February 2026 Research Rundown
By Madie Spartz
For this month’s Research Rundown—our curated list of recent, relevant research we think is worth adding to the education equity conversation—we highlight articles on:
- Seclusion in Minnesota schools
- A primer on math education
- College admission patterns after the SFFA v. Harvard Supreme Court decision
Children in Confinement: Seclusion in Schools
Minnesota Disability Law Center, February 2026
This report outlines the findings of Minnesota Disability Law Center’s (MDLC) assessment of the state of seclusion rooms in Minnesota. Seclusion is “the involuntary confinement of a child with disabilities alone in any room or area of a public school building.” While it’s currently banned for Minnesota’s youngest learners, seclusion is permitted in state law for students in 4th grade and older. As the federally designated protection and advocacy agency for people with disabilities in Minnesota, MDLC undertakes monitoring of facilities that serve people with disabilities, including schools. This report is the result of that monitoring process, where MDLC visited 80 registered seclusion rooms in 26 schools across the state.
They found that no accurate list of registered seclusion rooms is available to the public, and many seclusion rooms are inaccurately registered, which runs afoul of state law. Furthermore, while most seclusion rooms they visited complied with state requirements, many did not, including lack of ventilation and proper heating, or containing items that students could use to injure themselves. The most common seclusion room type has concrete floors and cinder block walls. Finally, they found that seclusion rooms are not universally used or evenly distributed: 40% of the state’s registered seclusion rooms exist in just 4 districts. The authors determined that use of seclusion is highly dependent on school culture—among schools that serve students with the same type of disabilities, some do not use seclusion at all, while others have a “seclusion room for every third child in the building.”
Why This Matters in Minnesota
Seclusion has been a highly debated topic in Minnesota for years. In 2023, the Minnesota Department of Education (MDE), following the U.S. Department of Justice, recommended eliminating seclusion for all children on the grounds that it “discriminates against students on the basis of disability”. In the same year, the Minnesota legislature banned its use for children 3rd grade and younger. There have been repeated efforts to repeal this ban, however, and in 2025 the legislature created a Seclusion Working Group to study the issue. The working group released a report in January with some consensus recommendations and other contested issues that are expected to face further debate at the Capitol..
Solving for X: A Primer on Research, Practices, and Policies That Shape Math Education
Bellwether, February 2026
This report offers an overview of the state of math achievement in the U.S., what research tells us about math instruction and learning, and the role education policy has played in the state of math today. According to the report, early math achievement (kindergarten-5th grade) is one of the strongest predictors of academic success, and students who excel in math are far more likely to earn a Bachelor’s degree and achieve economic stability in adulthood. However, research on math lags far behind that of literacy, and nationwide math achievement has stagnated since 2013 and is riddled with inequities. Nationwide, there is increasing demand for math education reform and an elevation of math to the emphasis we’ve seen in recent years on the science of reading.
In addition to a comprehensive view of math instruction and important considerations for effective mathematical skill-building, the report offers three states to watch for innovations in math policy and education: Maryland, Ohio, and Alabama. Each state has recently passed legislation aimed at overhauling math education and improving achievement, with some combination of the following best practices: considering math as a cradle-to-career process, investments in high-quality instructional materials and robust teacher training, and continuing to learn from research and models from other states on how students most effectively learn math skills.
Why This Matters in Minnesota
Minnesota is one of many states that have made intentional efforts to improve literacy policy and investment, punctuated by 2023’s Read Act. While strong literacy rates are critical for student success, math deserves focus as well. In fact, math proficiency rates are lower than reading proficiency for every demographic group in the state. Policymakers in Minnesota should address this issue with the same commitment and investment they dedicated to the Read Act, with an emphasis on high-quality research and best practices on math instruction and ample investments to ensure school districts can implement them effectively.
College Admission Patterns After SFFA v. Harvard
Annenberg Institute at Brown University, January 2026
This study analyzes the effects of college enrollment patterns among students of color after the historic 2023 Supreme Court ruling in Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard, which effectively banned race-conscious college admissions nationwide. Using student-level data for 12 million students, the authors compared college enrollment patterns in the years leading to and following the SFFA v. Harvard decision. They looked at race & ethnicity, socioeconomic status, and test scores to ensure a robust analysis of any demographic changes. They found that “high-achieving underrepresented minority students” were 14% less likely to enroll in highly selective colleges in the first year following the decision. (The authors define “highly selective” as colleges with acceptance rates lower than 25%.) This coincided with a “cascade” effect for the same cohort of students who were instead more likely to enroll in less selective colleges with “lower graduation rates and earnings outcomes.”
Nationwide, this translated to an 18% decrease in first-year underrepresented minority student enrollment in highly-selective colleges, despite the fact that those same colleges saw a 6% increase in enrollment of students from low-income neighborhoods. The difference between those two numbers suggests that while colleges may have placed a larger emphasis on socioeconomic status in their admissions decisions, this hasn’t translated to a uniform benefit for students of color to make up for the loss of consideration based on race. Finally, it’s important to note that these results suggest the ban on race-based affirmative action impacted where students enrolled in college, not whether they attended college at all, as college enrollment rates held steady over the study period.
What This Means in Minnesota
Though the methods in this study cannot definitively conclude that the SFFA decision is what caused such shifts in college enrollment, their analysis provides compelling evidence that the two are linked. While some may assume that these changes only impact Ivy League or “Ivy Plus” colleges, this study shows that changes in enrollment patterns impacts institutions of all types as students “reshuffle” where they enroll—meaning Minnesota students are just as impacted. While Minnesota lawmakers have invested in programs like North Star Promise and Direct Admissions to expand access to college and close college attainment gaps by race, our state still has a long way to go. The results of this study underscore the importance of continuing to emphasize race equity in college and career access efforts at the state level.