Welcome to another episode on America’s education past and future. Given the controversy surrounding the dismantling of the Federal DOE. I wanted to take this episode and share the history of the Federal DOE.

My husband is a fan of Blaze TV. He listens to their shows all day and shared a brief clip on YouTube where Glenn Beck spoke about the Federal DOE’s organizational act. I have this video linked along with the act in the show notes. Glenn notes President Jimmy Carter founded the Federal DOE; Congress solidified it in 1979. Congress must pass legislation to completely dismantle it. In Glenn's video, he shares excerpts from the DOE’s organizational act. You can click here to hear his take on it.

I am going to share the first part of the organization act that gives the what and the why behind it. The legislature amended this act in December 2022.

TITLE I—GENERAL PROVISIONS FINDINGS SEC. 101. ø20 U.S.C. 3401

The Congress finds that— (1) education is fundamental to the development of individual citizens and the progress of the Nation;

(2) there is a continuing need to ensure equal access for all Americans to educational opportunities of a high quality, and such educational opportunities should not be denied because of race, creed, color, national origin, or sex;

(3) parents have the primary responsibility for the education of their children, and States, localities, and private institutions have the primary responsibility for supporting that parental role;

(4) in our Federal system, the primary public responsibility for education is reserved respectively to the States and the local school systems and other instrumentalities of the States;

(5) the American people benefit from a diversity of educational settings, including public and private schools, libraries, museums and other institutions, the workplace, the community, and the home;

(6) the importance of education is increasing as new technologies and alternative approaches to traditional education are considered, as society becomes more complex, and as equal opportunities in education and employment are promoted;

(7) there is a need for improvement in the management and coordination of Federal education programs to support more effectively State, local, and private institutions, students, and parents in carrying out their educational responsibilities;

(8) the dispersion of education programs across a large number of Federal agencies has led to fragmented, duplicative, and often inconsistent Federal policies relating to education;

(9) Presidential and public consideration of issues relating to Federal education programs is hindered by the present organizational position of education programs in the executive branch of the Government; and

(10) there is no single, full-time, Federal education official directly accountable to the President, the Congress, and the people.

PURPOSES SEC. 102. ø20 U.S.C. 3402

The Congress declares that the establishment of a Department of Education is in the public interest, will promote the general welfare of the United States, will help ensure that education issues receive proper treatment at the Federal level, and will enable the Federal Government to coordinate its education activities more effectively. Therefore, the purposes of this Act are—

(1) to strengthen the Federal commitment to ensuring access to equal educational opportunity for every individual;

(2) to supplement and complement the efforts of States, the local school systems and other instrumentalities of the States, the private sector, public and private educational institutions, public and private nonprofit educational research institutions, community-based organizations, parents, and students to improve the quality of education;

(3) to encourage the increased involvement of the public, parents, and students in Federal education programs;

(4) to promote improvements in the quality and usefulness of education through federally supported research, evaluation, and sharing of information;

(5) to improve the coordination of Federal education programs;

(6) to improve the management and efficiency of Federal education activities, especially with respect to the process, procedures, and administrative structures for the dispersal of Federal funds, as well as the reduction of unnecessary and duplicative burdens and constraints, including unnecessary paperwork, on the recipients of Federal funds; and

(7) to increase the accountability of Federal education programs to the President, the Congress, and the public.

FEDERAL-STATE RELATIONSHIPS SEC. 103. ø20 U.S.C. 3403

(a) It is the intention of the Congress in the establishment of the Department to protect the rights of State and local governments and public and private educational institutions in the areas of educational policies and administration of programs and to strengthen and improve the control of such governments and institutions over their own educational programs and policies. The establishment of the Department of Education shall not increase the authority of the Federal Government over education or diminish the responsibility for education which is reserved to the States and the local school systems and other instrumentalities of the States.

(b) No provision of a program administered by the Secretary or by any other officer of the Department shall be construed to authorize the Secretary or any such officer to exercise any direction, supervision, or control over the curriculum, program of instruction, administration, or personnel of any educational institution, school, or school system, over any accrediting agency or association, or over the selection or content of library resources, textbooks, or other instructional materials by any educational institution or school system, except to the extent authorized by law.

(c) The Secretary shall not, during the period within eight months after the effective date of this Act, take any action to withhold, suspend, or terminate funds under any program transferred by this Act by reason of the failure of any State to comply with any applicable law requiring the administration of such a program through a single organizational unit.

Now, that doesn’t sound bad. I could go along with a lot of the positives outlined for the Federal DOE, but some aspects raise serious concerns. I also question the need for the Federal DOE when education is the responsibility of the state, not the federal government. And it’s those thoughts that make me step back and ask: since when did a crew of people sitting in Washington DC, who don’t even know who we are, and most likely do not have any formal training in education, know what’s best for our students and their education?

Let’s look at a few of these items. First, let’s look at this statement:

(2) there is a continuing need to ensure equal access for all Americans to educational opportunities of a high quality, and such educational opportunities should not be denied because of race, creed, color, national origin, or sex;

This is great, but I want to point out that this was already happening since the foundation of our country without the federal government being involved. Let me take you back to David Barton’s book 4 Centuries of American Education. On page 13, he shares that founding fathers such as John Witherspoon, Francis Hopkins, Benjamin Franklin, and Benajamin Rush founded some of the first schools for women and black Americans. Something that was unheard of at that time in history. They promoted that all children, regardless of race or gender, should be educated.

If citizens were already taking care of this at the local level, why did we need the federal government to step in? The truth is, we didn’t. Many will argue we did because of some schools denying access to others based on gender or race. I agree something had to be done to prevent this. However, big brother stepping in and bringing all his regulations with him was not the answer.

The answer lies within our free market. Many educators dislike the voucher system, but I think that is because the unions have been saying for years that this system will take away our jobs. And yes, if you do not provide a quality well-rounded education, then parents will take their children somewhere else that will. If we are honest with ourselves, we as parents would do the same thing. We want what is best for our children and that includes a quality education.

The voucher system lets parents freely choose their child's school, which is as it should be. We don’t want the government or others telling us how to educate or raise our children. We should not turn around and do it to others. What the voucher system breeds is competition, which leads to better education. Schools that deny students access based on race and gender would be obsolete because no one would choose to send their child there. A voucher system ran at the state level weeds out the ineffective educators and schools, leaving the best of best for students.

Let’s look at another piece that made my eyebrows jump up and if you’ve been listening to this entire mini-series, I am sure yours jumped up too.

(6) the importance of education is increasing as new technologies and alternative approaches to traditional education are considered, as society becomes more complex, and as equal opportunities in education and employment are promoted;

We’ve been looking at the statistical and empirical data of these alternative approaches to traditional education, and it isn’t pretty. According to the NAEP (National Assessment of Educational Progress) report card, in 2024 only 29% of 4th grade students were proficient in math. Eighth-grade math proficiency is only 28%. You can view the math scores on the NAEP website here. Reading is not any better off with only 31% of 4th graders demonstrating proficiency and only 30% 8th graders reading at grade level. You can view the NAEP reading scores here.

70-80% of children are not proficient in either reading, math, or both. The combination of alternative teaching methods and curriculum has led to this unacceptable proficiency in reading and math.

America’s traditional education model produced students with such a high level of academic knowledge and reasoning that many could begin attending college after their eighth-grade year. In fact, many of us struggle to read and comprehend our founding documents because our education is subpar compared to that of the average American citizen in the seventeen and eighteen hundreds.

Has the Federal DOE helped with this by supporting alternative approaches to education? The data would say no.

Believe or not, I am trying not to be snarky, but this statement made me laugh. If you have ever completed any Title grant so that your school could receive federal funding, you will laugh too.

(6) to improve the management and efficiency of Federal education activities, especially with respect to the process, procedures, and administrative structures for the dispersal of Federal funds, as well as the reduction of unnecessary and duplicative burdens and constraints, including unnecessary paperwork, on the recipients of Federal funds;

Nothing about the federal grant process is efficient. Moreover, numerous stipulations prevent direct funding of student educational needs. In fact, some grants are not even worth applying for because nothing that is allowable for the grant money to be spent on is useful to our students.

Ever attend a Donuts with Dad or Muffins with Mom event? Title I money requires the school to host parent outreach events to have more parent involvement in their child’s education. These events don’t work, yet we throw thousands of education dollars at them. Parents come in eat a donut or muffin with their child and then walk right back out. They leave not any more involved in their child’s education than they were when they entered the building.

Two years ago, I abandoned the Title III grant application process due to its restrictive nature, forcing us to squander funds on unnecessary items. We could not in good conscience continue to waste money like that. I realize we are a small school with a small EL population, therefore we received less than $5,000 from the Title III grant. However, had it just been given to support the education of EL students with no additional requirements, we could have put the money to good use.

This is last one before we look at what is going on with the Federal DOE now. As I read this section really think about what it is saying.

(a) It is the intention of the Congress in the establishment of the Department to protect the rights of State and local governments and public and private educational institutions in the areas of educational policies and administration of programs and to strengthen and improve the control of such governments and institutions over their own educational programs and policies. The establishment of the Department of Education shall not increase the authority of the Federal Government over education or diminish the responsibility for education which is reserved to the States and the local school systems and other instrumentalities of the States.

Protect our rights from whom? The rights and power of public education has always resided with the states and local school boards without federal government involvement. The way I read this, they are protecting the state's education rights from themselves because they are creating the Federal DOE to and I quote:

…strengthen and improve the control of such governments and institutions over their own educational programs and policies.

That is a scary line. The states already had control, but the federal government wanted to strengthen and improve that control through legislation and assistance that gives them control at the state and local level.

We just talked about the federal funding. They don’t just give states that money out of the goodness of their hearts. It comes with strings attached that do more harm than good for our children’s education.

This last statement seals it for me.

The establishment of the Department of Education shall not increase the authority of the Federal Government over education or diminish the responsibility for education which is reserved to the States and the local school systems and other instrumentalities of the States.

One, this is not true today. As stated earlier, their funding does not come without demands and control from them. Two, stop and think, why did we need the federal DOE in the first place? If they shall not increase their authority over education or diminish the state's responsibility for education, what is their purpose?

I think we all know the answer to that question, it’s just a matter of whether or not we want to accept it.

Now that you have some background on the Federal DOE, let’s look at what is happening with it now. Here is President Trump’s executive order signed on March 20, 2025 titled: Improving Education Outcomes by Empowering Parents, States, and Communities. I do have a link to a video of this signing in the blog post for this episode.

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, and to enable parents, teachers, and communities to best ensure student success, it is hereby ordered:

Section 1. Purpose and Policy. Our Nation’s bright future relies on empowered families, engaged communities, and excellent educational opportunities for every child. Unfortunately, the experiment of controlling American education through Federal programs and dollars — and the unaccountable bureaucracy those programs and dollars support — has plainly failed our children, our teachers, and our families.

Taxpayers spent around $200 billion at the Federal level on schools during the COVID-19 pandemic, on top of the more than $60 billion they spend annually on Federal school funding. This money is largely distributed by one of the newest Cabinet agencies, the Department of Education, which has existed for less than one fifth of our Nation’s history. The Congress created the Department of Education in 1979 at the urging of President Jimmy Carter, who received a first-ever Presidential endorsement from the country’s largest teachers’ union shortly after pledging to the union his support for a separate Department of Education. Since then, the Department of Education has entrenched the education bureaucracy and sought to convince America that Federal control over education is beneficial. While the Department of Education does not educate anyone, it maintains a public relations office that includes over 80 staffers at a cost of more than $10 million per year.

Closing the Department of Education would provide children and their families the opportunity to escape a system that is failing them. Today, American reading and math scores are near historical lows. This year’s National Assessment of Educational Progress showed that 70 percent of 8th graders were below proficient in reading, and 72 percent were below proficient in math. The Federal education bureaucracy is not working.

Closure of the Department of Education would drastically improve program implementation in higher education. The Department of Education currently manages a student loan debt portfolio of more than $1.6 trillion. This means the Federal student aid program is roughly the size of one of the Nation’s largest banks, Wells Fargo. But although Wells Fargo has more than 200,000 employees, the Department of Education has fewer than 1,500 in its Office of Federal Student Aid. The Department of Education is not a bank, and it must return bank functions to an entity equipped to serve America’s students.

Ultimately, the Department of Education’s main functions can, and should, be returned to the States.

Sec. 2. Closing the Department of Education and Returning Authority to the States. (a) The Secretary of Education shall, to the maximum extent appropriate and permitted by law, take all necessary steps to facilitate the closure of the Department of Education and return authority over education to the States and local communities while ensuring the effective and uninterrupted delivery of services, programs, and benefits on which Americans rely.

(b) Consistent with the Department of Education’s authorities, the Secretary of Education shall ensure that the allocation of any Federal Department of Education funds is subject to rigorous compliance with Federal law and Administration policy, including the requirement that any program or activity receiving Federal assistance terminate illegal discrimination obscured under the label “diversity, equity, and inclusion” or similar terms and programs promoting gender ideology.

Sec. 3. General Provisions. (a) Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:

(i) the authority granted by law to an executive department or agency, or the head thereof; or

(ii) the functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.

(b) This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.

(c) This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.

DONALD J. TRUMP

THE WHITE HOUSE,
March 20, 2025.

Here is the fact sheet that was issued in conjunction with this executive order.

RETURNING EDUCATION TO PARENTS AND COMMUNITIES: Today, President Donald J. Trump signed an Executive Order returning power over education to families instead of bureaucracies.

The Executive Order directs the Secretary of Education to take all necessary steps to facilitate the closure of the Department of Education and return education authority to the States, while continuing to ensure the effective and uninterrupted delivery of services, programs, and benefits on which Americans rely.
The Order also directs that programs or activities receiving any remaining Department of Education funds will not advance DEI or gender ideology.

DISMANTLING BUREAUCRACY AND EMPOWERING FAMILIES: Federal government control of education has failed students, parents, and teachers.

Since its relatively recent inception in 1979, the Department of Education, which does not directly educate students, has spent over $3 trillion without improving student achievement as measured by standardized National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) scores.

Federal taxpayers spent around $200 billion in additional education funding during COVID-19, which, given the substantial learning loss that resulted, typifies the ineffectiveness of the current federally driven model.

Mathematics and reading scores are down in public schools, despite per-pupil spending having increased by more than 245% since the 1970s, indicating that more spending does not mean better education.

13-year-olds’ mathematics scores are the lowest they have been in decades.
13-year-olds’ reading scores are the lowest since testing began over 30 years ago.
Low-performing students are falling further behind.
In 2023, 13 Baltimore, Maryland, high schools had zero students who tested proficient in mathematics.

The Department of Education burdens schools with regulations and paperwork.

Its “Dear Colleague” letters have forced schools to redirect resources toward complying with ideological initiatives, which diverts staff time and attention away from schools’ primary role of teaching.
Biden’s Department of Education added rules that imposed nearly $3.9 billion in costs and 4,239,530 paperwork hours.

Taxpayers will no longer be burdened with tens of billions of dollars wasted on progressive social experiments and obsolete programs.

Under the Biden Administration, the Department of Education wasted more than $1 billion in grants focused on entrenching radical ideologies in education.
Biden’s Department of Education rewrote Title IX rules to expand the definition of “sex” discrimination to include “gender identity.”
The Trump Administration recently canceled $226 million in grants under the Comprehensive Centers Program that forced radical agendas onto states and systems, including race-based discrimination and gender identity ideology.

FULFILLING PROMISES TO PARENTS AND STUDENTS: President Trump has outlined a bold vision for America’s schools and returning education back to the states.

During his campaign, President Trump said “I will close the Department of Education and move education back to the states where it belongs.”
While speaking on parental rights in education, President Trump spoke of a dramatic rethinking of schools: “I want every parent in America to be empowered to send their child to public, private, charter, or faith-based school of their choice. The time for universal school choice has come. As we return education to the states, I will use every power I have to give parents this right.”
Since returning to office, President Trump has already signed an Executive Order to expand educational freedom and opportunity for families, recognizing our government-assigned education system has failed millions of parents, students, and teachers.

Aren’t we as educators and parents frustrated by the mandates handed down to us by the federal government? Mandates that come from people in Washington, DC who have never stepped foot in our communities and most likely have never served in any role as an educator. Again, I ask, who knows what our children’s educational needs are? I’m pretty sure we would all agree it’s us, not the federal government.

Many of us fear having the federal DOE removed, and I understand that. For most of us, it has always provided the funding for some teachers' salaries. At the same time, they have made mandates that hinder our ability to meet our students’ needs. With these changes, we will still receive necessary funding, but with fewer mandates. Putting the control of education back into the hands of the states and its citizens brings us unprecedented freedom in education. A freedom we have not seen in a hundred years.

These are scary but exciting times in education. Join me in the next episode as we dive into curriculum and pedagogy before looking at solutions to bring America’s education system back to excellence.