Category: Department of Education

  • The True Costs of Trump’s Ed. Dept. Cuts – The 74

    The True Costs of Trump’s Ed. Dept. Cuts – The 74

    School (in)Security is our biweekly briefing on the latest school safety news, vetted by Mark Keierleber. Subscribe here.

    When the Trump administration decimated the Education Department’s civil rights office last year, thousands of students waiting for relief from alleged racial and sexual discrimination in schools were left to languish. 

    It turns out the move to sideline half of the Office for Civil Rights staff cost taxpayers tens of millions of dollars, according to a new report by the nonpartisan Government Accountability Office. Nearly a year later, the Education Department still can’t say whether it saved a dime. 

    GAO estimates the decision to place civil rights staffers on paid administrative leave, while simultaneously shuttering most of its regional offices, cost upwards of $38 million for the salaries and benefits of staffers who were kept home. 

    “Other costs,” the government watchdog noted, “are unknown.” 

    Without a full accounting of costs and savings, the watchdog concluded, the department can’t credibly claim the shakeup improved efficiency, saved money or better served students — the very reasons used to justify the cuts in the first place. 

    Click here to read the full Government Accountability Office report.

    In the news

    Meghan Gallagher/The 74/Getty Images

    The latest in Trump’s immigration crackdown: Minnesota school districts and the state’s teachers union filed a lawsuit demanding reinstatement of a longstanding policy against immigration enforcement activities near schools and other “sensitive locations.” | The 74

    • A Minnesota 11-year-old and her mother will be reunited with their family after being held for nearly a month in a Texas detention center after getting picked up by immigration agents on their way to school. | KSTP
    • The horrifying truth behind the immigration arrest of 5-year-old Liam Ramos: It wasn’t an accident. | Slate
      • The Columbia Heights school district where Liam is enrolled closed for a day this week after officials received a “racially and politically motivated” bomb threat. | CBS News
    • ‘None of this is OK’: Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz demanded in a letter that the federal government disclose how many of the state’s children have been detained as part of the immigration enforcement surge — and pleaded for agents to stay away from schools and bus stops. | MPR News
    • Cities could be compelled to cooperate with federal immigration officials in order to access federal funds for investigations into internet crimes against children, a lawsuit alleges. | KPBS
    Sign-up for the School (in)Security newsletter.

    Get the most critical news and information about students’ rights, safety and well-being delivered straight to your inbox.

    Big Tech in the spotlight: As TikTok and Snap settle lawsuits centered on the damaging effects of social media on children, Meta and YouTube are gearing up for closely watched trials. The tech companies face allegations the apps were designed to keep kids hooked despite known harms to their well-being. | Los Angeles Times

    • Amazon reported hundreds of thousands of photos of child sexual abuse in its artificial intelligence training data — but the company’s refusal to say where it came from could hinder police efforts to track down perpetrators. | Bloomberg 
    • As Democrat- and Republican-led states pass rules designed to protect children from the potential harms of AI chatbots like ChatGPT, an executive order by President Donald Trump gives the attorney general authority to sue states with consumer protection laws that stand in the way of the country’s “global AI dominance.” | Futurism
    • The head of the Federal Trade Commission came out as a strong proponent of contentious online age-verification rules, arguing “it offers a way to unleash American innovation without compromising the health and well-being of America’s most important resource: its children.” | The Record

    A North Carolina woman faces criminal charges after she allegedly kicked a pregnant school resource officer in the stomach while refusing to leave her child’s elementary school. | WECT

    ‘It’s evil’: The National Institutes of Health failed to protect genetic data of more than 20,000 U.S. children from misuse by a fringe group of researchers who used the records to claim intellectual superiority of white people over other races. | The New York Times

    Two Florida teenagers accused of plotting to kill a classmate will be charged as adults with attempted premeditated murder. | WESH

    ICYMI @The74

    Eamonn Fitzmaurice/The 74, Getty Images

    Four Takeaways from New Report on AI’s Risks in Education

    Families Locked Out of Child Care Subsidies Suffer While On Waitlists

    How a Notorious Maximum-Security Prison Was Transformed Into a Thriving Preschool

    Emotional Support

    The 74’s Eamonn Fitzmaurice and his son Ellis visited the Brooklyn Cat Cafe to offer a few treats and scratches. “I’m a dog person,” Eamonn tells me, “but the cats were cute.”


    Did you use this article in your work?

    We’d love to hear how The 74’s reporting is helping educators, researchers, and policymakers. Tell us how

    Source link

  • Hawaiian Language Schools Grow As DOE Shrinks. There’s One Big Problem – The 74

    Hawaiian Language Schools Grow As DOE Shrinks. There’s One Big Problem – The 74


    Get stories like this delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for The 74 Newsletter

    At a time when local schools are facing shrinking enrollment and talks of closure, Hawaiian immersion programs are bucking the trend. 

    Enrollment in schools that teach primarily in ʻōlelo Hawaiʻi — collectively known as Kaiapuni schools — has increased by 68% over the past decade, with the number of campuses run by the state education department growing from 14 to 26. But students tend to have fewer immersion options in middle and high school, and the pool of qualified teachers isn’t keeping up with families’ growing demand.

    Recruiting qualified teachers is one of the largest barriers to expanding Kaiapuni programs, Office of Hawaiian Education Director Kau‘i Sang said in a recent education board meeting. The Department of Education needs to find a balance between adding more classrooms to meet families’ needs and hiring enough teachers to support existing Kaiapuni schools, she said. 

    DOE plans on opening two new Kaiapuni programs at Haleʻiwa Elementary on Oʻahu and Kalanianaʻole Elementary on the Big Island.

    “We cannot open classrooms unless we have qualified staff,” Sang said. 

    Currently, DOE has three unfilled Kaiapuni teacher positions, Communications Director Nanea Ching said in an emailed statement. The department also employs 25 unlicensed Kaiapuni educators who still need to fulfill their teacher training requirements, she said. 

    But the number of additional teachers needed to fully staff Kaiapuni schools could be closer to 100, said Kananinohea Mākaʻimoku, an associate professor at the University of Hawaiʻi Hilo’s College of Hawaiian Language. Some Kaiapuni teachers are taking on larger-than-average class sizes because of staffing shortages, she said, meaning the annual vacancy rates underestimate the number of educators schools need. 

    DOE will need 165 more Kaiapuni teachers in the next decade to fully staff its classrooms and meet families’ growing demand, according to ʻAha Kauleo, an advisory group of Hawaiian language schools and organizations. The projection doesn’t account for a large group of teachers who are expected to retire in the coming years, Mākaʻimoku said.

    Last year, UH Mānoa and Hilo produced a total of 12 licensed Kaiapuni teachers.

    It’s difficult to find candidates who are both fluent in Hawaiian and interested in teaching, Mākaʻimoku said, especially because Hawaiian language speakers are in high demand in many careers. But a lack of teachers doesn’t mean schools should stop expanding Kaiapuni programs, she said, especially when the movement has so much family support and momentum. 

    ‘No Option But To Leave Their Home District’

    The Hawaiʻi Supreme Court has previously ruled that the education department has a constitutional duty to provide families with access to Hawaiian immersion education. Two lawsuits filed in August argued that DOE has fallen short of this responsibility by creating unique barriers for immersion families, such as waitlists for enrollment and limited immersion programs in some school districts.

    One of the lawsuits was dropped over the summer, but the second remains active. 

    Currently, families are pushing for more immersion options in Pearl City, which has no middle or high school for Kaiapuni students. Children can attend the Kaiapuni program at Waiau Elementary until the sixth grade but then need to transfer to immersion programs in Kapolei or Honolulu for middle school or switch to an English-language program.

    A petition to add Kaiapuni programs at Highlands Intermediate and Pearl City High School received more than 100 signatures over the past three weeks. 

    “Our keiki start their educational journey in Hawaiian immersion programs, but upon reaching intermediate and high school levels, they find themselves with no option but to leave their home district,” parent Chloe Puaʻena Vierra-Villanueva said in written testimony to the Board of Education.

    The department is planning to add more grade levels to existing Kaiapuni schools next year and provide families with more information on how to enroll in immersion programs, Sang said. Her office also plans on tracking the number of open seats and waitlists across the state to determine which communities have the greatest demand for Kaiapuni classrooms. 

    Since 2020, the state has also offered a $8,000 salary bonus to Kaiapuni teachers to attract more people to classroom positions. 

    Kahea Faria, an assistant specialist at UH Mānoa’s College of Education and a Kaiapuni parent, said she would like to see more DOE campuses solely dedicated to serving immersion students across all grade levels. Creating environments where Hawaiian is the only spoken language is critical to students’ development, she said, and could possibly encourage more kids to pursue teaching careers in Kaiapuni schools. 

    “Right now, with a growing number of students, they have very limited opportunities to grow their language abilities,” Faria said. 

    The state also needs to look beyond Kaiapuni graduates to expand the potential pool of immersion teachers, Mākaʻimoku said. For example, she said, offering more Hawaiian language classes to families and community members could encourage more people to earn their Kaiapuni teaching credentials. 

    “That’s definitely a conversation that all communities in Hawaiʻi should have,” she said. 

    This story was originally published on Honolulu Civil Beat.


    Did you use this article in your work?

    We’d love to hear how The 74’s reporting is helping educators, researchers, and policymakers. Tell us how

    Source link

  • What happens after the U.S. Department of Education is dissolved?

    What happens after the U.S. Department of Education is dissolved?

    eSchool News is counting down the 10 most-read stories of 2025. Story #1 focuses on the Trump Administration’s goal of dismantling the U.S. Department of Education.

    Key points:

    In light of Donald Trump assuming a second presidential term in 2025, conversations concerning dismantling the United States Department of Education have resurfaced. Supporters argue that federal involvement in education undermines state authority, while critics fear that removing the federal role could exacerbate inequities and hinder national progress. To evaluate the proposal, it is crucial to examine the federal and state roles in education, the historical and constitutional context, and the potential benefits and challenges of such a shift.

    The federal role in education

    The United States Constitution does not explicitly grant the federal government authority over education. As Lunenberg et al. (2012) noted, “Education is not a function specifically delegated to the federal government” (p. 327). Instead, under the Tenth Amendment, powers not delegated to the federal government are reserved for the states (McCarthy et al., 2019). This leaves education primarily under state jurisdiction, with federal involvement historically limited to indirect support rather than direct control.

    The United States Department of Education was established in 1979. It is responsible for overseeing federal funding for schools, enforcing federal laws in education, and ensuring equal access for students across the country.  Furthermore, it has played a significant role through legislation such as the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) and its successors: NCLB (No Child Left Behind) and ESSA (the Every Student Succeeds Act). These laws link federal funding to specific requirements, which aim to address inequities in education. Currently, federal contributions account for approximately 8 percent of funding for elementary and secondary education, with the remaining 92 percent coming from state and local sources (“The Federal Role,” 2017).

    The role of state and local control in education

    Education policy and administration have traditionally been state functions. States determine funding formulas, establish teacher certification requirements, and oversee curricula through their departments and boards of education (Lynch, 2016). Governors and state legislatures allocate funds, which are often distributed to schools based on enrollment, need, or specific programs (Lunenberg et al., 2012).

    Local school boards also play a critical role, managing day-to-day operations and responding to community needs. This decentralized structure reflects a longstanding belief that local authorities are better positioned to address the diverse needs of their communities. However, it has also led to significant disparities between states and districts in terms of funding, resources, and student outcomes.

    Dismantling the United States Department of Education 

    One of the most compelling arguments for dismantling the United States Department of Education lies in the principle of localized control. Critics argue that education is best managed by state and local governments because they are closer to the specific needs of their communities. Localized governance could allow schools to tailor their policies, curriculum, and resource allocation in ways that best fit the unique demographics of their regions. For example, schools in rural areas may have vastly different needs than those in urban centers, which is why local authorities are likely better equipped to address these disparities without the interference of federal oversight.

    The concern extends beyond general education. The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), which is enforced by the United States Department of Education, mandates that students with disabilities receive free and appropriate public education (FAPE) along with necessary services and accommodations. Similarly, the department oversees federal programs that support English Language Learner (ELL) students by helping schools provide tailored instruction and resources to students who are not native English speakers. Without federal oversight, it is possible that these programs could lose funding or be inconsistently applied across states, causing vulnerable populations to be without critical support.

    Advocates of dismantling the United States Department of Education also point to the financial burden of maintaining a federal agency. They argue that billions of dollars allocated to the department could be redirected to state education budgets, thereby allowing for more impactful initiatives at the forefront. By eliminating bureaucratic layers, states could potentially deliver education funding more efficiently, thereby focusing resources directly on teachers, classrooms, and students.

    Another critical function of the United States Department of Education is establishing and enforcing national education standards. Programs such as NCLB and ESSA aim to hold schools accountable for student performance and ensure consistency across states (albeit, there are arguments those programs have led to a culture of “teaching to the test” and have stifled creativity in the classroom), but allowing states and local districts to have greater freedom to design their own standards and assessments may fostering innovation while also leading to the quality of education varying dramatically from state to state and can cause challenges for students in transient populations due to a lack of cohesion disrupting their education and limiting their opportunities.

    Keeping the United States Department of Education 

    Dismantling the United States Department of Education raises significant concerns about equity. The department plays a crucial role in addressing disparities in funding education, as well as in funding access. Federal programs (i.e., Title I, free meals, counseling, after-school programs, etc.) provide additional resources to schools serving high numbers of low-income students, many of which are located in inner-city areas. Without the United States Department of Education, these programs might be eliminated or left to the discretion of states that have historically struggled to prioritize funding for underserved communities.

    Inner-city urban schools often face unique challenges (i.e., overcrowding, insufficient funding, higher rates of poverty among students, etc.). Many of these schools also serve disproportionately high numbers of students with disabilities and ELL students, thereby making federal support even more vital. The United States Department of Education enforces civil rights protections that ensures that all students (including vulnerable subgroups) receive equitable treatment. Dismantling the department could weaken these safeguards, thereby leaving marginalized communities more vulnerable to neglect. Therefore, the loss of federal oversight is a serious concern for public education. Historically, states have not always allocated resources equitably, and urban school districts have often been underfunded compared to their suburban counterparts. Federal intervention has been essential in addressing these disparities. Without it, inner-city schools may struggle to maintain even basic standards of education, thereby exacerbating poverty and inequality.

    All schools (not just inner-city schools) will be adversely impacted by dismantling the United States Department of Education. Federal funding supports Advanced Placement (AP) courses, STEM initiatives, and dual-enrollment opportunities. Dismantling the United States Department of Education could lead to inconsistencies in college admissions processes because states might adopt different graduation requirements and assessments. This lack of standardization could complicate admissions for students applying to out-of-state or prestigious universities. Furthermore, the United States Department of Education funds research initiatives that lead to the development of new teaching methods, technologies, and curricula. These innovations often benefit all schools, but without federal support, such research might stagnate leaving schools without access to cutting-edge educational resources.

    Conclusion

    In conclusion, the debate pertaining to dismantling the United States Department of Education has taken on new urgency under the Trump administration in 2025. While advocates of dismantling the department argue for greater local control and efficiency, the critics highlight the potential risks to equity and access.  As the nation grapples with this issue, it is essential to prioritize the needs of students (and communities). The ultimate goal must be to create a more equitable and effective education system that serves all students regardless of their background or zip code.

    Latest posts by eSchool Media Contributors (see all)

    Source link

  • 25 of Our Top Stories About Schools, Students and Learning – The 74

    25 of Our Top Stories About Schools, Students and Learning – The 74

    Republish This Article

    We want our stories to be shared as widely as possible — for free.

    Please view The 74’s republishing terms.


    Source link

  • KU researchers publish guidelines to help responsibly implement AI in education

    KU researchers publish guidelines to help responsibly implement AI in education

    This story originally appeared on KU News and is republished with permission.

    Key points:

    Researchers at the University of Kansas have produced a set of guidelines to help educators from preschool through higher education responsibly implement artificial intelligence in a way that empowers teachers, parents, students and communities alike.

    The Center for Innovation, Design & Digital Learning at KU has published “Framework for Responsible AI Integration in PreK-20 Education: Empowering All Learners and Educators with AI-Ready Solutions.” The document, developed under a cooperative agreement with the U.S. Department of Education, is intended to provide guidance on how schools can incorporate AI into its daily operations and curriculum.

    Earlier this year, President Donald Trump issued an executive order instructing schools to incorporate AI into their operations. The framework is intended to help all schools and educational facilities do so in a manner that fits their unique communities and missions.

    “We see this framework as a foundation,” said James Basham, director of CIDDL and professor of special education at KU. “As schools consider forming an AI task force, for example, they’ll likely have questions on how to do that, or how to conduct an audit and risk analysis. The framework can help guide them through that, and we’ll continue to build on this.”

    The framework features four primary recommendations.

    • Establish a stable, human-centered foundation.
    • Implement future-focused strategic planning for AI integration.
    • Ensure AI educational opportunities for every student.
    • Conduct ongoing evaluation, professional learning and community development.

    First, the framework urges schools to keep humans at the forefront of AI plans, prioritizing educator judgment, student relationships and family input on AI-enabled processes and not relying on automation for decisions that affect people. Transparency is also key, and schools should communicate how AI tools work, how decisions are made and ensure compliance with student protection laws such as the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act and Family Education Rights and Privacy Act, the report authors write.

    The document also outlines recommendations for how educational facilities can implement the technology. Establishing an AI integration task force including educators, administrators, families, legal advisers and specialists in instructional technology and special education is key among the recommendations. The document also shares tips on how to conduct an audit and risk analysis before adoption and consider how tools can affect student placement and identification and consider possible algorithmic error patterns. As the technologies are trained on human data, they run the risk of making the same mistakes and repeating biases humans have made, Basham said.

    That idea is also reflected in the framework’s third recommendation. The document encourages educators to commit to learner-centered AI implementation that considers all students, from those in gifted programs to students with cognitive disabilities. AI tools should be prohibited from making final decisions on IEP eligibility, disciplinary actions and student progress decisions, and mechanisms should be installed that allow for feedback on students, teachers and parents’ AI educational experiences, the authors wrote.

    Finally, the framework urges ongoing evaluation, professional learning and community development. As the technology evolves, schools should regularly re-evaluate it for unintended consequences and feedback from those who use it. Training both at implementation and in ongoing installments will be necessary to address overuse or misuse and clarify who is responsible for monitoring AI use and to ensure both the school and community are informed on the technology.

    The framework was written by Basham; Trey Vasquez, co-principal investigator at CIDDL, operating officer at KU’s Achievement & Assessment Institute and professor of special education at KU; and Angelica Fulchini Scruggs, research associate and operations director for CIDDL.

    Educators interested in learning more about the framework or use of AI in education are invited to connect with CIDDL. The center’s site includes data on emergent themes in AI guidance at the state level and information on how it supports educational technology in K-12 and higher education. As artificial intelligence finds new uses and educators are expected to implement the technology in schools, the center’s researchers said they plan to continue helping educators implement it in ways that benefit schools, students of all abilities and communities.

    “The priority at CIDDL is to share transparent resources for educators on topics that are trending and in a way that is easy to digest,” Fulchini Scruggs said. “We want people to join the community and help them know where to start. We also know this will evolve and change, and we want to help educators stay up to date with those changes to use AI responsibly in their schools.”

    Latest posts by eSchool Media Contributors (see all)

    Source link

  • $218m in wages recovered by Fair Work – Campus Review

    $218m in wages recovered by Fair Work – Campus Review

    The Fair Work Ombudsman is scrutinising 28 universities in relation to wage underpayments and has recovered $218 million in unpaid wages for over 110,000 employees.

    Please login below to view content or subscribe now.

    Membership Login

    Source link

  • ‘Make Sure They Speak English’ is Fed’s Only Responsibility to U.S. Kids – The 74

    ‘Make Sure They Speak English’ is Fed’s Only Responsibility to U.S. Kids – The 74

    News


    By

    Speaking to reporters on Tuesday, President Donald Trump said ‘little tiny bit of supervision’ is all that’s needed for education.



    Source link

  • Using QILT data to up student satisfaction – Campus Review

    Using QILT data to up student satisfaction – Campus Review

    Students need to know universities are actively using Quality Indicators for Learning and Teaching (QILT) survey data to change processes, the director of the survey said on Thursday.

    Please login below to view content or subscribe now.

    Membership Login

    Source link

  • Trump Education Department Delays Return of Laid-Off Workers Over Logistics – The 74

    Trump Education Department Delays Return of Laid-Off Workers Over Logistics – The 74


    Get stories like this delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for The 74 Newsletter

    Parking permits. Desk space. Access cards.

    Ordered to bring back roughly 1,300 laid-off workers, the U.S. Department of Education instead has spent weeks ostensibly working on the logistics. Meanwhile, the Trump administration wants the U.S. Supreme Court to decide they don’t have to restore those jobs after all.

    The legal argument over the job status of Education Department workers is testing the extent to which President Donald Trump and Education Secretary Linda McMahon can reshape the federal bureaucracy without congressional approval.

    The employees, meanwhile, remain in limbo, getting paid for jobs they aren’t allowed to perform.

    An analysis done by the union representing Education Department employees estimates the government is spending about $7 million a month for workers not to work. That figure does not include supervisors who are not part of the American Federation of Government Employee Local 252.

    “It is terribly inefficient,” said Brittany Coleman, chief steward for AFGE Local 252 and an attorney in the Office for Civil Rights. “The American people are not getting what they need because we can’t do our jobs.”

    McMahon announced the layoffs in March, a week after she was confirmed by the Senate, and described them as a first step toward dismantling the Education Department. A few days later, Trump signed an executive order directing McMahon to do everything in her legal authority to shut down the department.

    The Somerville and Easthampton school districts in Massachusetts, along with the American Federation of Teachers, other education groups, and 21 Democratic attorneys general sued McMahon over the cuts. They argued the layoffs were so extensive that the Education Department would not be able to perform its duties under the law.

    The layoffs hit the Office for Civil Rights, Federal Student Aid, and the Institute of Education Sciences particularly hard. These agencies are responsible for federally mandated work within the Education Department. By law, only Congress can get rid of the Education Department.

    U.S. District Court Judge Myong Joun agreed, issuing a sweeping preliminary injunction in May that ordered the Education Department to bring laid off employees back to work and blocked any further effort to dismantle or substantively restructure the department.

    The Trump administration sought a stay of that order, and the case is on the emergency docket of the Supreme Court, where a decision could come any day.

    In the administration’s request to the Supreme Court, Solicitor General John Sauer argued that the harms the various plaintiffs had described were largely hypothetical, that they had not shown the department wasn’t fulfilling its duties, and that they didn’t have standing to sue because layoffs primarily affect department employees, not states, school districts, and education organizations.

    Sauer further argued that the injunction violates the separation of powers, putting the judicial branch in charge of employment decisions that are the purview of the executive branch.

    “The injunction rests on the untenable assumption that every terminated employee is necessary to perform the Department of Education’s statutory functions,” Sauer wrote in a court filing. “That injunction effectively appoints the district court to a Cabinet role and bars the Executive Branch from terminating anyone.”

    The Supreme Court, with a conservative 6-3 majority, has been friendlier to the administration’s arguments than lower court judges. Already the court has allowed cuts to teacher training grants to go through while a lawsuit works its way through the courts. And it has halted the reinstatement of fired probationary workers.

    The Education Department did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

    Last week, Joun issued a separate order telling the Education Department that it must reinstate employees in the Office for Civil Rights. The Victims Rights Law Center and other groups had described thousands of cases left in limbo, with children suffering severe bullying or unable to safely return to school.

    Meanwhile, the Education Department continues to file weekly updates with Joun about the complexities of reinstating the laid-off employees. In these court filings, Chief of Staff Rachel Oglesby said an “ad hoc committee of senior leadership” is meeting weekly to figure out where employees might park and where they should report to work.

    Since the layoffs, the department has closed regional offices, consolidated offices in three Washington, D.C. buildings into one, reduced its contracts for parking space, and discontinued an interoffice shuttle.

    In the most recent filing, Oglesby said the department is working on a “reintegration plan.”

    Coleman said she finds these updates “laughable.”

    “If you are really willing to do what the court is telling you to do, then your working group would have figured out a way to get us our laptops,” she said.

    This story was originally published by Chalkbeat. Chalkbeat is a nonprofit news site covering educational change in public schools. Sign up for their newsletters at ckbe.at/newsletters.


    Get stories like these delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for The 74 Newsletter

    Source link

  • Federal judge blocks Trump’s Education Dept. shutdown, orders reinstatement of laid off staff

    Federal judge blocks Trump’s Education Dept. shutdown, orders reinstatement of laid off staff

    This story was originally published by Chalkbeat. Sign up for their newsletters at ckbe.at/newsletters.

    A federal judge on May 22 issued a preliminary injunction blocking President Donald Trump’s executive order to shut down the U.S. Department of Education and said the agency must reinstate the employees who were fired as part of mass layoffs.

    After U.S. Education Secretary Linda McMahon announced the agency’s plans in March to slash its workforce by roughly half, she called it a first step in getting rid of the agency. Trump followed days later with his executive order aiming to eliminate the department, a move he has long wanted.

    But only Congress can actually eliminate the department, and the administration’s attempt at getting around that influenced U.S. District Judge Myong Joun’s Thursday ruling.

    The Trump administration argued that they implemented agency layoffs to improve “efficiency” and “accountability,” the Massachusetts judge wrote, but then said: “The record abundantly reveals that [the administration’s] true intention is to effectively dismantle the Department without an authorizing statute.”

    Joun added: “A department without enough employees to perform statutorily mandated functions is not a department at all. This court cannot be asked to cover its eyes while the Department’s employees are continuously fired and units are transferred out until the Department becomes a shell of itself.”

    Within hours of the Joun’s ruling, the Trump administration filed an appeal.

    “This ruling is not in the best interest of American students or families,” Madi Biedermann, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Communications, wrote in a statement.

    Calls for the injunction came from lawsuits filed by the Somerville and Easthampton schools districts in Massachusetts along with the American Federation of Teachers, other education groups, and 21 Democratic attorneys general.

    They argued that the gutting of the department rendered the agency incapable of performing many of its core functions required by Congress.

    For example, all of the attorneys from the agency’s general counsel office who handle grants for K-12 schools and grants under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, or IDEA, had been fired. The dismantling of the Office for Civil Rights made it difficult to enforce civil rights protections. The department’s Financial Student Aid programs, which provide financial assistance to almost 12.9 million students across approximately 6,100 postsecondary educational institutions, were also hampered.

    Trump’s executive order instructed McMahon to “take all necessary steps to facilitate the closure of the Department of Education and return authority over education to the States and local communities” to the “maximum extent appropriate and permitted by law.”

    At the same time, the order said McMahon should ensure “the effective and uninterrupted delivery of services, programs, and benefits on which Americans rely.”

    Trump said he would move the agency’s student loan portfolio to the Small Business Administration, and the Department of Health and Human Services would replace the Education Department’s role in “handling special needs.”

    Before the layoffs, the Education Department was the smallest of the 15 cabinet-level departments in terms of staffing, according to the judge, with around 4,100 employees. And the plaintiffs said the agency was strained meeting its obligations even then.

    The ruling was not based on the employees’ job rights, but rather how the agency was able to fulfill its obligations.

    “It’s not about whether employees have a right to a job,” said Derek Black, a University of South Carolina law professor. “It’s about whether the department can fulfill its statutory obligations to the states and to students.”

    The case made by former department employees, educational institutions, unions, and educators, Joun wrote, paints “stark picture of the irreparable harm that will result from financial uncertainty and delay, impeded access to vital knowledge on which students and educators rely, and loss of essential services for America’s most vulnerable student populations.”

    American Federation of Teachers President Randi Weingarten heralded the judge’s ruling, calling it “a first step to reverse this war on knowledge and the undermining of broad-based opportunity.”

    But Biedermann, from the Education Department, said the ruling was unfair to the Trump administration.

    “Once again, a far-left Judge has dramatically overstepped his authority, based on a complaint from biased plaintiffs, and issued an injunction against the obviously lawful efforts to make the Department of Education more efficient and functional for the American people,” she said in a statement.

    Chalkbeat national editor Erica Meltzer contributed reporting.

    Chalkbeat is a nonprofit news site covering educational change in public schools.

    For more news on federal policy, visit eSN’s Educational Leadership hub.

    Latest posts by eSchool Media Contributors (see all)

    Source link