31-03-2025
Gutting the Education Department abandons America's past, present, future
The executive order to dismantle the Education Department is a severe blow to U.S. democracy and international competitiveness. High-quality public education is crucial for a functioning democracy because it cultivates informed citizens and critical thinking. Plus, the United States' global education ranking would surely decline without high academic standards and guarantees of equal access. Raising academic standards for all students and holding schools accountable by measuring their achievement are central to promoting excellence in our nation's schools.
Having worked in the Education Department for more than 35 years as a program officer, I know first-hand the breakthrough achievements of the agency and its staff. One example is how every school district receiving federal funds must have a publicly available school report card so people can identify areas of weaknesses and develop school improvement plans.
A quick look at the department's latest national report card shows that U.S. fourth- and eighth-graders are not making enough progress to regain ground lost during the pandemic — especially in reading. In 2024, the percentage of eighth-graders achieving their grade's basic-level reading skills was the lowest since 1992, when the assessment was started. The percentage of fourth-graders achieving their basic reading level was its lowest in 20 years.
Facilitating high-quality teaching has always been a priority for the Education Department. This includes education research, which is readily available through the department's What Works Clearinghouse. The department has also become a valuable information resource for prospective college students who want to find high-quality universities, teachers and administrators who seek guidance on best practices, and technical assistance for low-performing schools.
The Education Department also provides grant funding for leading-edge programs, including Mental Health Service Professional Demonstration grants, the Full Service Community Schools Program and the Teacher Quality Partnership Program. Title I provides much-needed resources to school districts and eligible private schools with high percentages of children from low-income families. The Office of Student Financial Assistance awards more than $120 billion a year in grants, work-study funds and low-interest loans.
Many countries with high-quality schools have strong national ministries of education. For example, China's national curriculum requires students to start learning English as early as kindergarten. In Greece, public education from preschool to university level is a constitutional right. Countries such as Germany, Norway, Austria, Finland, Iceland, Poland and Argentina provide college education for their citizens tuition-free.
To ensure America's success, we need a national agency to maintain high expectations for public education working in partnership with private schools.
Mary E. Moran, Litchfield, Illinois
Dismantling the Education Department would not significantly reduce government inefficiency — but it would effectively abandon millions of students. If we hand full control of education to the states without federal safeguards, we risk turning it into a privilege instead of a right. And for people like me, as well as the young students I teach, that's not an abstract policy discussion. It is survival.
At 4 years old, I was diagnosed with autism. I could not read, write or speak, even to say my own name. My family fought an exhausting legal battle to secure my right to an education. They sacrificed their financial stability and peace of mind, even to the point of living in a house where rain leaked through the roof, just to ensure I had access to the basic education that every child deserves. Without the Individuals With Disabilities Education Act, which is enforced by the Education Department, I wouldn't be able to share my story, much less teach others.
As an English as a Second Language (ESL) teacher, I see that same fight play out every day. Millions of English learners rely on programs that depend on the Office of English Language Acquisition. Without it, states could slash ESL funding, leaving immigrant and bilingual students without the resources they need to integrate, learn and thrive.
The federal government exists to ensure states don't leave vulnerable students behind. Without its funding and enforcement, special education services, ESL programs, equitable funding and even basic accountability could become optional.
The argument for dismantling the Education Department often relies on the idea that states know how to best educate their own students. If that were true, why would we continue to see significant educational disparities — across scores, quality and access — across state lines? The question is not whether states can do better, but whether they will.
If states alone could fix education, we wouldn't see students with disabilities denied services. We would not see English learners left without support. And we certainly wouldn't see an education system where Zip codes determine opportunity.
Education is not a game. It's a civil right. And without federal oversight, we risk taking a giant step backward, leaving millions of students without the protections they need to succeed.
Brendan Tighe, Atlanta
Not much has amused me in the news lately, but as a veteran educator, I laughed out loud when I read remarks by Republicans including Sen. Bill Cassidy of Louisiana, House Speaker Mike Johnson of Louisiana and Arkansas Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders supporting President Donald Trump's efforts to get rid of the Education Department. Louisiana and Arkansas are both near the bottom of almost any state-by-state education ranking. I would take any opinions about how to improve education from people in charge of those states with a grain of salt — or maybe a whole teaspoon.
What's not funny is the trepidation I hear from my former special education colleagues and parents of public school students, wondering how these misguided ideasare going to affect the future of public education, which is a cornerstone of our nation's past achievements and future success.
Theresa Early, Colorado Springs
As an educator, I read about President Donald Trump's executive order to close the Education Department with great alarm. Although the department seems to have lost some of its primary focus over the years, it should be improved and reformed, not abolished.
Without national education standards, poor states will fall further behind those with the money to pay for better educational institutions and teachers. Also, disadvantaged students nationwide will not be able to receive adequate public education and will probably face greater challenges in preparation for our highly specialized, competitive, information-laden and technical world. This will only perpetuate the growing economic and educational divide in the United States.
In the prescient words often attributed to former Harvard University president Derek Bok: 'If you think education is expensive, try ignorance.' I shudder thinking about our nation's future.
Michael Pravica, Henderson, Nevada
I earned a PhD supported by government grants. My politics were formed by protesting the Vietnam War and have remained left of center as I have aged. Logically, I should have a knee-jerk reaction against President Donald Trump's assault on the Education Department.
However, I find myself struggling to rise to the defense of an institution and policies that, over the past two generations, have produced an electorate that resulted in Trump's presidency — twice. Trump's election might be the only reason to rethink American education.
James Morentz, Bethesda
As President Donald Trump does his best to eliminate the statutorily constituted Education Department and, in Education Secretary Linda McMahon's words, 'free future generations of American students and forge opportunities for their success … [by] sending education back to the states where it so rightly belongs,' it might be useful to remember just how involved our national government has been in public education for the past 240 years.
Thomas Jefferson led the committee behind the Land Ordinance Act of 1785, which provided the basis for organizing the territories north of the Ohio River and east of the Mississippi. This law provided the first mechanism for funding public education using national financial resources. The ordinance provided that when the territories were organized and given self-governing rights, the 16th section in every six-mile square township was to be used to support public education. Here was our national government, two years before our Constitution was drafted, telling soon-to-be-states how to support public education.
In the early 19th century, some educators and lawmakers began advocating for greater federal involvement in U.S. education, promoting the idea of a national, standardized 'common school' system to aid the nascent public schools that were so haphazardly established and funded across the country. After the end of the Civil War, during Reconstruction, the federal government became more involved by creating a non-Cabinet-level Education Department. Defending the measure, Illinois Board of Education President Samuel W. Moulton, a Democrat, offered an analogy: Just as the Agriculture Department, which had begun operations in 1862, showed farmers how to increase their crop yields through better practices, so could the Education Department demonstrate to the states the best ways to educate their students.
Different administrations have housed federal oversight of education in different departments, including the Interior Department In 1980, it became an independent department once more.
The Education Department has never done everything perfectly. However, it's important to remember that our country has a long and honorable history of national involvement in and support of public education at the local level — a history that was originated and embraced by the very individuals we know today as the country's Founders.
James Currie, Alexandria
