Sign up for Chalkbeat’s free weekly newsletter to keep up with how education is changing across the U.S.
Cut federal funding for schools “pushing critical race theory, radical gender ideology, and other inappropriate racial, sexual or political content on our children.”
That’s among the top 20 promises in the Republican Party’s 2024 platform, alongside pledges to seal the border, conduct the largest deportation operation in American history, make college campuses “patriotic and safe again,” and “keep men out of women’s sports.”
Formally adopted Monday by delegates at the Republican National Convention in Milwaukee, the platform says that Republicans will “stop woke government” and calls for rolling back protections for gay and transgender students. It also calls for expanding parental rights and school choice, promoting career training and “patriotic” civics education, and beefing up student discipline, positions that Republicans hope will resonate beyond their base on Election Day.
The platform also calls for the abolition of the U.S. Department of Education, a long-standing conservative goal.
“Every American can read our platform and know what we believe,” U.S. Sen. Marsha Blackburn, a Tennessee Republican and co-chair of the platform committee, told the gathered delegates.
Education has taken a back seat in a presidential campaign dominated by the economy, immigration, and the fundamental fitness of the candidates. That’s only more so after what the FBI is investigating as an assassination attempt against former President Donald Trump at a rally in Pennsylvania a few days before the convention convened.
But concerns about parental rights and teachers pushing left-wing ideas in the classroom have proved a potent motivator for conservative voters in local school board elections. At the same time, Republican-led states have dramatically expanded access to vouchers and education savings accounts in the last few years.
The party platform echoes many of the ideas in Project 2025, a roadmap for a future Trump administration written by people who served in his first administration. But it contains far less detail and steers clear of some of the more controversial proposals, such as phasing out federal funding for high-poverty schools and ending the Head Start preschool program.
Political observers said the platform reflects long-standing Republican priorities and taps into issues that might motivate Trump’s conservative base, as well as moderate voters skeptical of progressive trends in education. The extent to which those proposals would impact everyday school and student experiences is less clear.
“Because of the long distance between federal policy and classroom practice, it is best to see these as cultural artifacts and bully pulpit statements,” said Robert Pondiscio, a senior fellow at the conservative American Enterprise Institute and a former classroom teacher.
But Jonathan Collins, an assistant professor of political science and education at Columbia University’s Teachers College, said the platform should be taken seriously.
“I don’t think this is lip service, I don’t think that this is fodder, I don’t think that this is innuendo,” Collins said. “I think everything that is in this proposal, if Trump is elected, you should expect to see some element of it implemented within the first year.”
GOP platform: no ‘gender insanity,’ no teacher tenure
In addition to penalizing schools that teach about race, gender, and history in ways the administration deems inappropriate, the Republican platform calls for:
- ending “left-wing gender insanity” and reversing changes to Title IX regulations that aim to protect gay and transgender students at school.
- ending teacher tenure and supporting merit pay for educators.
- supporting “universal school choice,” which generally means expanding voucher programs and education savings accounts.
- allowing 529 savings accounts to be used for homeschooling expenses.
- reinstating Trump’s 1776 Commission, a conservative effort to promote “patriotic education” and counter the 1619 Project, which emphasized the role of slavery and white supremacy in American history.
- restoring parental rights in education, a term the platform doesn’t define.
Recent legal and political developments might make it easier for Trump to make progress on some of these goals, although his first term shows that it can be difficult to turn ideas into wins.
During her tenure as Trump’s education secretary, Betsy DeVos championed a federal tax credit proposal to support private school choice that failed to gain much traction. The Biden administration has opposed vouchers, and while GOP members of Congress routinely express support for bills that would dramatically expand school choice, finding sufficient support for them on Capitol Hill has proven elusive.
DeVos also axed rules promulgated by former President Barack Obama to reduce racial disparities in student discipline. Taking a different tack, the Biden administration has encouraged schools to be sensitive to discrimination in disciplinary practices. But it hasn’t fully restored the Obama-era rules amid calls in some states for tougher discipline policies to address rising concerns about student behavior.
Title IX, federal legislation that bars sex discrimination in education, is also in focus. Earlier this year, Republican states almost immediately sued and won injunctions to block enforcement of new Title IX rules from the Biden administration that expanded protections for gay and transgender students. A Trump administration would rewrite them entirely to emphasize a strictly biological definition of sex.
Many Republican states have recently passed laws banning teachers from talking about the idea that gender and sex aren’t always the same or that people can change genders and allowing teachers to disregard students’ preferred pronouns.
Republican states have also adopted bans on teaching “divisive concepts” and limited how teachers can talk about race and history. Many of these laws are vague, leaving school administrators and teachers alike uncertain where the line is. A recent survey from the research corporation RAND found that two-thirds of teachers report self-censoring how they talk about potentially controversial topics, even in states and districts with no restrictions on the books.
Michael Petrilli, president of the conservative Thomas B. Fordham Institute, said he would expect to see the Office for Civil Rights used to investigate claims that school equity policies or affinity groups for students of color discriminate against white students. (The Biden administration has also warned against schools’ support for such race-exclusive groups.)
But even some Republicans in Congress might balk at passing laws banning certain educational practices, given the long tradition of state and local control over schools, Petrilli said.
Petrilli lamented that the platform makes no mention of student achievement. “It wouldn’t have taken much to mention learning loss, given that schools were closed longer in blue states and in blue cities and low-income children of color suffered the most,” he said.
And if Republicans pursue mass deportation as promised, that will inevitably have consequences for millions of children, Petrilli said.
Pondiscio said he expects most education policies to remain the purview of states and districts. He predicted limited enforcement of any federal ban on teaching critical race theory — unless a teacher goes viral on social media for the wrong reasons. That possibility should remind teachers that they’re acting as public servants, Pondiscio said: “Elevating parents rights as part of the platform is a healthy thing. There is repair work that has to be done.”
But educators who have faced repercussions for talking about race or standing up for LGBTQ students said school districts might heed the warning even without formal policy changes. Willie Carver, a former Kentucky Teacher of the Year who left teaching after an intense homophobic campaign against him, said he saw administrators crack down on teaching materials and support for student clubs when legislation was merely introduced and not yet enacted.
Carver said students in Kentucky cities such as Louisville and Lexington might still see Pride flags at school, but he’s met educators in rural districts who were disciplined for intervening to stop homophobic bullying — something he fears would spread to what are now safe havens if a Trump administration threatens school funding.
“It will silence any and all conversations that might lead to justice, that might lead to understanding,” he said. “If we presuppose that there are any meaningful differences between the lives of men and women, if we presuppose that there is any reality to racism, it will make it impossible to discuss those.”
Project 2025 targets Head Start, loan forgiveness, Title I
Trump has tried to distance himself from the Heritage Foundation’s 2025, but many observers believe it will help form the blueprint of his administration if he wins. Several people involved in Project 2025 also helped write the party platform, which Trump explicitly endorses.
Where the party platform lays out high-level principals, Project 2025 walks through which changes would require acts of Congress, which could be done through executive order, and which would require changes to rule-making processes.
Both documents call for the elimination of the U.S. Department of Education. Project 2025 describes which functions should be transferred to other departments and which should be eliminated. Project 2025 also calls for the end of Head Start, the long-standing federally supported preschool program, and the phasing out of Title I, which provides more than $18 billion a year in support for schools serving students from low-income backgrounds.
Project 2025 states that racial disparities — such as more Black students being suspended or identified as having serious emotional disabilities — should never be considered the basis for a civil rights violation.
Project 2025 also calls for ending most federal grant programs, privatizing student loans, and eliminating loan forgiveness, including for teachers and other public employees.
In a separate memo, the Heritage Foundation also links education to its immigration enforcement priorities by proposing to deny a free education to undocumented students.
Petrilli said that compared to Project 2025, the Republican platform is “a toned down argument for Trump” aimed at middle-of-the-road voters.
“We’re going to do some culture war stuff, we’ve got school choice, but the message is that they shouldn’t be afraid of a second Trump administration,” he said, characterizing the platform.
Collins of Columbia University said voters can “squint” at the party platform “and see elements of unity.” But voters should pay closer attention to Project 2025, he said.
“It’s a promissory note of what Trump’s main constituency essentially expects out of a Trump presidency,” Collins said. “It’s a document that he is going to be beholden to, and it already builds on a lot of the ideas that he championed during his previous term.”
Erica Meltzer is Chalkbeat’s national editor based in Colorado. Contact Erica at emeltzer@chalkbeat.org.
