The move to dismantle the department would threaten decades of progress toward educational equity, and its ripple effects would be felt deeply, not just in K-12 schools, but in colleges, universities, and communities like ours at City College.
On Thursday, March 20 a proposed executive order was issued calling for a comprehensive plan to dismantle the United States Department of Education. While proponents claim this is an effort to cut government spending and return control to local communities, the implications go far beyond bureaucracy.
The Department of Education is essential to ensuring that every student, regardless of background, income or ability has an equal shot as everybody else at a quality education. The department runs Pell Grants and manages FAFSA, lifelines to thousands of City College students. It enforces civil rights laws so students with disabilities, LGBTQ+ students, and students of color can learn in safe, inclusive environments. Without it, there’s no guarantee these protections will remain in place.
By shifting educational oversight to individual states, we risk creating a deeply unequal educational landscape where students’ opportunities are determined by their ZIP code creating unfair barriers that nobody should accept.
Proponents of eliminating the Department of Education argue that education is a local issue, and it needs to be dealt with based on the individual requirements of specific communities rather than imposed by federal mandates. They believe that the abolition of the department could cut bureaucratic red tape, federal intrusion, and encourage innovation since states would be free to develop their own models of schools.
While local control may have a significant role to play in education, eliminating the federal footprint entirely ignores the function the Department of Education serves in leveling the playing field, protecting students’ rights and enabling financial aid. Without a federal standard, we risk leaving behind millions of students, particularly those in under-resourced or disadvantaged cohorts. Local innovation cannot come at the cost of national equity.
For such a widely diverse campus as City College, with so many first-generation, low-income, or part-time students working to balance work and school, dropping federal standards and funds would intensify the gap in achievement as well as push higher education even further beyond reach.
Without an agency to track and respond to enrollment trends, graduation rates, student debt and equity outcomes, the nation would be flying blind in crafting fair and efficient educational policy. For schools like City College, which rely on such information to acquire grants, strengthen programs, and support vulnerable students, this loss would be a step backward toward continued improvement and accountability.
We should oppose this proposal. Our schooling and our futures are more than worthwhile fighting for.
