Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Project 2025: A threat to equitable education

Happy elementary students raising their hands on a class at school
skynesher/Getty Images

Johnson is a United Methodist pastor, the author of "Holding Up Your Corner: Talking About Race in Your Community" and program director for the Bridge Alliance, which houses The Fulcrum.

This is part of a series offering a nonpartisan counter to Project 2025, a conservative guideline to reforming government and policymaking during the first 180 days of a second Trump administration. The Fulcrum's cross partisan analysis of Project 2025 relies on unbiased critical thinking, reexamines outdated assumptions, and uses reason, scientific evidence, and data in analyzing and critiquing Project 2025.

Michelle Obama resonated deeply at the Democratic National Convention.

"Shutting down the Department of Education, banning our books — none of that will prepare our kids for the future," she said.


Her warning comes as Project 2025’s proposed overhaul of the Department of Education gains traction. This radical plan, part of the Heritage Foundation’s design for the early days of a second Trump administration, promises efficiency and reform but delivers a blueprint for discrimination, cultural insensitivity and the erosion of democratic principles. In analyzing the historical, socioeconomic and democratic implications of the document's proposed policies, one truth becomes clear: This is a battle for the soul of the American education system.

But Project 2025 is not just a threat to our educational system; it's a threat to our cultural diversity. Consolidating power in the hands of a select few unelected officials risks stripping away the local control that has long defined America's educational landscape. This is a direct assault on the democratic ideals our schools should embody, and it jeopardizes the very principles of representation and community involvement that are the bedrock of our nation.

Parents and communities, particularly those of multiracial and ethnic descent, could see their stories and cultures erased from classrooms. These are the very spaces where children should feel seen, heard and valued, and their potential loss is a devastating blow to the sense of worth and belonging that is so crucial for healthy development and academic engagement. Research confirms that seeing oneself reflected in the curriculum is not just beneficial. It's critical to academic success and a positive school experience.

The NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund warns that this lack of accountability invites policies that benefit a privileged few at the expense of the marginalized communities. The proposed curriculum reforms more than border on discriminatory. They place an undue emphasis on standardized testing and rote memorization, practices that betray the principles of a comprehensive education. Instead of nurturing critical thinking and creativity, schools are at risk of becoming factories, resulting in mere compliance and unquestioned obedience.

Moreover, such proposals are fundamentally at odds with the democratic purpose of education: to empower students to engage actively with our diverse society. The National Education Association, too, warns that such an approach “would lead to a narrowing of the curriculum and a lack of access to educational opportunities for already underserved students.” It's these students, already struggling against the odds, who stand to lose the most from Project 2025.

Perhaps most corrosively, Project 2025 threatens to segregate our schools through provisions for increased school choice and funding portability. Giving families more options and allowing education dollars to follow the child seems innocuous, even laudable. But similar policies have consistently led to greater racial and socioeconomic segregation, undermining the integration that is a bulwark against prejudice. Studies have shown that when given the option, affluent families often choose to cluster in well-funded schools, draining resources from those serving predominantly low-income and minority populations.

Project 2025 attempts to turn back the clock to a time when schools were tools of oppression, a retrograde vision that would unravel decades of progress toward educational equity.

We live in a moment that beckons concerned citizens to respond. It is a moment for parents, educators and communities to act. Whether flooding elected offices with calls, packing public hearings, or exposing the dangers of this proposal, mobilization is only the beginning. Project 2025 is a rallying cry to defend our schools and the values they represent. We cannot be cavalier about this for our children's and society's sake. The time to act is now. Educational opportunity is a civil right, and responding to the threat of Project 2025 is our civic responsibility.

More in The Fulcrum about Project 2025


    Read More

    Barbershops Are Helping Black Boys See Themselves as Readers

    One of the barbershops participating in the Barbershop Books program.

    Photo courtesy of Alvin Irby

    Barbershops Are Helping Black Boys See Themselves as Readers

    Barbershop Books, an organization whose award‑winning literacy programs celebrate, amplify, and affirm the interests of Black boys while inspiring kids to read for fun, has spent more than a decade transforming everyday community spaces into joyful reading hubs. That mission was on full display this Martin Luther King Jr. Day, when the organization partnered with a neighborhood barbershop in the Bronx—Flava In Ya Hair—to offer free haircuts and free children’s books to local families.

    As families examined stacks of Dog Man, Fly Guy, Captain Underpants, and Diary of a Wimpy Kid, barbershop owner Patrick shared that growing up, reading was associated with negative school experiences and used as a punishment at home. “Go in your room and read!” he said.

    Keep ReadingShow less
    We Can’t Let Hegseth Win His War on Women

    We Can’t Let Hegseth Win His War on Women

    When Hegseth ordered all top brass to assemble in Quantico in September, he declared women could either meet male standards for combat roles or get cut. Strong message, except the military was already doing that, so Hegseth was either oblivious or ignoring decades of history. Confusion aside, it reaffirmed a goal Hegseth has made clear since his Fox News days, when he said, “I'm straight up saying we should not have women in combat roles.” Now, as of January 6th, the Pentagon is planning a six-month review of women in ground combat jobs. It may come as no surprise, but this thinly veiled anti-woman agenda has no tactical security advantage.

    When integrating women into combat roles was brought to Congress in 1993, a summary of findings submitted that, “although logical, such a policy would [erode] the civilizing notion that men should protect . . . women.” Archaic notions of the patriarchy almost outweighed logic; instead, luckily, as combat roles have become available to them, more and more women are now serving, increasing military readiness. As it turns out, women are highly effective in combat. Khris Fuhr, a West Point graduate who worked on gender integration at Army Forces Command, calls this new review "a solution for a problem that doesn't exist." She says an Army study between 2018 to 2023 showed women didn’t just perform well in ground combat units but sometimes scored even better than their male counterparts.

    Keep ReadingShow less
    Women holding signs to defend diversity at Havard

    Harvard students joined in a rally protesting the Supreme Courts ruling against affirmative action in 2023.

    Craig F. Walker/The Boston Globe via Getty Images

    Diversity Has Become a Dirty Word. It Doesn’t Have to Be.

    I have an identical twin sister. Although our faces can unlock each other’s iPhones, even the two of us are not exactly the same. If identical twins can differ, wouldn’t most people be different too? Why is diversity considered a bad word?

    Like me, my twin sister is in computing, yet we are unique in many ways. She works in industry, while I am in academia. She’s allergic to guinea pigs, while I had pet guinea pigs (yep, that’s how she found out). Even our voices aren’t the same. As a kid, I was definitely the chattier one, while she loved taking walks together in silence (which, of course, drove me crazy).

    Keep ReadingShow less
    DEI Dilemma? Start Building Community within Your Organization

    Team of male and female entrepreneurs working on computers at office

    Getty Images

    DEI Dilemma? Start Building Community within Your Organization

    Amid the pushback to DEI, an essential truth often gets lost: You have agency over how you approach building diversity, equity, and inclusion into your organization.

    No executive order or unhinged rant can change that.

    Keep ReadingShow less