On Nov. 5, America made its decision. Former President Donald Trump was re-elected for his second term of presidency and, to little surprise, a majority of Missouri counties sided with this ending. The shift of party control on Jan. 20 will inevitably bring about implications on a variety of national policy issues ranging from the economy to immigration, however, what does this mean to the average Parkway West student? 

Though Trump’s campaign did not focus heavily on education, the few times it did was to emphasize its ten steps to an ‘ideal education,’ including the termination of the federal Department of Education, the broadening of school choice programs and the elimination of “wokeness” or “left-wing indoctrination” from the curriculum. But, to understand the true ramifications of these plans, context to the Republican stance on education is crucial.

The Heritage Foundation’s Project 2025 is over 900 pages listing a wide range of right-winged policy proposals that greatly expand executive authority for a future conservative administration. During his campaign, Trump publicly claimed to know nothing about the document, even though over half of its 307 authors and contributors have formerly worked for Trump’s administration, campaign, or transition team. Additionally, in recent light, Project 2025 contributors are now obtaining new positions on Trump’s staff. Specifically to the realm of education, within Project 2025, Lindsey Burke — author of the education section — has outlined recommendations to eliminate the Head Start program, defund Title I, codify LGBTQIA+ discrimination, reduce federal funding for students with disabilities and more.

Dismantling the Department of Education

The promise to dismantle the Department of Education is not anything new on the Grand Old Party (GOP) agenda, dating back to the department’s founding in 1979; yet, through multiple Republican presidencies including Trump’s first term, the Department of Education has survived and will most likely continue to do so. 

The department does much for elementary and secondary education, serving over 50 million students across 18,200 school districts: enforcing civil rights protection, monitoring academic performance, overseeing the Free Application for Federal Student Aid (FAFSA) and more. Overall, the department does not dictate what is taught in classrooms — a popular public misconception. 

Proponents of dismantling the Education Department criticize the bloated bureaucracies tied to K-12 education subsidies with little to no academic improvement to show for it as well as the excessive spending on federal student loans contributing to inflation in college tuition. However, abolishing the department is politically difficult, requiring the approval of Congress and great bipartisan support. Although, what do Republicans mean by “abolishing” and subsequent synonyms? Is it simply the rearranging of people and programs to other departments which is the most likely to happen or actually removing the federal government out of education which is truer to the spirit and name? Or, perhaps the answer is turning all of the programs into block grants because just as Burke argues, local schools and families have a much better grasp on their individual situations and needs than the remote federal government does.

 Project 2025 combines all of these ideas detailing steps to ultimately return funding and decision-making to the local level. For example, they would transfer any Indian education programs to the Bureau of Indian Education or move FASFA and other federal student loan programs to the Treasury Department. So, what would be the problem with keeping most of these departments but moving them around? According to the Tenth Amendment, any issues or powers not stated in the Constitution are reserved for the states; therefore, with no mention of education in the Constitution, the Republican argument makes sense constitutionally. 

“The dilemma is right now [these departments] are under one umbrella of education, so their focus is making sure that schools abide by these rules, or that students can access these grants. If we put them as part of other things, then they become part of not education,” AP Government teacher Mel Trotier said. “And do they get the attention? Do they get the voice? Do they get the same emphasis that they would in the Department of Education? There’s that change in focus.” 

The Education Department’s mission “is to promote student achievement and preparation for global competitiveness by fostering educational excellence and ensuring equal access.” Therefore, without the department, students — especially the most vulnerable ones — as well as educators and schools alike would lose an advocate within the Cabinet to fight for crucial resources and protections. For example, the federal Individuals with Disabilities Act (IDEA) requires schools to support and ensure students with disabilities a free, equal learning opportunity. In 2022, the federal government allocated $12.5 billion in IDEA grants to states. Under Project 2025, IDEA oversight would be transferred to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services which offers less expertise, has its own priorities and provides no extra funding, all of which make educating students with disabilities significantly more challenging. 

Over time, this department has become a sort of symbolic distraction in a greater conversation on public education. And the truth of the matter is that we should not be debating straining already tight budgets, worsening existing teacher shortages or causing any further disruptions for students especially as we’ve seen the long-lasting impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on student’s learning. 

Broaden school choice

Another aspect of Trump’s plan is to advance school choice. This would follow traditional Republican wishes to minimize the federal government’s impact on educational access — and we can see the progress transpiring from his first term. 

“On the surface, the idea of [taking] your tax dollars and [going] to whatever school you want has gained a lot of traction in the last four years, because of what they perceive as a liberal bend in education. [It’s] taking money out of the pool; your money’s not just funding your student, it’s going to everybody. And draining that pool makes a bigger difference for all the students versus just you,” Trotier said.

Several states such as Maryland and Ohio have implemented similar private school vouchers. However, data will show that, in reality, these vouchers are not implemented as intended: those who can already afford to send their children are the primary beneficiaries. Thus the question is posed: are we propagating uniqueness in the status quo?

“I think it’s great that people want to send their kids to private school if you have the money, but if you don’t, there’s this great option of public school,” senior Gianna Lionelli said.

“Parents Rights” to end wokeness

Finally, Trump’s vision to reshape American education is to eliminate any lessons related to gender identity and critical race theory and abolish diversity and inclusion offices. He believes this content to be politically motivated, filled with “woke” radical leftist educators. In recent years, the term ‘woke’ has shifted from its original definition within the Black community to a more pejorative term used by Republicans to refer to anything deemed too progressive.

“Anytime someone uses the term wokeness, I balk at that because it’s become one of those umbrella terms like ‘snowflake’ a couple of years ago. When I hear phrases like ‘end wokeness,’ to me, that is kind of the same as saying ‘truffula trees,’ because I think the meaning has been lost in phrases like that,” English teacher Dan Barnes said. 

The primary implication hidden behind the word is censorship, something that is already being felt nationwide, specifically taking into account legislation such as the ‘Don’t Say Gay’ bill that was passed in Florida and the restriction of course availability such as the removal of AP African American Studies in South Carolina. Society as a whole has become complacent in the absence of subjective conversations and the blanket excuses covering them.

At the end of the day, no one knows what a Trump victory has in store for the nation. Throughout our waves of uncertainty, however, one thing remains constant: his methods of political action are not beneficial to federal education. Beyond a lack of funding, disproportionate benefits, and other monetary concerns, through the imposition of one-track mindsets, curriculum and content leave our future as a democracy at stake. 

“I think [education has] become politicized far too much. I believe that there are some things in history that we just need to know about, and some things that, no matter what side you’re on, you need to be educated about,” senior Shirah Ramaji said.