A wave of frequent immigration arrests across the United States is having a silent but profound impact on the nation's classrooms, potentially worsening academic performance and deepening existing social inequalities. A new working paper from the influential National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER) provides compelling evidence that the intensification of immigration enforcement, particularly following the start of Donald Trump's presidency, has produced measurable negative effects on student learning. These effects are notably present even among United States-born citizens who come from Spanish-speaking households.
The Direct Link Between Policy and Test Scores
The groundbreaking study, conducted by economists David Figlio and Umut Özek, analysed a vast set of anonymised data from a major school district in Florida. By meticulously linking local records of immigration arrests with student-standardised test results, the researchers could track how a rise in enforcement actions influenced academic achievement over a period of time.
The findings were clear: the analysis recorded modest yet distinct declines in spring test scores following increases in immigration arrests. While it was anticipated that foreign-born students would be affected, the research revealed that the decline extended significantly to United States citizen students living in Spanish-speaking households. This impact was especially sharp in high-poverty schools and among students who were already academically vulnerable. The researchers conclude that the psychological and social fallout from enforcement actions reaches far beyond the intended targets, creating an atmosphere of scrutiny and uncertainty that affects entire communities.
Quantifying the Educational Setback
The structure of Florida's education system, where students take state tests three times each academic year, allowed for precise tracking of performance before and after enforcement was escalated. According to the NBER paper, each percentage point increase in immigration enforcement intensity correlated with a test score decline roughly equivalent to 10 to 15 points on the SAT scale.
This decline represents approximately 10 per cent of the average test score gap observed between English-speaking and Spanish-speaking students in the district. A worrying pattern emerged from the data: higher-achieving Spanish-speaking students largely maintained their results, while their lower-performing peers suffered sharper declines. This indicates that the burden of enforcement falls most heavily on those students who are already struggling academically.
Broader Consequences and a Pattern of Fear
These findings resonate with a larger body of research that highlights the unintended collateral damage of immigration policy. Previous studies have connected increased enforcement to higher levels of anxiety and increased school dropout rates. This new analysis from Florida builds on that understanding, clearly demonstrating the tangible educational costs of what experts describe as one of the most intensive periods of interior immigration enforcement in recent US history.
Interestingly, the Florida study also noted a reduction in disciplinary incidents among Latino and Spanish-speaking students. It is unclear if this reflects students consciously trying to avoid drawing attention to themselves or if educators were responding with more leniency due to an awareness of the heightened stress within families. Attendance rates in this particular district, however, showed little change.
Other recent studies reinforce this pattern. In California's Central Valley, Stanford University professor Thomas Dee observed a dramatic 22% surge in daily student absences in the two months following a major immigration raid, a sharp break from historical attendance trends. The increase was most pronounced among younger children, as parents reportedly feared being separated from them.
Similarly, research by Kirsten Slungaard Mumma at Columbia University's Teachers College found that absences rose among English learners in both Connecticut and Rhode Island. This suggests that the negative effects of enforcement are neither confined to one location nor temporary in nature.
As federal agents have conducted raids in apartment complexes and near schools and childcare centres—locations once considered off-limits—fear and uncertainty have become ingrained in the school experience. Families report staying indoors more, while children speak of trouble concentrating, sleeplessness, and disengaging from their classes.
Figlio and Özek stress that their study does not dictate immigration policy. Instead, it underscores the urgent need for schools to recognise and actively address the collateral effects of enforcement on learning. They argue that school districts with high proportions of immigrant and Spanish-speaking students may require additional resources and psychological support, not just for those directly touched by enforcement, but for entire school communities. Education, they suggest, cannot be separated from the wider political climate; when enforcement intensifies, its repercussions are felt in households, school hallways, and ultimately, in test scores.
