President Donald Trump signed two executive orders with the goal of reshaping the landscape of K-12 schooling in the United States. The orders address Critical Race Theory (CRT) and the expansion of school choice options for families.
The first of the two orders, titled “Ending Radical Indoctrination in K-12 Schooling,” targets the teaching of Critical Race Theory, an academic framework that examines the role of race and racism in societal structures. Trump’s executive order reflected a widespread sentiment, asserting that schools across the country have been engaging in “radical, anti-American ideologies” that push a one-sided, ideological agenda. The order reads, “Parents have witnessed schools indoctrinate their children in radical, anti-American ideologies while deliberately blocking parental oversight.”
The order goes further to claim that children are being forced to “adopt identities as either victims or oppressors solely based on their skin color and other immutable characteristics.” According to Trump, this environment stifles critical thinking, creating an echo chamber where students are coerced into accepting a narrow set of beliefs without questioning or thoughtfully analyzing them.
The executive order mandates that any K-12 school that continues teaching CRT will lose all federal funding. The move cites Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, or national origin in programs that receive federal support.
The second executive order, titled “Expanding Educational Freedom and Opportunity for Families,” focuses on broadening school choice options, giving parents more control over their children’s education. This order references the alarming findings of the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) report, which highlights that a large percentage of 8th graders are not proficient in core subjects. The report shows that 70 percent of 8th graders were below proficient in reading, and 72 percent were below proficient in math.
Trump’s executive order argues that the current public education system is failing a significant portion of students, undermining national competitiveness and harming families and communities. In response, the order calls for increased educational freedom through K-12 scholarship programs that would allow families to choose the best educational settings for their children—whether that’s public, charter, or private schools.
In addition to supporting these scholarship programs, the order directs the Secretary of Education to issue guidance on how states can use federal funds to support K-12 educational choice initiatives. It also tasks the Secretaries of Labor and Education with proposing new plans within 90 days to further expand educational choice through grant programs.
Corey DeAngelis, a senior fellow at the American Culture Project and executive director of the Educational Freedom Institute, praised Trump’s actions, stating, “President Trump just showed the American people why he won the parent vote by 9 points. Parents want to be able to direct the upbringing of their children. Parents need to be in charge of their children’s education, not the government.”
Randi Weingarten, president of the American Federation of Teachers (AFT), expressed her opposition to the school choice executive order. In a statement, Weingarten argued that the order would undermine public schools by diverting resources away from classrooms to “fund tax cuts for billionaires.”
This accusation is drenched in irony, as there’s an undeniable inverse relationship between taxpayer funds diverted to public schools and the Department of Education (in addition to teachers unions like the one Weingarten leads) and the quality of public K-12 education. Weingarten enjoys a hefty salary of over half a million, making her a one percent earner, but reverts to platitudes about billionaires to distract from that fact.
Proponents of school choice argue that it would provide greater opportunities for students in underperforming schools, particularly in low-income primarily black and Hispanic communities. By allowing families more control over their children’s education, they argue, it would create a more competitive and flexible education system that meets the needs of students.
