Photo:
iStock
In a mounting effort to gut the United States’ public education system, the freshly inaugurated administration has pushed forward with plans to dissolve the U.S. Department of Education, raising concerns among educators, policymakers and families about the long-term implications for the nation’s millions of students and teachers.
Divided reactions
Critics are sounding alarm bells, pointing to the risks of centralizing power in state governments and the potential harm to low-income communities and marginalized students who depend on accessible education.
School voucher programs primarily benefit families with children who are not enrolled in public schools.
However, proponents of the move are arguing that eliminating the Department of Education will allow states more autonomy in deciding how education funds are allocated and spent, aligning with the administration’s broader goal of slashing federal government spending on public programs.
Passing the buck to states
Many Seattle education leaders are deeply concerned about the potential shuttering of the department that has been overseeing the nation’s education system since 1980, arguing that such a move would strip essential protections from students while redirecting public funds to private interests.
Noting the essential role the department holds, James “Fresh Professor” Miles, Chief Strategy Officer of Path with Art and assistant professor at Seattle University, emphasizes that “the Department of Education is in charge of funding for public schools, administering student loans, enforcing civil rights laws and running programs to help students from low-income communities and students with disabilities.”
“The reality is that many states have different priorities, and this move could widen the disparities that already exist.” — Seattle Central professor Dr. Daudi Abe
He says that all the uproar over an urgent need to end this department is a fabricated crisis. “When I see the White House seeking to eliminate the Department of Education, I see people creating a solution to a problem that doesn’t exist,” he says.
Miles further posits that “the main goal [of closing the Department of Education] is to use public funds to support private institutions, eliminate protections for students from low-income and disabled communities, end financial supports for students in higher education, and sow further distrust between people and government.”
Voucher program problems
At the heart of the administration’s threat to close the Department of Education is a push for a voucher program intended to give families more choice in school enrollment. Miles is skeptical about how that policy plays out in practice.
While the current president has claimed that school choice is “the civil rights issue of our time” since his first term, Miles points to the American Federation of Teachers’ warning that expanded voucher programs primarily benefit families with children who are not enrolled in public schools, and do not significantly expand access to high-performing schools for children furthest from educational justice.
In addition to the immediate consequences for students, Miles is troubled by the broader implications of abolishing the Department of Education. Drawing a historical parallel to “urban renewal” programs that displaced Black and working-class communities in the 1950s, ‘60s and early ‘70s in the U.S., Miles points out that nonprofits were called to support those decimated communities in place of the federal government providing support or solutions to reconcile the destruction. Begging the question: If destroying the Department of Education destroys our public schools, who will put the pieces back together? Whose futures will be sacrificed while state-by-state, parents, teachers, students and community members try to figure out what to do without federal support?
“Trump and his administration would rather not address the actual issues at hand,” Miles says. “But [instead] pass the buck and have someone else do the work.” The push to eliminate the Department of Education, he suggests, is less about improving schools and more about shifting responsibility away from the federal government, weakening public education in the process.
Merit pay perils
Dr. Daudi Abe, a professor at Seattle Central College and former K–12 teacher, shared his thoughts on the administration’s push to eliminate the Department of Education, noting that the appeal of the proposal would likely not hold up under scrutiny.
“On its surface, the idea of putting money and funding decisions in the hands of the states doesn’t seem like such a bad idea,” says Abe, sharing Miles’ sentiments about possible initial reactions to the proposal. “But the reality is that many states have different priorities, and this move could widen the disparities that already exist.”
As part of the threat to end the Department of Education, the President has also recently proposed paying teachers based on “merit,” a suggestion that Abe finds problematic.
“The idea of paying teachers on merit sounds appealing, but how exactly would merit be measured? It would likely be through standardized testing, which assumes a one-size-fits-all approach to education,” he explains. “That’s not just unrealistic — it undermines a culturally responsive approach to teaching, which is essential for meeting the needs of all students, especially in diverse classrooms.”
“The main goal is to use public funds to support private institutions, eliminate protections for students from low-income and disabled communities, end financial supports for students in higher education, and sow further distrust between people and government.” — Seattle University assistant professor James Miles
Abe’s concerns echo education scholars’ long-standing warnings that linking teacher pay to student test scores exacerbates existing inequities, particularly for students of color and those from low-income backgrounds. One study from the University of Illinois Urbana-Champagne also found that such policies can discourage teacher collaboration due to the climate of competition that grows in schools that focus on test score results.
Could the Department of Education really close?
The likelihood of abolishing the Department of Education remains low for now. Shuttering a federal agency requires congressional approval and bipartisan opposition is almost certain. As recently as 2023, 60 Republicans joined Democrats in opposing the closing of the Department of Education in a House vote.
Without a clear replacement plan, dismantling the Department of Education would create legal and financial chaos for the nation, which isn’t to say that this administration won’t move forward. For now though, while the debate over the federal role in education will undoubtedly continue with gusto, the prospect of completely dissolving the Department of Education remains more of a threat (and perhaps an intentionally chaotic distraction), than an imminent reality.
