FILE — The Department of Education in Washington, Nov. 18, 2024. The Republican Party has called for the shuttering of the Education Department since it first opened its doors in 1980. (Al Drago/The New York Times)

Since Trump assumed office, he has been starkly clear about his motive to dismantle the Department of Education and has reportedly advanced actions toward it as well. The statement “The Education Department is running a con job,” once declared by Trump, has since reverberated through the corridors of American education. Adding further weight to the administration’s stance, newly elected US Education Secretary Linda McMahon subtly expressed her commitment to overseeing the department’s dissolution in a recently circulated memo. McMahon’s educational vision reflects a decisive departure from federally dictated educational governance, instead pivoting toward a paradigm where state governments and parents reclaim authority over academic standards and curriculum design.
In her final mission email that subtly hinted at collapsing the US Education Department, McMahon notably remarked, “Taxpayer-funded education should refocus on meaningful learning in math, reading, science, and history — not divisive DEI programs and gender ideology.” The statement encapsulated the administration’s core objective of reshifting educational priorities. However, amid this sweeping policy shift, reading and math scores have continued to show a downward trend — a crisis that has prevailed since the pandemic. This, in turn, raises a burning question now echoing through the realm of US academia: Will dissolving the Department of Education indeed cultivate a conducive ground for improving math and reading scores, or will the absence of federal oversight push the education system to the brink of chaos, further eroding decades of progress?
As the Trump administration inches closer to implementing this monumental shift, US education now stands precariously at a crossroads, overshadowed by two divergent possibilities — reform or regression. Whether the envisioned educational autonomy will herald a renaissance in academic performance or precipitate widespread disarray remains a matter of profound uncertainty.

Current picture of Math and reading scores in the US

The latest National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) report issued by the US Department of Education has painted a dismal picture of academic proficiency, revealing a sharp decline in both reading and math scores across the nation. According to the report, fourth-grade reading scores have plummeted from 220 in 2019 to 215 in 2025, while eighth-graders witnessed an equally concerning drop from 263 to 258. This downward trajectory has hit the most vulnerable student groups the hardest, further intensifying the educational divide.
The crisis extends far beyond literacy, as mathematics has also experienced a concerning regression. Fourth-grade math scores have dropped by an average of three points compared to pre-pandemic levels, while eighth-graders recorded an even steeper decline of eight points, underscoring a growing academic deficit. While high-performing students have shown marginal improvements since 2022, the achievement gap between the nation’s highest and lowest-performing students has now reached a historic high. Chronic absenteeism has further compounded these challenges, particularly for students already grappling with lower academic performance. Data suggests that these students have been missing critical instructional time, making it increasingly difficult for them to regain lost academic ground. The deepening divide in math and reading proficiency has raised pressing concerns about the efficacy of existing academic recovery initiatives — fueling debates over whether dissolving the Education Department would accelerate progress or further dismantle academic stability.

Could eliminating the Department boost Math and Reading Scores?

Reading comprehension and Math literacy are the kingpins of the educational framework. However, as the Trump administration hurtles toward uprooting the US Education Department, the question that has emerged at the surface is: How will it help in enhancing the academic quality in US classrooms? Here are a few ways in which wiping off the department can assist students in honing their reading comprehension and mathematical abilities.
A push for state-driven educational innovation
One of the primary reasons brought about by Trump’s camp who back dissolving the education department is shifting educational control to states that could propel innovation, especially in core subjects like Math and English. Advocates believe that local governments comprehend the unique ordeals of their communities better than federal authorities. The decentralisation, they claim, could lead to customised solutions to bolster student performance.
For example, in Mississippi, a dramatic surge in fourth-grade reading scores—often referred to as the “Mississippi Miracle”—was achieved through state-led reforms supported by federally funded Regional Education Labs (RELs). These labs provided expertise and strategic guidance to state education agencies, ultimately leading to a robust overhaul in reading instruction.
Faster response to local education challenges
Uprooting the department will also lead to the erasure of time-consuming federal procedures. Currently, federal involvement leads to delays in the implementation of new educational initiatives, as states must walk along the extensive regulatory frameworks. Without federal intervention, the states could respond more swiftly and abruptly to educational challenges and integrate evidence-based learning strategies that directly benefit students grappling with math and English.
For instance, states like Kentucky were working on research projects to identify the best math intervention models when federal funding was abruptly cut. Had Kentucky retained full control, these projects might have advanced without disruption. Advocates believe that giving states autonomy can foster quicker and more efficient academic improvements.
Increased parental control and school choice
A worthwhile aspect of Trump’s vision is enhancing parental control over children’s education. The administration believes that shattering the department could facilitate the growth of charter schools, homeschooling, and other educational alternatives. By wiping off federal interference, parents can embolden their voices in deciding the curriculum, educational methods, and overall learning environment.
Proponents contend that this shift will not only bolster educational outcomes in math and reading but also foster personalised learning experiences. The freedom to implement innovative teaching strategies customised to local communities could ultimately close achievement gaps in grappling states.

Side-effects of wiping off the Education Department

Well, while the positive aspects of removing the department have garnered attention, the negatives cannot be shrugged off. The exact answer of how it will impact US academia rests with the future, but it can equivocally impede the progress of education or even take a U-turn in the longer run. Here are the possible consequences:
Discontinuation of federally funded initiatives
While proponents oversee academic progress through state autonomy, critics contend that scrapping off the Department of Education could derail several federally funded initiatives aimed at improving math and reading scores. The department has historically invested millions of dollars in teacher training, curriculum development, and state-led intervention programs.
For instance, Kentucky had plans to launch five comprehensive training programs for math teachers aimed at helping struggling students. These initiatives were expected to significantly improve math proficiency across the state. However, when the Trump administration cut $103.7 million in federal funding, these projects were abruptly halted. Without federal financial backing, states may now struggle to implement large-scale academic reforms, potentially stalling progress in math and reading proficiency.
Widening educational inequities
Another major concern is the potential disparity in educational inequities, especially for low-income minority, and disabled students. The Education Department has played a key role in implementing civil rights laws and ensuring educational access for all students. With its removal, there is an emerging apprehension that marginalised communities might face reduced academic support.
Currently, the department administers Pell Grants, supports students with disabilities, and safeguards students against race and gender discrimination in schools. Dissolving the department without a clear transition plan could leave millions of vulnerable students in limbo lacking essential educational resources. Critics believe that this could reverse decades of progress made toward educational equity.
Disruption of federal student loan programs
The fate of the $1.6 trillion federal student loan program also hangs in the balance. The Education Department oversees and administers federal loans and Pell Grants that support millions of students from low-income families. If the department is dismantled, the responsibility of managing these loans would need to be transferred to another federal agency, a process that could create significant disruptions.
McMahon suggested that such programs could be shifted to the Department of Treasury or another entity, but the transition process remains unclear. Critics worry that such a move could delay loan disbursements, impact students’ financial aid, and create widespread confusion among borrowers.
Lack of a unified national standard
Extinguishing the Education Department can lead to potential fragmentation of academic standards. Currently, the department ensures meeting a minimum level of educational quality nationwide. Without federal oversight, states may adopt absolutely different educational benchmarks, leading to inconsistencies in learning outcomes.
For instance, a sixth-grader in California may receive advanced math instruction, while a student in another state may struggle with basic concepts due to underdeveloped curriculums. This disparity could ultimately create large gaps in academic proficiency, particularly in subjects like math and English.
Reduced research and data support
The department holds a pivotal role in funding educational research and implementing best practises. The recently defunded Regional Education Labs (RELs) and Comprehensive Centers were pivotal in assisting the state improve literacy and math scores. Their closure has left many states without vital research, training, and technical support.
In Mississippi, for example, RELs contributed significantly to the state’s reading reform success. Without federal support, replicating such success stories may become increasingly difficult, ultimately stalling national academic progress.

Reform or regression: What lies ahead?

The debate over shattering the Department of Education has led to two different narratives- one visualising educational liberty and innovation, while the other projecting a regression in academic progress. While proponents holdfast to the belief of state autonomy, quicker response time, and greater parental control, critics are wary of massive repercussions including widened educational inequities, financial disruptions, and patched learning standards.