<b>WHO DECIDES WHAT WE TEACH? </b><b>A QUALITATIVE STUDY ON THE POLITICIZATION OF AMERICAN HISTORY</b>

<p dir="ltr">This hermeneutic phenomenological study examines how public school leaders navigate the challenges of curriculum decision-making amid escalating political and social pressures. In the context of legislation and activism aimed at restricting classroom discourse on race, gender, and American history, the research explores how K–12 administrators experience and respond to external demands while upholding their educational values and responsibilities.</p><p dir="ltr">Drawing from detailed interviews with five school and district leaders in a politically charged Midwestern state, the study reveals key themes that define leadership under restrictions. These themes encompass curriculum alignment with state standards, teacher autonomy, curriculum content aimed at redefining the use of supplemental materials, inclusive framing to resist political pressure, and proactive community engagement. Participants voiced increased fear, both for their staff and themselves, concerning potential backlash from parents, politicians, and community members. In response, leaders highlighted the strategic significance of transparent communication and building trust with stakeholders. While some districts emphasized strict compliance with state standards as a method of curricular protection, others explored alternative routes, such as carefully selected instructional materials.</p><p dir="ltr">The findings highlight the balance that educational leaders must maintain: supporting teacher professionalism and inclusive education while mitigating external scrutiny. The implications of this study suggest the need for ongoing professional development in policy navigation for education leaders, clearer legislative guidelines, and stronger systemic supports to safeguard instructional integrity and ensure equitable access to curriculum.</p>