Editor’s note: On Thursday, March 20, 2025, President Donald Trump signed an executive order to direct Education Secretary Linda McMahon to begin dismantling the Department of Education. The intent of his order is to shift control of education to U.S. states, which already largely enjoy autonomy over standards and curriculum. Trump’s action followed mass layoffs at the department. While a complete shutdown of the Department of Education may require an act of Congress, the executive order could shift funding for Pell Grants, low-income schools, special education and other federally-funded education initiatives to other governmental departments.
What will U.S. public education look like in Akron and beyond under President Donald Trump?
Before winning the presidency, Trump said he would close the Department of Education, a federal agency that has supervised policies, provided funding and stressed civil rights and equal access to education since it began operation under President Jimmy Carter.
And now — one month into office — the nation braces for Trump’s latest shakeup. He’s stated his desire to eliminate the Department of Education stems from concerns over the quality of government-run schools and “radical transgenderism” and alleged progressivism pushed in public education. The impact of its potential elimination remains to be seen, from federal financial aid for college students, book bans and rules on using gender-affirming bathrooms.
Educators and other leaders across Akron spoke to Signal Akron about the latest threat to the U.S. Department of Education.
Why is the U.S. Department of Education at risk of being abolished by Trump?
Throughout the campaign trail, Trump has said his administration will emphasize school choice — meaning federal funds will follow students who attend the public, private or charter schools of their choosing. Linda McMahon, the former head of Trump’s Small Business Administration who spent much of her career building WWE, the professional wrestling company, has been nominated to lead these efforts as education secretary. McMahon previously served one year as an appointed member of the Connecticut State Board of Education and lost the general election twice as a Republican U.S. Senate candidate in Connecticut.
Bruce Alexander, Akron Public Schools’ Board of Education member: I think you should always have a national standard, organization or governing body to give some guidelines as far as nationally and then also to allow the states to have their input as to what they feel would be the best. If you abolish it, I think we lose all continuity in every state; every city will be all over the place.
Rebecca Callahan, executive director of Community AIDS Network Akron Pride Initiative: I think the politicians not only in Ohio but elsewhere are saying this is just a signal that, as Americans, we’re rejecting these policies about trans and LGBTQ people. That’s not the case. I don’t think it’s the majority of people, and even if it were, as educators, as government officials, isn’t part of what they’re supposed to do is help and care for their constituents and their students? The state of Ohio does not have, hardly as a state, any record of protecting communities that are underserved, like LGBTQ, people of color, and so the state will just have free reign.
Lathardus Goggins II, education chair for Akron NAACP: There has been a history of angst with the federal government, in particular the Department of Education as it pertains to enforcing federal laws around civil rights. Those who oppose the interpretation of civil rights that tends to be more inclusive, those who are insecure with their place within the social structure when their privilege and power is not protected or their power is not privileged by local norms, they tend to take issue with the federal government imposing constitutional perspective or the idea that American values should apply to all American citizens. When you have a view that certain people are privileged above and beyond others, you tend to have animosity towards those who would call that out.
Ellen McWilliams-Woods, former APS chief academic officer: Out of all of the federal departments that could be targeted, this one seems to have the greatest reaction from people across the country — positive and negative. When you say the Department of Labor or Commerce, or all of the different organizations that regulate healthcare, that’s difficult for people to connect to. But every American is somehow connected to education, and so everyone will have an opinion one way or the other when you talk about children and education. …It tends to be something that he brought up in his last four years of his presidency but wasn’t able to achieve because he didn’t have the support from Congress.
Renee Mudrey, assistant director of the educational psychology department at the University of Akron: I am not affiliated with any political party, and that’s important because when I talk about this, stories can be contrived to have voices of political agendas. I will say that I’m not surprised by this proposal by Trump’s administration. We have seen this before. This isn’t anything new. When you dig into the history of the department there, there are varying perspectives. The left and the right feel very differently about this particular office, and a lot of that circulates around the idea of the Constitution ensuring that the states have the rights and powers over their educational systems.
Kurt Russell, 2022 National Teacher of the Year and Oberlin High School history teacher: Under the new administration … I just don’t see that same intensity and that same value that is placed upon education. You can hear the rhetoric of this new administration in regards to the [critical race] theory — which is not true at all — [and] the banning of books. Those are the things where, as a teacher, I’m concerned with because it does not truly represent the heart of education. The heart of education is that every single student will see themselves in the curriculum, will see themselves and will have value in a sense of belonging.
What could change?
There is no direct mention of education in the Constitution, but the 10th Amendment, which basically states the powers not delegated to the United States by the document go to the states, follows Trump’s desire to turn education back to complete state control. Trump must also abide by the 14th Amendment, which states all children must have equal access to public education.
Mudrey: People are going to be very worried about this, and we don’t know all that’s coming from this. We have a woman now appointed to lead the Department of Education who has limited educational experience. Probably a big concern for people is, ‘Will she, in this position, be open to what she doesn’t know?’
Why was the DOE formed in 1980? What does it do? How could it be abolished?
Advocated by then-president Jimmy Carter and formally established by Congress in 1979, the Department of Education was created to set national standards for education and provide assistance through federal funds. Prior to its founding as an agency, the department operated on a smaller scale under agencies such as the Department of the Interior. The department was originally founded in 1867 by President Andrew Johnson to collect information about the country’s schools.
Since its formal inception, former Republican presidents such as Ronald Reagan have called for dismantling the department.
McWilliams-Woods: Before 1979 — when the U.S. Department of Education was created — there wasn’t a focus on education. There were pots of money kind of spread out through other departments, and that’s the risk. There’s no way that they can just stop doing what is in federal law for education; that would have to go to some other department.
It’s not even real to say that the U.S. Department [of Education] would be eliminated completely. As a department it would be eliminated, but all those functions would have to go someplace else and be tucked into some other department because they’re based on federal law. The problem is now there’s 50 priorities in another department. One of those might be education. The level of focus, the level of attention, the level of research, the level of working collaboratively with the states on dispersing the money, the ability to be compliant and to monitor compliance with the federal laws, all of that can get sacrificed.
Mudrey: It’s always been a figurehead in a way, just as the queen is to England. People who are not in the field of education can sometimes misunderstand that. If it does go away, the states are still present — the state governments — the State Departments of Education are still present. Historically, the Department of Ed has really been to ensure any federal funding that is provided to education, the safeguard of that money reaching the states, and also being a place for the executive or the president to be informed on educational needs and things like that at the state level. [Its role] really is to supplement the efforts of the state. What’s really important is that this Department of Education as we know it today is still really young.
What issues does this bring up?
Critics of the Trump administration warn of dangerous precedents on the horizon: the vilification of underrepresented and marginalized groups, an emboldening of ideals such as white supremacy and a deprivation of resources to public school systems.
Pat Shipe, president of the Akron Education Association: Our children are our future. What are we going to accept in this country without leaving marginalized people behind? What are we going to accept as far as how low we will lower the bar with the quality of educating our children in this country, in Ohio [and] in Akron Public Schools? The bottom line is, when you starve public education of resources, when you starve our children of resources, then you take away their futures.
Callahan: I think it’s a scary time for many people. We’re already, as a state, taking away protections of students and making safe environments in our schools and in our communities. You can’t tell me that denying someone access to a restroom or denying someone access to information, denying someone’s identity is supporting them and caring for them. There’s always a lot of misinformation out there.
Goggins: What are our true values? I take issue with notions like, ‘I don’t want education to indoctrinate our children.’ That is what education is. When education is done well, it is supposed to socialize members of a society to be active participants of that society. American education should prepare American citizens to be a part of American society, so that means a quality, good American education would come with the values that are a part of the constitution. The bigger conflict has been people whose identities and commitments are more to the imperfect practice of what America has done versus the high ideals we should be moving towards, like the practice of white supremacy versus the high ideal of equal protection under the law.
McWilliams-Woods: Without a U.S. Department of Education who’s waking up every single day thinking about children and youth in learning environments, all of those other grants to support students’ mental health, to support their safety, to support their extended learning in summer and after school, there’s a huge focus with the U.S. Department of Education right now on career training and workforce training. The Department of Labor is not going to have the same level of passion for youth career preparation and early workforce development as the U.S. Department of Education is doing right now, because the Department of Labor is so focused on adults. They’re not going to have that same focus. I think one of the early kinds of systemic issues is going to be all of that additional focus, guidance and grants that support innovation across the country will go by the wayside.
Russell: My colleagues are worried and they are afraid. Especially some of the younger educators, especially those educators who have received a deferment of their loans or a consolation of their loans, which has really helped them financially. With the possible ending of the Department of Education — and with the possible elimination of the cancellation of loans — it will cause a burden on some of our younger teachers who do not make a high salary; that they have to pay back loans and also pay for resources in their classroom. And also making sure their mortgage is paid. It’s a scary time for a lot of teachers, especially our younger teachers.
If the DOE is abolished, what does that mean? What would happen?
Abolishing the U.S. Department of Education would represent a shift in how education is viewed across the United States, especially when it comes to accountability for equitable education and federal funding for public school systems. Without federal oversight, systemic changes could take shape such as limited cultural education, an increased role of religion in schools and a weakened effort to promote social justice. The movement of money throughout education, however, could potentially speed up.
Callahan: It’s denying a lot of history. One of my high school history teachers said, ‘History is written by the victor,’ and I think [Trump] literally wants to rewrite history books. We’re talking about young folk who are going to be impacted by this, and how could this shape our higher education and what we’re able to learn? Education helps you consider other perspectives and introduce you to things that maybe, within the environment you grew up in, you didn’t have an opportunity to learn about or even see. If that’s removed, that will collectively hurt not only our culture, but how we as individuals approach problems and issues and our neighbors.
Goggins: Even with the Supreme Court interpretation of not using race as a part of the initial process, it exposes where commitment to diversity was more a marketing ploy than it was an institutional value. There’s no law that says you can’t have race-based or race consideration in terms of scholarships. Schools have chosen not to stay committed as a pre-compliance, even though there’s no direct mandate for compliance. When you get to institutions that are not at their core committed to social justice, committed to equity and creating an equitable environment — they see it more as a marketing ploy -– they’re going to be the people who are going to be first to walk away from those commitments. It may not ever get to a point where the federal government has dismantled [these values], but because of the atmosphere, because of the direction, because of setting the tone, institutions will be less willing to make those commitments, and that would have a greater effect.
Mudrey: The removal of the federal figurehead … if we remove that extra step, local communities may actually increase in self governance and be able to receive … money more quickly, distribute that money more quickly. It could be positive that way, as long as there are systems in place, checks and balances, at the state and local levels, which would ensure that needs of those communities would continue to be met.
Russell: The first thing that we need to understand is the great work of the Department of Education, [and] the work to making sure that all of our students receive a quality and fair and equitable education. We are looking at students — not only those students who sit in public schools — but all schools, especially our disabled students. The Department of Education oversees and makes sure that school districts across the country [are] doing what [they are] supposed to do, and that is to teach every single child. If the Department of Education is limited, then my fear is that school districts would not hold teachers accountable and would not hold the process of learning and the process of education accountable.
Shipe: It will increase expansion of school vouchers for private schools, especially without any element of accountability to the local taxpayers. Typically, there’s no accountability, but there’s public funds going towards private and voucher schools. We see it as a further separation of church and state, but only specific religious affiliations. And also, quite frankly, a lot of the block grant funds — which the Department of Education forwards to the states — would be without the guidance or standards based on the evidence of best practices. There would be no checks and balances in many cases, and that’s quite concerning.
How will a potential elimination affect school funding?
The Department of Education, serving roughly 49.6 million students, currently contributes 13.6% of funding to K-12 public schooling, though exact numbers vary state to state, according to the Education Data Initiative. Schools receive the rest of their funds from state funds and tax dollars.
Within this allotted funding, 90% of school districts receive Title I, or Part A of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, grants that are designed to ensure all children have an equal access to education and to help students in low-income areas succeed in their schooling.
Title I made up the largest category of federal support ($596.3 million) for public schools in Ohio in 2023, according to the Ohio Legislative Service Commission’s Public School Federal Operating Revenue brief. Overall, federal revenue made up 12.9% of the state’s revenue.
Callahan: If the state can’t afford to pay for all of the schooling, where do we get our school funding? Property taxes? That’s already an issue. Now, it’ll be way worse for our schools. Fortunately, I think districts are able to make their own protection rules. Akron Public Schools has a good track record for their students, but that’s not everywhere in the state of Ohio. Living in Summit County, we’re quite fortunate about our county and the city of Akron officials being interested in the rights and the dignity and protecting the humanity of the residents that live here.
Goggins: I’m not so concerned with the actual elimination of the department. The federal government contributes roughly 10% to education funding. Trump’s rhetoric often signals a strategy rather than a tactic, so the idea that there’s going to be less federal oversight becomes the bigger concern.
McWilliams-Woods: The U.S. Department of Education has a major role in allocating funding, conducting research and making sure that policies on students with disabilities and the IDEA — Individuals with Disabilities Education Act — is complied, there’s compliance in the school system. For all of that reason, forget about everything else that the U.S. Department of Education does. That alone should be a reason why you can’t, you shouldn’t abolish the U.S. Department of Education. In addition, the second major role, especially [the] financial role [the Department] has, is Title 1 money, and that is for students who live in poverty and all of the additional supports. It’s the same thing, it’s not just the money. It’s money plus making sure there’s equity across states. If the department was abolished — the money, because those are tied to federal laws — the president can’t eliminate the funding because that is based on federal law.
Something positive? Something to think about?
Even while expressing concerns about an increased negative rhetoric surrounding equity and diversity in education that permeated this election season, experts who spoke to Signal Akron still remained hopeful that inclusivity and civil rights will win out.
They maintained a positive outlook on the Akron community’s own commitment to creating a city welcoming to all people.
Alexander: I know people are talking about abolishing the Department of Education. Personally, I think there could be an attempt to, but I don’t think they’ll be able to completely do it, so I’m being optimistic they won’t be able to do that. I’m optimistic that [at] Akron Public Schools that we continue to work hard and keep moving forward and diligently [and] make sure our kids get what they’re supposed to get in our district.
Goggins: No one’s above the law, and the law should be applied equally to all and those certain inalienable rights, life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, is the standard by which we all seek to form a more perfect union. An American education should then be in line with those values. We better do those things and critique our practice so that when we are missing the mark, we are willing to do the hard work toward becoming more. When your identity is insecure and wrapped around tropes versus values, you find that to be a threat. How American do you really want to be?
McWilliams-Woods: We have an incredible mayor that has prioritized children and children’s services, mentoring, preschool and after school and summer programming for youth. We have a county executive who also has prioritized work-based learning or summer youth employment opportunities for youth and expanding those. We have passionate parents and passionate educators in the Akron Public Schools. So if we all continue to work together, no matter what happens in Washington, D.C., if we put our heads down and figure out how to keep expanding opportunities like we’ve been doing, our children will thrive.
Mudrey: I want people to keep an open mind and to not panic because there’s always opportunity in any transition, no matter what that transition is – whether it’s from the right or from the left – for growth. Growth only happens in the discomfort, and I think that this is a gap of discomfort for people because there’s so many uncertainties.
Russell: My hope lies within my students. Students across the state of Ohio and across this county are willing, and they are anticipating to learn. We have wonderful students that look beyond politics, and they look for the truth. That gives me hope. We have bright young scholars that [are] willing to stand up to injustice and are willing to really learn uncomfortable topics so they could change, [and] so the world could change.
Shipe: I always believe that debate is hopeful. When we have disagreements — whether they’re individuals, or whether they’re a group of people or a country — debate is good. If you have problems at a foundational level for any issue, screaming at each other never works. They have to be able to sit down at the foundational level –- not with sound bites, not with rhetoric — but sit down and say what’s the real base of this issue, the foundational issue and problem. Let’s start listening to each other and try to take some steps together as a country, as a state, as educators and the communities they serve and the local political process.
