In a recent interview on The Brian Kilmeade Show, Ian Prior discussed the implications of abolishing the Department of Education, arguing that such a move should not be misconstrued as an attack on public schools. Instead, Prior emphasized that the call to eliminate the department is fundamentally a stance against federal oversight of local educational systems. This dialogue comes in the wake of the Department of Education’s recent decision to cancel nearly $350 million in contracts, which the agency described as "woke" spending that failed to address essential educational needs.
The Department of Education announced the cancellation of ten contracts with Regional Educational Laboratories (REL), amounting to $336 million. A review of these contracts revealed what officials termed "wasteful and ideologically driven spending," which they claimed did not serve the interests of students or taxpayers. The cuts may be linked to broader efforts by the Department of Government Efficiency, which has been scrutinizing the Education Department’s initiatives related to Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI).
In addition to the REL contracts, the department has terminated $33 million in grants to four Equity Assistance Centers. These centers were involved in training related to DEI, critical race theory, and gender identity for educational agencies and school boards. The department’s review highlighted instances where DEI initiatives were funded, prompting a shift in strategy toward contracts that prioritize statutory requirements and improve student learning outcomes.
The pushback against DEI initiatives has intensified, with the Department of Education warning that public schools must eliminate such policies or risk losing federal funding. This directive aligns with the broader agenda of the current administration, which has faced criticism for its approach to educational spending and policy.
President Donald Trump has long been an advocate for dismantling the Department of Education, labeling it a "con job" that has not effectively educated American students. He pointed out that despite the United States spending more per pupil than any other country, its educational outcomes rank poorly internationally. Trump’s administration has focused on cutting funding for programs perceived as divisive or ideologically driven, claiming these measures are necessary to improve educational quality and accountability.
The recent actions by the Department of Education reflect a significant shift in federal educational policy, prioritizing local control and reducing federal influence. As the debate continues, stakeholders in the education sector are closely monitoring the implications of these changes for public schools and their funding structures.