In recent years, the role of the U.S. Department of Education has been subject to ongoing debate, with some voices calling for its elimination. This week, rumors spread that Trump named Representative Lauren Boebert from Colorado as his pick for leading the department. As an educational consultant deeply invested in supporting students, teachers, and school leaders across the country, I’d like to explore what such a change could mean for students and our schools.
What Does the Department of Education Do?
The Department was established in 1979, to ensure equal access to education and improve the quality of education nationwide. The department’s core responsibilities include:
Administering federal funding for K-12 schools, particularly through programs like Title I and IDEA, which serve economically disadvantaged students and those with disabilities.
Providing financial aid for higher education, including Pell Grants and federal student loans.
Enforcing civil rights in schools to prevent discrimination.
Supporting research, accountability, and standards that drive data-informed decision-making across the country.
The US Dept. of Education plays a central role in leveling the playing field for all students, regardless of their background or location, ensuring access to quality education.
The Impact of Dismantling the Department of Education
If the Dept. of Education were dismantled, the repercussions would be profound, potentially affecting millions of students, especially the most vulnerable.
Here are key areas of concern:
1. Loss of Funding for Disadvantaged Students
Federal funding makes up a significant portion of the budget in low-income school districts. Title I funds, for example, support schools with high numbers of low-income students, providing resources that help bridge achievement gaps. Without the US Dept. of Education, these funds could disappear, forcing states to either absorb the costs (likely unrealistic for many) or cut vital services, such as after-school programs, tutoring, and additional support staff. This could widen educational disparities and limit upward mobility for students from lower-income families.
2. Threats to Civil Rights Protections
The Dept of Ed’s Office for Civil Rights enforces essential anti-discrimination laws, ensuring that students are not denied access to education based on race, disability, gender, or other protected characteristics. Civil rights enforcement in education could weaken- marginalized students could face greater barriers, unchecked discrimination, and fewer resources.
3. Higher Education Access and Affordability
Federal financial aid, administered through the Dept of Ed, makes higher education affordable for millions of students. If this role shifted away from the Dept, the federal loan and grant system could collapse, leaving students reliant on private loans with higher interest rates and less favorable terms. This could mean fewer students can afford college, leading to a significant talent drain and limiting social and economic mobility.
4. Loss of Research, Standards, and Accountability
The Dept of Ed provides states and schools with research-backed resources and accountability standards, encouraging evidence-based practices. Without the Dept., educational quality across states would become inconsistent. States with fewer resources might struggle to maintain high standards, and educational inequalities across state lines would likely deepen, with students’ educational quality becoming even more dependent on their zip code.
5. A Patchwork of Educational Policies
One of the greatest risks in dismantling the Dept of Ed is the lack of national coordination. Education policies would likely become highly fragmented, creating a “patchwork” effect where standards vary significantly by state. Students moving between states, or simply living in states with fewer resources, could see their educational opportunities diminished.
What Would Happen with Lauren Boebert (or someone like her) at the Helm?
At this point, it seems this is a rumor, but what would happen if Representative Lauren Boebert (or someone similar) would be chosen to head up the US Dept. of Education? Her stance includes an emphasis on parental rights, reduced federal involvement, and an increased role for local governments. If Boebert were given a leading role in dismantling or significantly reducing the Dept’s influence, here’s what might happen:
1. Increased Emphasis on Parental Choice and Local Control
Boebert advocates for school choice and local decision-making. While parental choice is valuable, it often comes with consequences for public schools, which are left with fewer resources as funds shift to private or charter options. A weakened public education system could mean reduced access for families unable to afford or access private schools, particularly in rural or under-resourced areas.
2. Reduced Federal Oversight on Curriculum Standards
Boebert’s approach would likely allow states to set independent curriculum standards, potentially leading to politically driven education choices. Topics like climate change, history, and science could be taught differently—or not at all—in certain states. This decentralization could impact students' readiness for college or careers, especially in fields requiring rigorous STEM knowledge and a global understanding of history and society.
3. Potential Decrease in Support for Special Education and English Learners
Federal programs that support English language learners and students with disabilities could shrink or disappear under a Boebert-led department focused on minimizing federal influence. These students, who already face academic challenges, would have reduced access to the resources they need, possibly widening achievement gaps.
4. Shifts in Educational Priorities
A Boebert-led education policy would likely emphasize traditional values and local governance. The risk is that this approach could prioritize ideological education over inclusive and evidence-based teaching practices, potentially alienating or underserving groups of students who don’t align with the dominant local culture or political orientation.
The Broader Implications for Education
Dismantling the Dept of Ed and placing a figure like Lauren Boebert in charge of educational policy could have far-reaching implications. While some argue that more local control benefits schools, the absence of federal support could result in a fragmented, inequitable education system. Schools in low-income areas would likely suffer, creating a cycle where only those who can afford better education or live in well-funded districts can thrive. Education should be a great equalizer, but without federal oversight, we risk a system that reinforces, rather than erodes, societal inequalities.
Final Thoughts
An educated society is a prosperous society. The U.S. Department of Education, while not perfect, is a central pillar in promoting equity, protecting civil rights, and providing opportunities for millions of students. Dismantling it and moving toward a decentralized, ideologically driven education model would have severe consequences for students across the country, especially those in vulnerable communities. Education is too important to become a casualty of partisan politics; we must work to strengthen, rather than weaken, our commitment to providing every child with a quality education. If you have opinions on who should be selected as the next leader of the US Dept. of Education, it's time to contact your Senator now.
Our future depends on it.
Comments