Critically Thinking about the Federal Department of Education

Three Powerful, Practical, Plausible Recommendations to Improve DOEd

There is now an unprecedented opportunity that Critical Thinkers (that’s us) should take advantage of.

Arguably, for the first time in modern US history, the federal government is: 1) open to making radical changes in government agencies, 2) has the right political perspective, and 3) is receptive to citizen inputs.

Yes, there are always reasons to be skeptical — but the upside is so great that we should assume the best, and offer assistance. For those who are incurably cynical and say no, then you are foregoing your future rights to complain!

I’m polling my Critical Thinking Substack readers as to their best ideas regarding the Department of Health and Human Services (FDA, CDC, etc.), Department of Education (DOEd), Department of Energy (DOE), EPA, and Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). [If you have any good connections with the upper echelon of any of these federal Departments, please email me.]

—> Let’s say that this is the scenario: a) we are given five (5) minutes for a face-to-face meeting with the Secretary of each of these Departments, and b) we are asked to limit our suggestions to three (3) items. Due to these rules, we need to filter out many ideas so that we are left with just three (3) succinct, important, doable recommendations.

This is the second in my series of commentaries to each of the above-mentioned Departments. Below are my suggested three (3) recommendations for the federal Department of Education (DOEd). Critically Thinking readers can constructively weigh in with support or any improvements on what I’ve proposed, in the Comments below...

We’ll then try to get the end product to the new Department of Education Secretary, probably Linda McMahon.

Recommendation #1 —

Redefine its Mission. Here is the boilerplate pablum that is their current mission statement. This should be upgraded to say something like: meaningfully assisting States in producing high school graduates who are competent, productive, healthy, critical thinkers (e.g., see this fine piece). In other words, the Department should leverage the power and money of the federal government to aggressively assist States in fixing the currently deplorable K-12 education system. (Note: in 2024 the Department had $80± Billion in discretionary funding (out of a $250± Billion budget) — that is a LOT of leverage!)

In the process of reformulating DOEd’s mission get rid of bureaucratic bloat. Strip down the Department to the bare essentials. (Right now there are over 4100 employees. How about aiming for 400 — a 90% reduction? Four hundred competent, motivated, mission-focused employees can do a LOT!)

Recommendation #2 —

Clearly spell out what the primary objective of K-12 education should be. Assuming that the 3Rs are properly taught, the #1 objective of every state education system should be to produce Critically Thinking graduates. In other words, States should radically change their education systems from their current focus on teaching students WHAT to think, to instead teach them HOW to think. Since no State is currently doing that(!), this would revolutionize American education. (Note: presently less than ten States even mention Critical Thinking in their Mission statements!)

DOEd should put this as a condition for States to receive money from DOEd. In other words, unless a State can show that their K-12 education curricula is properly teaching students to be Critical Thinkers, they are not eligible for certain DOEd funds.

Recommendation #3 —

DOEd should take an unequivocal stand against age-inappropriate books being in K-12 school classes and libraries (e.g., see here and here). The fundamental problem is that the American Library Association (ALA) does not recognize the issue of age-appropriateness! DOEd has the power and authority to stand up against ALA — much more than most States do.

This idea is already societally accepted in the US. A good example is that the rating systems for movies and TV are based on age-appropriateness. The movie website says: “Established in 1968, the film rating system provides parents with the information needed to determine if a film is appropriate for their children.” Exactly the same thing applies to books being considered for K-12 schools!

To make a profound improvement in K-12 education, the Department should specify that they will not provide any certain DOEd funds to a State that does not have an enforced appropriate official written policy regarding the age-appropriateness of materials associated with their K-12 schools. [Towards that same end the Department should aggressively oppose legislation that undermines the concept of age-appropriateness — like this.]

—————————————————————————————

Yes, I am fully aware that there are a multitude of other education-related issues — and several of them are significant (e.g., see here). The question is, if you only had five (5) minutes to speak to the DOEd Secretary, and were limited to your three (3) best recommendations, what would they be? These are my recommendations.

---

Here is other information from this scientist that you might find interesting:

I am now offering incentives for you to sign up new subscribers!

I also consider reader submissions on Critical Thinking on my topics of interest.

Check out the Archives of this Critical Thinking substack.

WiseEnergy.org: discusses the Science (or lack thereof) behind our energy options.

C19Science.info: covers the lack of genuine Science behind our COVID-19 policies.

Election-Integrity.info: multiple major reports on the election integrity issue.

Media Balance Newsletter: a free, twice-a-month newsletter that covers what the mainstream media does not do, on issues from COVID to climate, elections to education, renewables to religion, etc. Here are the Newsletter’s 2024 Archives. Please send me an email to get your free copy. When emailing me, please make sure to include your full name and the state where you live. (Of course, you can cancel the Media Balance Newsletter at any time - but why would you?

Thanks for reading Critically Thinking About Select Societal Issues! Please pass a link to this article on to other associates who might benefit. They can subscribe for FREE to receive new posts (typically about once a week).