PRINT AS PDF

On Thursday, March 20, 2025, President Donald Trump signed an executive order aimed at closing the U.S. Department of Education. Below are excerpts from my email to staff:

To all,

Late this afternoon, President Trump signed an executive order… directing the closure of the U.S. Department of Education (DOE). The order states, “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…” Additionally, it mandates strict legal compliance in federal education funding, explicitly targeting programs associated with DEI and gender ideology.

This executive order was long expected. The Trump Administration’s intention to dismantle the DOE was clearly articulated in its campaign’s Project 2025 playbook… Below is a sketch of my thoughts.

Will the Trump Administration Succeed?

The combination of public passivity, institutional “obedience in advance” (as Yale University historian Timothy D. Snyder describes it), weak congressional resistance, and judicial failures to halt the dismantling of agencies like USAID and Voice of America suggests that efforts to fully block the DOE’s substantial reduction in scope and function are unlikely to succeed.

A far more likely outcome is a significant weakening of the DOE, but not full closure, achieved through defunding, transferring programs to other federal agencies, reducing oversight, and shifting education policy decisions to the states. While legal challenges and the reluctance among some states to take on additional functions may slow this process, the DOE’s authority will likely be significantly eroded. Conservative states could exploit this shift to impose ideological education policies, fragmenting curricula nationwide, as seen in Oklahoma’s proposed changes related to the teaching about the 2020 Presidential election.

Potential Impacts on Higher Education:

This scenario will likely have a dramatic impact on the U.S. Higher Education landscape.

• Colleges & Universities: Public institutions could become more susceptible to ideological control, while elite institutions retain greater autonomy through private funding.
• Data Reporting: Federal data collection would weaken, creating inconsistencies in accreditation and accountability. IPEDS reporting could cease.
• Financial Aid: Pell Grants and student loan programs could shrink, leaving students from lower- and middle-income families to increasingly rely on private loans or seek alternatives to Higher Education. U.S. leadership in science, health, and technology will likely erode.
• Curriculum: Conservative-controlled states could push ideological or revisionist curricula, while liberal states maintain progressive standards.
• Students: Increased inequality in educational quality based on geographic location could leave large groups of students underprepared for post-secondary education.
• Accreditation: Accreditation could shift to a state-based model where recognition occurs at the state-level, not federal level. Differences in state education priorities and policies could make the application of uniform accreditation standards more difficult.

This entry is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International license.