What a dismantled Department of Education could mean for Ohio schools

On March 20, President Trump signed an executive order calling on Education Secretary Linda McMahon to begin closing the Department of Education, a process that would return authority over public schooling to state and local governments.

The order has been praised in Ohio primarily by Republican lawmakers. Governor Mike DeWine was present at the signing ceremony, and expressed support for the move in a statement made on X.

Ohio Senate President Rob McColley (R-Napoleon) also took to social media to call the order long overdue.

“Education policy belongs in the states and the federal government’s ‘one size fits all’ meddling has hurt our country for decades,” McColley said in a post on X. “President Trump’s order will allow our 50 laboratories of democracy to deliver innovative solutions that meet each state’s unique needs.

The directive has invited pushback from the Buckeye state as well, primarily in concern over federal funding cuts. According to the Ohio Education Association, school districts in the state on average receive 10% of their revenue from the federal government.

Ohio Education Association (OEA) President Scott DiMauro claimed this funding could be at risk if the Department is shut down, and the implications could disproportionately affect students based on socio-economic factors.

“Districts that have a higher percentage of students in poverty depend even more on the federal government for support,” DiMauro said in an interview with the Ohio Capital Journal. “So in higher poverty, rural, and urban districts, we can see those percentages be 20% to 25% or even more.”

Though the U.S. does not have a national education system, federal legislation contributes to state educational frameworks through limited oversight and some sources of funding.

Around 10% of funding for K-12 education comes from congressionally authorized funds, primarily through the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) and the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), both of which are federal legislation.

Title I of ESEA, the largest of these streams, provides grants to schools that serve high percentages of economically disadvantaged students. IDEA funding supports students with disabilities.

Considerably, money allocated through ESEA and IDEA is authorized by Congress, and the Department of Education is currently only responsible for disbursing it. Eliminating the Department of Education would not nullify these pieces of legislation.

Federal funding for postsecondary education happens primarily through student support, including Pell Grants, Federal Work Study, federal student loans, and the FAFSA process. Currently, the Department of Education manages much of this work.

Most of this funding is authorized by Congress through the Higher Education Act, and it would remain authorized even if the order is carried out.

Dr. Anna DeJarnette, Director of UC’s School of Education, expressed that the effects of this order on public universities like UC are hard to determine this early.

“If I were a college student, I would be paying close attention to discussions about Pell Grants, work study, and other sources of federal financial aid, as the management of those programs has probably the most direct impact on college students,” DeJarnette said.

A key branch of the department is its Office for Civil Rights. The office is responsible for enforcing legislation such as the Americans with Disabilities Act, which protects the rights of students with disabilities in school settings.

Closing the Department of Education would not eliminate federal civil rights legislation, but enforcement of those laws would have to be managed elsewhere.

Education research, development, and evaluation is a major contribution of the Department of Education. Due to U.S. education being decentralized, the federal Department of Education is uniquely positioned to track educational progress at a national level.

“Some of this work has already been paused or cancelled,” DeJarnette said. “This means we will know less about the state of student learning over time in the U.S.”

Contrary to popular misconception, the department does not dictate nationally what is taught in public schools. Learning standards are currently set at the state level and curriculum is adopted by local school boards.