Trump’s Dilemma: Reform the U.S. Department of Education or Kill It?

My perspective on this issue comes from personal experience. In the late 1980s, I pursued a Master’s in the Administration and Supervision of Adult Education at the University of the District of Columbia. During the summers of 1990 and 1991, I interned at the DOE, where I observed firsthand how the department impacted education and contributed to shaping modern learning.

In 1990, I worked in a division that tracked proprietary schools—private for-profit institutions that receive federal funding. My role involved updating compliance records, ensuring that these schools met federal standards to qualify for funding. This work was essential in protecting taxpayer money, ensuring that only compliant institutions received federal aid. Even today, this oversight is vital, as the DOE continues to regulate institutions involved in the federal student loan program.

In 1991, I participated in a pioneering initiative focused on distance learning, which would eventually evolve into the modern online education system. At the time, distance learning consisted of televised lectures, video cassettes, and correspondence by mail and fax. Little did I know that I was laying the groundwork for what would become a vital part of modern education. Today, online education has become indispensable, particularly for students in remote areas. The DOE’s investment in this initiative played a critical role in making online learning what it is today.

These personal experiences have shaped my view that the DOE should not be eliminated, but rather reformed. While there are bureaucratic inefficiencies and outdated processes that need attention, the department’s key functions—such as regulating proprietary schools and ensuring equal access to education—are essential. Before proposing cuts or dismantling the DOE, DOGE should conduct a thorough evaluation of each division’s role to understand its value. Federal oversight ensures uniform standards across all states, preventing corruption and bias that could arise in a decentralized system.

Some critics argue that state-run education departments can better serve local communities. While I believe states should control their educational systems, there are functions best handled at the federal level. For example, regulating for-profit schools ensures uniform standards, protecting students and taxpayer money. A federal oversight system is less susceptible to corruption, as it’s harder to bribe a federal official than a state official. Federal involvement also ensures consistent application of civil rights protections, such as Title IX, and special education funding, which might not be as effectively enforced at the state level.

Furthermore, the DOE supports educational research and innovation through grants for technological advancements, teacher training, and special education programs. Without this federal support, critical advancements in education could be delayed or lost.

The case for reform, rather than elimination, is clear. Bureaucratic inefficiencies in the DOE can and should be addressed, but dismantling the department entirely would be shortsighted. Instead of cutting funding indiscriminately, policymakers should focus on targeted reforms to improve transparency, streamline operations, and ensure that taxpayer dollars are spent effectively to benefit students and educators. The risk of losing crucial protections and resources for students in the name of efficiency is too high.

The federal government has a responsibility to ensure that all students, regardless of where they live, have access to quality education and equal opportunities. Let’s reform the system, not destroy it. The Department of Education’s vital role should be preserved while addressing inefficiencies and improving the agency’s operations.

Now that Linda McMahon has become Secretary of the U.S. Department of Education, changes in how the DOE operates are certain. However, it remains to be seen whether she will focus on reforming the department’s structure or advancing policies that enhance its role in promoting educational equality nationwide.