# data[].attributes.body
After reading Dr. Yuvraj Verma's article on dismantling the U.S. Department of Education, I find myself thinking about the major implications this would have on schools across the country. The idea of shifting control completely to state and local governments sounds appealing in some ways, especially in terms of tailoring education to better fit local needs, but it also raises concerns about consistency and equity. Without federal oversight, would underfunded schools struggle even more? Would educational disparities between states widen?I understand the frustration with federal involvement, especially when it comes to bureaucracy and standardized decrees that don't always reflect the needs of individual communities. However, the Department of Education plays a big role in things like special education funding and civil rights protections. If it were dismantled, what safety nets would be put in place to ensure all students still receive fair access to quality education?This article made me consider both sides of the debate. While local control could allow for more flexibility, completely eliminating federal oversight might create more problems than solutions. Maybe instead of dismantling the department entirely, we should focus on reforming it to be more effective and responsive to the actual needs of schools and students.

# data[].attributes.body
Getting rid of the U.S. Department of Education might seem like a way to save money, but it could hurt students especially those in poorer schools.

This department helps schools get money for important things like free lunches, extra help for struggling students, and special education. Without it, some states might not give enough money to schools that need it. It also ensures that all students are treated fairly, including those with disabilities and those learning English. If every state had different rules, some kids might not get the same chances as others. Plus, if schools had different graduation rules, moving to a new state could confuse students.

The department also helps pay for advanced classes like AP courses and science programs. Without that help, some schools wouldn’t be able to offer these, making it harder for students to get into college. Instead of getting rid of it, we should make it better. Schools should have enough money and support to help every student succeed!

# data[].attributes.body
I oppose dismantling the Department of Education (DOE) because it is key to ensuring that all students, especially those from low-income or marginalized communities, have equal access to education. The DOE provides important funding for programs like free lunch, special education, and after-school care, which many schools depend on to help their students. Without federal oversight, some states might not prioritize these services, especially in areas with fewer resources. The DOE also ensures that vulnerable students, such as those with disabilities and English language learners, get the support they need. Dismantling it could lead to a lack of consistency in funding and services, making inequality worse. While some people argue for more local control, this could mean that some students, especially those in poor areas, would not have the same opportunities. The DOE helps ensure that all students across the country are treated fairly. Without it, we risk undoing progress made in reducing education gaps and making the education system more equal for everyone

# data[].attributes.body
Understanding the roles that both the federal and state government play in education was really helpful in effectively being a part of the debate. I never actually knew what it meant to dismantle the US Department of Ed. but I knew it was bad and shouldn't happen. After reading the article I still believe in needs to stay in place because of the backboard it is in ensuring equity and access to communities who would fall through the cracks HOWEVER I think changes need to be made. Teaching certification requirements and standards should be a federal role so that there is consistency across the country. There is no reason why the quality of a teacher is left up to the state, all teachers should be held to the same standard to ensure we are effective to the young minds we are responsible for. In regards to standards I think there should be national standards that ensure everyone receives a basic education because there are some things every person should know and know how to do, like how to read and do taxes. While also there being state specific standards that align with the particular needs of the state, like middle states with a farming curriculum and standards.

I also noticed in the article the word 'potentially' is used in regards to what state and local government would do with more funds if there is no US Department of Ed. State departments of Ed. have a history of not using their funds correctly which is why federal needed to step in. I have no doubt without federal protection these programs like IDEA, Title I, STEM, and AP courses will disappear from inner-city schools, which are the schools that need it the most. If the goal is to create a more equitable and effective education system that serves all students regardless of their background or zip code then getting rid of the US Department of Ed. is not the answer, you don't get rid of something because it has flaws, you go in and you address and fix the issues. Federal and state education departments should be working together to ensure our future.

# data[].attributes.body
This article discusses the debate of dismantling the US Department of Education, with supporters arguing it would give schools more control, while others worry it can hurt access to education. As a future teacher, I find this debate very important because it can greatly impact schools and students. While local control could allow schools to address their specific needs, this could create inequalities, which then lead to some students without resources. A strong education system should ensure that all students, no matter what, can have access to quality learning opportunities. It’s especially important to provide students with disabilities with the tools and accommodations that they need. Some people are worried that if there is no department of education their child won’t get the services they need. Education should be fair and accessible for all, so no child is left behind due to lack of funding or support. Defunding the Department of Education is not a good idea, and ultimately we are hurting students.

# data[].attributes.body
This article touches upon the debate over dismantling the U.S. Department of Education raises valid points on both sides. Some argue that local control would allow states to better meet the unique needs of their communities, especially in rural areas. As the article mentions, “Localized governance could allow schools to tailor their policies, curriculum, and resource allocation in ways that best fit the unique demographics of their regions.” While this sounds promising, I am concerned about the risks to equity and fairness. The article highlights, “The loss of federal oversight is a serious concern for public education… historically, states have not always allocated resources equitably.” Federal programs like IDEA and Title I provide critical support for vulnerable students, and without the Department of Education, these programs could be at risk. I believe federal involvement is necessary to ensure that all students, regardless of background, have equal access to a quality education, and dismantling the Department of Education could lead to greater inequality.

# data[].attributes.body
This topic of dismantling the U.S department of education has been a very popular topic of discussion and a very big due to our careers. I have always heard different things and have had people ask me about it but i never had all the information. I feel there is different information about what it would look like if it happened and what it effects. Some articles say one thing and others say another. In this article it broke down two sections to discuss what the federal level involvement in schools and then state and local involvement in schools. They also broke it down into what happens with keeping it and what happens if it is dismantled. I understand the discussion around the funding and and where it comes from and down that line. I also understand the certain federal laws being bought down. But many people will be affected by this dismantling and most are not positive. From what I have read it also does not seem they have any plan for what happens after it regarding the people and students affected by the dismantling of the U.s Department of Education.

# data[].attributes.body
The article "Dismantling the US Education Department" raises critical questions about the federal role in education. While I see merit in arguments for state and local control; such as fostering innovation and reducing bureaucracy, I believe eliminating the department poses significant risks. Its role in ensuring equity, enforcing civil rights laws (like Title IX and IDEA), and providing essential funding (e.g., Title I, Pell Grants) is crucial for underserved students. Without federal oversight, disparities between states could deepen.

Historically, the department was created to unify and address national education challenges. While reforms are needed to streamline its functions and improve effectiveness, dismantling it entirely could undermine progress in equity and access. Instead of elimination, we should focus on making the department more efficient and responsive to the needs of students and educators. Education is too important to leave to chance, and every child deserves a fair shot at success.

# data[].attributes.body
I find the debate over dismantling the U.S. Department of Education deeply concerning. While I understand the argument for increasing state and local control, I worry about the potential consequences for educational equity. The federal government plays a crucial role in ensuring that all students, regardless of their socioeconomic background, receive a fair and adequate education. Programs such as Title I, IDEA, and federal support for ELL students help bridge opportunity gaps that state and local governments have historically struggled to address. Without federal oversight, I fear that disparities between wealthy and underfunded school districts will widen, leaving many students without the support they need to succeed. Additionally, the Department of Education provides a level of standardization that ensures students across the country receive a comparable education. If states had complete autonomy, graduation requirements, curriculum standards, and assessments could vary drastically, making it more difficult for students who move between states and complicating college admissions. As a future educator, I want to ensure that my students have access to resources, support, and opportunities, regardless of where they live. Eliminating the Department of Education could undermine these efforts, placing even greater strain on already underfunded schools.

# data[].attributes.body
About a month ago, my sister asked me about my thoughts about the DOE being dismantled but I honestly wasn’t well educated on the topic to give my opinion. After reading the article, I now feel like I have a clearer understanding of the debate around dismantling the Department of Education, and honestly, I’m really concerned. Federal funding supports critical programs like free meals and accommodations for students with disabilities, and if that’s cut, what happens to students who rely on those services? How can they succeed without them? I also worry about my current placement, where approximately 40% or more of my students depend on free or reduced breakfast/lunch. If the Department of Education is dismantled, how will they continue to get those meals? Without the necessary resources, it seems like students in lower income districts could really suffer. While some argue for more state control over education, many districts already struggle to provide resources, even with federal support. If that funding is removed, what happens to those schools? It’s a scary thought. We’ve made so much progress in ensuring equity and providing essential resources that students need. Dismantling the Department of Education feels like a huge step backwards, and I’m left with so many concerns about how this would impact students, especially those who need the most support. It’s also really frustrating because so many of us, as future educators, have a lot of questions and no clear answers. As we’re starting our careers, it’s unsettling not knowing what the future will look like. At the end of the day, we can only hope for the best possible outcome and do everything we possibly can to make the best of it for our students. As teachers, our main goal will always be to advocate for our students and do everything we can to help them succeed, no matter what challenges are thrown our way.

# data[].attributes.body
This article did clarify what Trump meant by dismantling the Department of Education but it did not make me feel better about it. As I was reading this article i was scrolling instagram and I saw a news source post that there might be an executive order coming soon to dismantle it sooner than later. Which I heard was going to happen but I didnt believe it. Reading this article makes me nervous for the school I am teaching in, I know alot of the programs in my school are federally funded. I know alot of my students get free lunch, I know some of their parents rely on this. The school I am in has very small class sizes, if the department of education is no longer, these class sizes will double. If dismantling the department of education solely meant states had more control, maybe it is a good idea, but dismantling the department of education means so much more. Doing this I believe will set our country back.

# data[].attributes.body
As a student teacher in a bilingual classroom, reading Dismantling the U.S. Department of Education deeply resonated with me, especially in terms of the potential impact on English Language Learners (ELLs) and underserved communities. The article highlights the argument for local control of education but also raises serious concerns about equity, access, and the loss of federal support for crucial programs.

One of my biggest takeaways is how dismantling the Department of Education could affect bilingual education. The department currently provides funding and oversight for programs that support ELL students, ensuring they receive the resources and accommodations they need. Without federal intervention, these supports might be inconsistently applied, leaving bilingual students vulnerable to inadequate instruction and limited opportunities. The article also reinforced my concerns about educational disparities. I see firsthand how funding disparities impact students, some schools have access to better resources, while others struggle with overcrowded classrooms and outdated materials. The Department of Education helps bridge these gaps through initiatives like Title I funding and special education programs. Removing these safeguards could disproportionately harm students in lower-income and minority communities, many of whom are bilingual learners. Overall, this article made me reflect on how much federal support shapes the classroom experience. While I understand the argument for local control, I fear that without national oversight, bilingual students who already face unique challenges could be left behind. This reinforces my commitment to advocating for equitable education policies that ensure all students, regardless of language or background, receive the quality education they deserve.

# data[].attributes.body
The article brings up a strong debate about the role of the U.S. Department of Education. On one hand, giving states more control could let schools focus on their specific needs. On the other, taking away federal oversight could lead to more inequality, especially for low-income, disabled, and ELL students. The department provides important funding and protections, and without it, some schools might struggle even more. While change might be needed, completely getting rid of it seems risky for ensuring equal education for all. The idea of dismantling the U.S. Department of Education brings up a lot of concerns for me, especially as a future educator. While I understand the argument for local control, I worry about what this would mean for students, particularly those in underfunded schools or from marginalized communities. Without federal oversight, there’s a real risk that students in lower-income areas, who already struggle with limited resources will fall even further behind. Programs that provide funding for special education, English language learners, and low-income students could be cut or left to the discretion of states that may not prioritize them. For my students, this could mean fewer resources, outdated materials, and even less support for their individual needs. Equity in education is already a challenge, and taking away federal involvement could make it worse. I also think about the impact on standardization, if every state has different expectations, students who move frequently might struggle to keep up with shifting requirements. This could create even more obstacles to their success.

# data[].attributes.body
Originally while reading this article, my thoughts on the dismantling of the U.S. Department of Education were complicated. I was torn on issues as both positive and negative aspects both appealed to and repulsed me. Concepts of more freedoms, more state funding, and no longer having to teach to a test were promising thoughts, especially for a new teacher. However the negatives soon began to outweigh any positives when I realized just how much this may affect me, and those like myself.

I come from a historically low income family on both sides. Neither of my parents had graduated from a university or ever received a degree, and as I've gone to school in the past, I’ve always been added into the free lunch programs at schools. I was also a child with various behavioral issues as a child, and have had siblings on the autism spectrum that have needed significantly more assistance in school to achieve the least restrictive environment and learning. I began to think about my upbringing as I read through this article, and how while much of these changes may benefit me as a teacher in my preferred district, they won’t benefit those like me, who grew up like me, who needed extra help, free lunches, and programs to help achieve equity. On top of this, a majority of my education has been paid for by a combination of both the FAFSA and the HESSA. It took me a moment to realize as it was not mentioned in this article that the FAFSA by definition is federal funding for education. It may take up only 8% of funding in education, but to me, that 8% is half of my tuition every semester, and is keeping me from going deep into debt with student loans.

I fear for students of the future who may not be able to afford lunches, who may not receive the same quality of education that those assurances of the federal government provide. I feel for the students who desperately need speech, a paraprofessional, or other services in an IEP that can no longer be entirely guaranteed to them by that additional federal level. I fear for those from communities of low economic wealth who might wish to pursue higher education past their potentially inequitable schools who may not be able to afford college from a lack of grants, and who may not be accepted from educational disparities in public school curriculums and quality.

This is a change that may not be in our best interests, and though historically the U.S. DOE has only existed since 1979, it vastly improved the quality of education in our country, has helped pass numerous education acts, and have assured that schools are free from inequity, and that student rights are met. Hopefully the department may remain by the end of the current 4 year presidential term.

# data[].attributes.body
Dismantling the DOE under the current administration may not be the worst idea. If dismantling it is that pressing that it needs to be done in the first 100 days of the current presidency, maybe it should not be protested. The time used to protest could be used to restructure or further structure how each state handles education and diversity in education. The current administration does not want to prioritize education at a federal level because the investment that must be made into it will not yield an immediate return. If that were the case, I do not believe it would be a priority to dismantle it. The DOE receives billions in funding every year. If I am judging from the view of the current administration, I am looking to see how those billions could be used to fund my other interests.

If it is a priority to dismantle DOE in the first 100 days of a presidency, then what type of priority would it take if were not taken down. It would probably be left to sustain itself without any attention, good or bad.

The states should focus on how they can influence the districts they serve. Under the 10th amendment, one of the decisions that states have control over is education. Though making education equal should be a priority, it is not. In fact, in the past several years, many states created laws that work against educating on diversity in classrooms at every level, specifically in educational spaces that receive state funding. That was under the influence of an executive order signed by the POTUS in 2020.

In many ways, New Jersey is one of the country’s most diverse states. There are 564 municipalities and almost just as many school districts. New Jersey has politicians who seek to challenge the way diversity is taught to the various demographics of people who learn in NJ schools. If the DOE is dismantled, NJ may become a state that tries to push for changing laws and the way the truth is taught in schools. Especially since Gov Murphy is nearing the end of consecutive term limits. He has done alot for education in recent years. I can’t help but think how much could be undone when someone else is elected.

Do I agree with disrupting the DOE? No. If it means states can have a better handle on education for the better, then okay. However, for most states I do not believe that will be the case. The DOE was created because many states did not properly handle diversity in schools.

# data[].attributes.body
I found that this article clarified many of the questions I had about the claims of dismantling the U.S. Department of Education. I have talked to my cooperating teacher a lot about how this will impact programs for special education students since all of our students receive the services that receive federal funding. Working with Special Education students, it is crucial to know what will happen with their services that are federally funded and how this will impact the state's ability to maintain these services. It is also not just our particular students that benefit from the federal funding from the Department of Education, but a vast majority of our schools rely on services that are aided by federal funding. Some of these services are but are not limited to services for ELS students, students with disabilities, free meal programs, counseling services, and after-school programs. While many of the state governments will still have funding to work to keep services and programs available to their students, many states do not receive the same amount of funding and resources. I just think about how three of my students receive free lunch every morning, and they always finish it because they are so hungry. I can't imagine that this may be a service that has to be cut due to lack of funding. I am also working on coming up with STEM lessons for the self-contained special education students at my school as my STAYS project because there is a lack of STEM resources and programs at my school/in my district. STEM education is important for all students to learn and develop interpersonal and critical thinking skills. Seeing that those resources may be at risk across the country is concerning. Regardless of the decisions that are made, it is important to continue to work to ensure that all students, every single student, regardless of their circumstances or demographics, have access to a fair and equal education.

# data[].attributes.body
The article, “Dismantling the U.S. Department of Education” by Dr. Yuvraj Verma discussed the news of the plan to dismantle the U.S Department of Education and looks at the potential impacts on various areas of the U.S schools. The article was very informative. I enjoyed reading it because it highlighted just how much the Department of Education oversees and how many areas would be affected if it were to be dismantled. Before reading it, I was not aware of the extent to which U.S schools rely on federal support. This is why the idea of dismantling the U.S Department of Education is very scary to think about. While the article mentioned a valid reason for dismantling it, providing more funding for state education budgets, the negatives seem to far outweigh the positives. The Department of Education is responsible for enforcing crucial federal acts and programs, such as IDEA. If the department were to be dismantled, the programs would likely fall into state control. However, states have different programs, and some do not have one at all, to support students and what they need. If there were no federal oversight, states might opt out of these programs due to their views on them. This would make it harder for students who have the need to access the assistance needed to succeed. Students might have to attend schooling in other states that perhaps value these supports enough to maintain them, even without being mandated in the federal level. Additionally, if the Department of Education were to be dismantled, essential programs such as free meals, counseling, and after school programs could be eliminated or left to states with limited resources, especially to the ones that are known for struggling to prioritize funding for low-income communities. Many students rely on these programs not just for academic support, but for their wellbeing and for the chance to participate in something other than schoolwork. Without these services, students' health and development will suffer. Federal support is crucial to ensure that schools meet the diverse needs of their students, which is why the Department of Education should not be dismantled.

# data[].attributes.body
The debate over dismantling the U.S. Department of Education is a deeply consequential one, with significant implications for equity, access, and national educational standards. While advocates argue that state and local control would lead to more tailored and efficient decision-making, the risks of eliminating federal oversight cannot be ignored.

One of the most pressing concerns is the potential for increased disparities in educational funding and resources. Historically, local and state control has led to vast inequalities, particularly affecting low-income and marginalized communities. Federal intervention through programs like Title I and IDEA has been instrumental in ensuring that disadvantaged students receive the support they need. Without a centralized entity to enforce these protections, there is a real danger that educational inequalities will deepen.

Additionally, the argument that eliminating the Department of Education would lead to more efficient funding distribution is questionable. While bureaucratic inefficiencies exist, federal funding ensures national consistency in education quality and access. Redirecting funds to states does not guarantee equitable allocation, especially in states that have historically struggled to prioritize education funding.

Ultimately, while localized decision-making is valuable, the risks of completely dismantling the Department of Education outweigh the benefits. Instead of eliminating it, policymakers should focus on refining its role to balance state flexibility with national equity and accountability. The primary concern must always be ensuring that all students, regardless of their background, have access to a high-quality education.

# data[].attributes.body
When I first saw a video of Donald Trump saying he wanted to "close" the Department of Education, I was extremely confused and a little frightened. I heard murmurs in the teacher's lounge about the situation, but I never got a full understanding on the matter. After reading this article, I became more educated on the topic, and quite frankly more scared. If the Department of Education were to be dismantled, it could negatively affect low-income schools and special education programs. These schools rely on federal funding and oversight to ensure that vulnerable students, like those with disabilities or from low-income families, get the support they need. Without this federal involvement, there's a real concern that these students could fall further behind, facing even greater disparities in education. The Department of Education plays a key role in promoting equity, and without it, those already most at risk could see their opportunities shrink even further. All students should be able to receive an equal education and should receive the resources they need in order to succeed. Laws such as The Equal Educational Opportunities Act (EEOA) and The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) were made to prevent to ensure that students would be protected, but it seems that dismantling the Department of Education can be a possibility. I am hoping that this will not be the case and that all students receive a free and equal education, not matter their background.

# data[].attributes.body
The article, "Dismantling The U.S Department of Education" by Dr. Yuvraj Verma discusses the implications of abolishing the Department of Education. After reading this article, I have gained more knowledge of what dismantling the Department of Education would actually do to both student and teachers. Abolishing the Department of Education would leave decisions up to the state, making it inconsistent on a national level. Every school district in the country would be disadvantaged by this. Lack of funding would eliminate after school programs, STEM and even advanced placement classes and assessments at the high school level. If it is up to the states, college applications will become more challenging if students are applying out-of-state or to prestigious universities. I find this ironic, because I have always believed that being an educated individual is the quickest way to change the world. By endangering these programs, we are taking away essential resources for prospective students planning on attending university. In addition, dismantling the department of education would have an impact on inner-city and lower income areas. I have experience working in a Title I school district and more than half of the students receive free lunches. In fact, the school has a program where they were able to bring home food on fridays to last them the weekend. Through this experience, I was able to see how important federal funding is for these districts to make sure children have food on their plates, along with receiving an education. Dismantling the Department of Education would lead many more students to become hungry, as many students survive off of the food that is served in school. The IDEA, mandated by the United States Department of Education declares that individuals with disabilities receive a free, appropriate public education, with specific accommodations and modifications, if applicable. This would mean that these services could be entirely eliminated or lose significant funding on a state basis, having a crucial impact in special education. Overall, I think that the United States needs the Department of Education to run on a federal level to mandate equity for each student. I find that the potential dismantling of the Department of Education to be a form of suppression and inequitable for ALL students. I find it a scary time to be a teacher and I hope to see a change because I want the best for my students.

# data[].attributes.body
The topic of dismantling the U.S. Department of Education has become a major concern for those involved in education, whether that be a teacher, parents, students, etc. When the talk recently started again, I was a bit lost. I was unclear about the lines between state and federal education laws and procedures. After reading this article, I gained a deeper understanding of funding, which is important in education. I am in a lower-income area for my placement, and 50% of students receive free lunch. If the Department of Education was dismantled, lunch funding and after-school programs could be eliminated. It is saddening because I know how many parents rely on these programs to feed their children and keep them after school while they are working to earn money to support their children. I would hope states would figure out funding to keep these programs, but who is to say every state and district would? How are hungry children supposed to focus and learn when their brains have no fuel? Another concern I had when reading the article was about special education students. The Department of Education advocates for these students in the sense of mandating they receive free education. I would like to hope states would do the same if the federal level was taken away, but what if states don't have the funds to help students with disabilities? I now have a deeper understanding of what the federal and state levels do in education and the unknown of what could/would truly happen is scary. Students deserve opportunities and I truly hope those are not taken away if the Department of Education is dismantled.