fact-check us also, and we always provide our data and sources to make it easy.
Second, student outcomes, enrollment, and budget challenges won’t improve until education administrators and KASB accept responsibility for improving student outcomes and listen to parents.
The good news here is that more superintendents and school board members are courageously looking inward and changing how they operate. Leaders don’t worry about who or what is to blame; they identify barriers holding students back and reallocate resources to improve student outcomes.
