Agence France-Presse
March 20, 2025
US President Donald Trump signs an executive order aimed at shutting down the Department of Education on March 20, 2025. (AFP)
Do American students really rank at the bottom of international comparisons and does the United States really spend more per pupil than any other country?
Those are the false claims made by President Donald Trump and his backers to justify shutting the Department of Education.
Trump signed an executive order on Thursday to close the department, which was created in 1979. While it cannot be shuttered without the approval of Congress, the department will likely be starved of funds and staff by the order.
ALSO READ: 'Came as a surprise to me': Senators 'troubled' by one aspect of government funding bill
The Trump administration had already sought to gut the department in early March by shedding almost 1,800 jobs, or about half of its staff, which according to Education Secretary Linda McMahon would help "our scores go up."
- Do US students really rank last? False -
"No matter how you cut it, the US is not scoring at the bottom of the international rankings," Nat Malkus, senior fellow and the deputy director of education policy at the conservative-leaning American Enterprise Institute, told AFP. "The US ranks in the middle of the pack on most international assessments."
Fifteen-year-old US students placed above average in reading and close to average in math on the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development's latest Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) test.
Two other international tests, the PIRLS in 2021 for reading and the TIMSS in 2023 for science and mathematics, also place American kids within the average of the countries tested.
National tests did show a drop off after 2019, but that was partly attributed to disruptions caused by Covid shutdowns, with similar patterns seen in other countries.
But the picture is nowhere near as catastrophic as many of Trump's conservative supporters claim.
Nationally, in 2024, 76 percent of fourth-grade students (ages 9-10) and 61 percent of eighth-grade students (ages 13-14) met or exceeded the expected baseline in mathematics, according to National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) results. In reading, they were 60 percent and 67 percent above the minimum, respectively.
It is also false that students "have fallen behind" since the creation of the DoE, a claim made by Republican Representative Byron Donalds of Florida.
For example, the average math proficiency of fourth-graders has increased by 24 points since 1990, and the average reading proficiency has not changed since 1992, according to the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES).
Malkus at the AEI said the "Department could improve how it supports US education" but cannot "be held responsible for student outcomes."
- Highest cost per student in the world? False -
Trump has claimed "we spend more per pupil than any other country in the world, and we're ranked at the bottom of the list."
He says his "dream" is to "move education into the states so that the states instead of bureaucrats working in Washington can run education" -- as proposed in the conservative "Project 2025" program that has guided the new administration.
But that's already the case. Each US state runs its own education system, with the DoE primarily responsible for administering student loans offered by the federal government, assisting disadvantaged students and enforcing rights.
While it does spend more per student than most countries, the United States ranked fifth in 2019 and sixth in 2021 in the OECD ranking for spending per primary and secondary student, far behind Luxembourg and Norway. And that spending is the responsibility of the states, with the federal government representing only about 13 percent of total funding.
"In the US only 4 percent of total federal spending is devoted to education, compared to about 10 percent on average in the countries in the OECD," said Fernando Reimers, a Harvard professor specializing in international education.
Several Democratic states, parents associations and the American Federation of Teachers (AFT) have all filed appeals against the dismantling of the department.
The AFT said in a press release that shutting the department will hurt "ten million students who rely on financial aid to go to college or pursue a trade" as well as "millions of students with disabilities and students living in poverty."
'Now they can discriminate': Top lawmaker on education panel sounds alarm over Trump order
Matt LasloDaniel Hampton
March 20, 2025
Matt LasloDaniel Hampton
March 20, 2025
RAW STORY
U.S. President Donald Trump attends an event to sign an executive order to shut down the Department of Education, in the East Room at the White House in Washington, D.C., U.S., March 20, 2025. REUTERS/Nathan Howard
The top Democrat on the House Education and Workforce Committee railed against MAGA efforts to dismantle the Department of Education, telling Raw Story on Thursday, "Now they can discriminate."
President Donald Trump signed an executive order on Thursday to begin drastically unwinding the Department of Education. The order directed Education Secretary Linda McMahon to begin the process of shrinking the department and transferring educational authority back to the states.
Completely eliminating the department, however, requires congressional approval, which the administration likely doesn't have.
The order aimed to significantly reduce the agency's scope and only retain "essential functions" such as managing student loans, enforcing civil rights legislation, and overseeing Pell grants. It also fulfills Trump's campaign vow and aligns with long-standing conservative calls to eliminate the agency.
Rep. Bobby Scott (D-VA) sounded the alarm at the action, warning that the U.S. has seen what education looks like without the Department of Education — it resulted in segregation.
"They know they're discriminating, and now they can discriminate," Scott told Raw Story. "If the Department of Education is eliminated, then the civil rights of students — the right of students to get an education — will be dependent on each and every state, and we know how that worked. If you leave it up to the states, you could still have racial segregation in schools, students with disabilities would not be getting much education at all.”
Scott called the latest MAGA endeavor akin to when the Voting Rights Act was "shot down."
"You started seeing these states in the South particularly kind of revert back to some of their old ways," he said. "When Section V — pre-clearance — was essentially eliminated, officials in at least two states pronounced that it was good, and now they can pass voting rights laws that would make no sense if they could have been pre-cleared."
He pointed to Title I and the Civil Rights Act as evidence of what happens when civil rights are left up to the states.
"It didn't work, right?" Scott said.
While he conceded he doesn't know what the political implications will be, he said the education implications are clear.
"Those for whom the Education Department was there, they will be at a serious disadvantage," warned Scott. "Those who were segregated into inferior schools, those with English as a second language, students with disabilities were not getting an education until there was a federal mandate. Low-income students, people in rural and low-income areas were not getting an equal educational opportunity. That's why the Department of Education was there."
Furthermore, equitable access to college may suffer.
"Then access to college and student loans, so students can get into college. That's why the Department of Education was there, so that people would have an equal opportunity with education, and we know what it looked like before then, we know how many students were getting into college without Pell Grants and student loans. We know what the opportunity looked like and, under segregation, what is left up to the states. We know students with disabilities were not getting an education until there's a federal mandate."
"Parents of students with disabilities, it's a fight," he added. "The only thing they have on their side is federal law and the Department of Education. Leave it up to the states, they're not going to get much."
U.S. President Donald Trump attends an event to sign an executive order to shut down the Department of Education, in the East Room at the White House in Washington, D.C., U.S., March 20, 2025. REUTERS/Nathan Howard
The top Democrat on the House Education and Workforce Committee railed against MAGA efforts to dismantle the Department of Education, telling Raw Story on Thursday, "Now they can discriminate."
President Donald Trump signed an executive order on Thursday to begin drastically unwinding the Department of Education. The order directed Education Secretary Linda McMahon to begin the process of shrinking the department and transferring educational authority back to the states.
Completely eliminating the department, however, requires congressional approval, which the administration likely doesn't have.
The order aimed to significantly reduce the agency's scope and only retain "essential functions" such as managing student loans, enforcing civil rights legislation, and overseeing Pell grants. It also fulfills Trump's campaign vow and aligns with long-standing conservative calls to eliminate the agency.
Rep. Bobby Scott (D-VA) sounded the alarm at the action, warning that the U.S. has seen what education looks like without the Department of Education — it resulted in segregation.
"They know they're discriminating, and now they can discriminate," Scott told Raw Story. "If the Department of Education is eliminated, then the civil rights of students — the right of students to get an education — will be dependent on each and every state, and we know how that worked. If you leave it up to the states, you could still have racial segregation in schools, students with disabilities would not be getting much education at all.”
Scott called the latest MAGA endeavor akin to when the Voting Rights Act was "shot down."
"You started seeing these states in the South particularly kind of revert back to some of their old ways," he said. "When Section V — pre-clearance — was essentially eliminated, officials in at least two states pronounced that it was good, and now they can pass voting rights laws that would make no sense if they could have been pre-cleared."
He pointed to Title I and the Civil Rights Act as evidence of what happens when civil rights are left up to the states.
"It didn't work, right?" Scott said.
While he conceded he doesn't know what the political implications will be, he said the education implications are clear.
"Those for whom the Education Department was there, they will be at a serious disadvantage," warned Scott. "Those who were segregated into inferior schools, those with English as a second language, students with disabilities were not getting an education until there was a federal mandate. Low-income students, people in rural and low-income areas were not getting an equal educational opportunity. That's why the Department of Education was there."
Furthermore, equitable access to college may suffer.
"Then access to college and student loans, so students can get into college. That's why the Department of Education was there, so that people would have an equal opportunity with education, and we know what it looked like before then, we know how many students were getting into college without Pell Grants and student loans. We know what the opportunity looked like and, under segregation, what is left up to the states. We know students with disabilities were not getting an education until there's a federal mandate."
"Parents of students with disabilities, it's a fight," he added. "The only thing they have on their side is federal law and the Department of Education. Leave it up to the states, they're not going to get much."
Matt Laslo has covered Congress since 2006, bringing Raw Story readers the personalities behind the politics and policy straight from Capitol Hill. Based in Washington, D.C., Matt has been a long-time contributor to NPR, WIRED, VICE News, The Daily Beast, Rolling Stone, and Playboy. More about Matt Laslo.
No comments:
Post a Comment