This thesis project explores the extent to which elected education officials, specifically school board members, with a background in education make policy decisions differently than those who do not have a background in education. This line of questioning began with a project completed in a class I took in the fall semester of 2023 - Innovations in School Democracy, where students chose a critical issue in the education sphere and situated it within the context of civic education. The critical issue I addressed at the time was the significant number of individuals in “high-ranking” positions in the education field who do not appear to have a background in anything education-related, outside of their own schooling. The issue lies with the fact that these individuals are making large scale policy decisions that impact all students, teachers, parents, and school faculty members within their district without having any research or practice-based educational foundation or experience to draw upon for their decision making. For the purpose of this thesis, I expanded this phenomenon beyond the realm of civic education by performing a comparative analysis of elected education official decision-making between school boards that have members with educational backgrounds and those who don’t, in addition to analyzing the stances and policies of the Superintendent of Public Instruction. The goal of this analysis is to see how, or if, decisions differ and to what extent those decisions appear to be driven by current political ideologies versus educational research and best practices. I hypothesize that elected education officials who have a background in education will make decisions that are more student- and educator-focused and have fewer indicators of a specific partisan political ideology. Conversely, I hypothesize the opposite for decision-making by officials without an education background, where I expect to find more evidence of influential partisan political ideology. In order to determine if a decision-making gap exists, I examined school board websites and pulled district-related news articles in order to cross-analyze the verbiage on specific political buzzwords or phrases that could be clearly linked to a political party’s ideology or stance on public schooling matters and policies. I performed a similar search through the campaign platform and current Arizona Education System biographical page for Superintendent Tom Horne. To begin this investigation, thirty school districts in the state of Arizona were selected for preliminary research - ten small districts, ten medium-size districts, and ten large districts. Through the use of school district websites and the biographies of school board members, I determined which school boards had individuals with a background in education and which did not. From there, two school boards from each district size category were selected for examination - one board categorized as having a strong educational background presence and one board that either had very minimal presence, or none at all. From this research, I intended to present preliminary findings about the extent to which differences in policy-making decisions relate to school board member education background and experience, as well as the degree to which explicit partisan politicization appears to influence such decisions. Upon completion of this limited research, my findings ended up deriving more directly from the mission and vision statements of school districts and school boards, though policy decisions were still loosely analyzed through district media articles. However, my research on Superintendent Horne lent itself well to answer all three of my proposed research questions.