Republicans have been calling for the demise of the U.S. Department of Education since its creation in 1979 by President Jimmy Carter and Congress, insisting it’s a prime example of federal overreach since the U.S. Constitution doesn’t mention a role for Washington in education.
The department is still hanging on almost 50 years later.
But now President Donald Trump seems anxious to deliver on a campaign promise to knock out the department and send schooling “back to the states,” a plot that has many New Yorkers wondering what the impact could be on students, families and their local schools.
USA TODAY and other news outlets have reported that Trump is preparing an executive order that would lead to the department’s closure. Trump said Tuesday he wants Linda McMahon, his nominee for secretary of education, to “put herself out of a job.”
Trump has already produced executive orders on other education-related priorities, like curtailing DEI plans in schools, restricting K-12 schools from acknowledging students’ transgender and nonbinary identities, and promoting school choice.
In New York, the state Education Department said it is reviewing those executive orders and that the executive branch of the federal government lacks authority to “disregard acts of Congress.”
Of interest:How will Trump’s orders on K-12 education, gender and DEI square with NY’s policy?
Will the U.S. Education Department get pinned?
Right now, it’s far from clear that McMahon, a former pro wrestling magnate, can put a sleeper hold on the 4,000-employee Education Department.
For one thing, it would require an act of Congress to dissolve the Education Department. Plans would have to be made to disperse the department’s responsibilities and budget to other federal departments, as much spending is required by federal law.
New York State Education Commissioner Betty Rosa understands there may be some “panic” about a possible loss of federal funds for students from low-income families and students with disabilities. But she’s skeptical that members of Congress will want to mess around with programs their constituent families depend upon.
“Our legislators in Washington have to think about how do they go home and face their own communities, if in fact, all of a sudden, these decisions are made and impact their communities,” Rosa told The Journal News/lohud recently. “It is a tough conversation to have, when you go home at the local level, so we are hopeful that common sense and cooler heads prevail.”
What does the U.S. Department of Education do?
The federal Education Department has a small but pointed role in the nation’s schools.
Federal funding contributes about 14% of public school budgets across the country. It is estimated that $800-900 billion is spent annually on K-12 education in the U.S.
The department supplements state funding and provides oversight in a few key areas, including the education of needy students and students with disabilities. Under Title I, a portion of federal education law, the feds dole out aid to schools with high percentages of students from low-income families, including over $1 billion a year to New York schools.
The DOE also also outlines and enforces educational rights for students with disabilities, seeks to protect students’ civil rights, collects enormous amounts of data on education, and oversees federal students loans for college students, among other things.
‘We know our ZIP codes are linked … to student achievement’
Christine Clayton, a professor of education at Pace University, said that while the abolishment of the U.S. Education Department would not change federal laws or necessarily affect federal funding for schools, it would bring into question the national mission for public education.
Would federal requirements be enforced, for instance, for the education of students with disabilities?
“Federal laws try to put in place more equality and equity in education, particularly for low-income students in urban and rural areas,” she said. “Would these changes make things more equal or less equal. That is the question we should be thinking about.”
The federal government has long tried to track and promote student achievement by using standardized test scores and other measurements, making states accountable for improving their results. This focus has often been controversial, with conservatives opposing Washington’s over-involvement in education and liberals weary of an over-reliance on test scores.
Despite the skepticism, a federal retreat could have unforeseen consequences, Clayton said.
“We know our ZIP codes are linked very much to student achievement,” she said. “Some may romanticize the idea of returning education to the states. But are we going to give up on a federal commitment to holding us accountable to a larger vision of what we aspire to for our nation’s children?”
In Westchester:Activists call on Chuck Schumer to show more muscle in critique of Trump, Musk
Professor: Goal is to drive federal money to private schools
Ken Mitchell, associate professor of educational leadership at Manhattanville University in Purchase, said the Trump administration will likely seek to manipulate rules and funding so that more public money will go to private schools, including religious schools.
Trump’s executive order promoting school choice, “Expanding Educational Freedom and Opportunity for Families,” bears this out.
“They may not cut Title funds, but they can reshape it, rename it, recategorize certain things,” he said. “It’s symbolic and strategic. We spend a lot of money on K-12 education in this country, and there are profits to be made.
“Linda McMahon is as qualified to oversee education as I am to run the World Wrestling Federation, but she is a businesswoman,” he said. “There is a business opportunity here to privatize education.”
Mitchell said the Trump administration can also dangle grants to incentivize states to change their educational programs. The Obama administration did this with Race to the Top grants, he said.
“They could use it as policy tool, like ‘We want you to use the 1776 curriculum to get certain block grants,'” Mitchell said, referring to the President’s Advisory 1776 Commission, created during the first Trump presidential term, to promote “patriotic education.”
States might also restructure their accountability systems for districts and schools to get federal money, he said.
“We could see less federal oversight and less protections for students,” Mitchell said. “The Department of Education is basically about protecting equal rights. That could change.”