JOHN YANG: In March, President Trump# signed an executive order to begin## shutting down the Department of Education,# though it would take an act of Congress## to actually close it.

In the meantime, the# department is taking dramatic steps toward## fulfilling a conservative vision of a reshaped# system of primary and secondary education.

Jennifer Smith Richards is the co-author of# a ProPublica investigation looking into all## of this.

Jennifer, what is the Department of# Education doing?

What steps are they taking?

JENNIFER SMITH RICHARDS, ProPublica:# Yeah, so they've been very clear## since Trump took office that the idea was# to shut down the department.

Linda McMahon,## the Secretary of Education, has called# it her final mission.

And Donald Trump,## of course, has called the department a# big con job.

So that part has been clear,## this desire to phase out many of the# functions of the department and close it down.

What's been less clear is why# Linda McMahon has brought in## a number of political strategists and, you know,# ultra conservative activists into the office,## even as it's supposed to be shutting down and# winding down.

Those people have been quiet,## frankly, about what they are doing# behind the scenes at the department.

JOHN YANG: Is there a common thread running# between through these appointments?

And are## they all have similar goals or similar things# they've talked about in the past about education?

JENNIFER SMITH RICHARDS: They have.

My colleague# and I at ProPublica went through, you know,## hundreds and hundreds of hours of speeches# and podcast interviews and read essays that## were from these appointees that really lay out# a vision for the future of American education.

And the through line really is# that they want to break up what## they view as a monopoly that public# schools have.

And they envision in## the future that far fewer students# will be attending a public school.

JOHN YANG: I've heard people talk about# this, and it's all in the view of the## idea of returning power to the parents,# letting them sort of figure out what schools## are doing well and let them send the money# there.

What do the critics say about this?

JENNIFER SMITH RICHARDS: Well, critics say# you need a strong public school system for## many reasons.

One is that public schools are# required to serve students with disabilities,## whereas private schools typically are not.

You# know, the American school system is a democratic## idea.

It was designed to serve any and all# students who come through their doors.

And private## school choice means that private schools also get# to choose which students they're going to accept.

JOHN YANG: On the one hand, the administration# and conservatives say that most decisions about## what happens in school should be done at the# state and local level.

But are they talking## about getting involved at the federal# level about some curriculum decisions?

JENNIFER SMITH RICHARDS: Federal government# historically has not been involved in dictating## what is being taught in the classrooms.

They've# not been in the curriculum business.

But what## we're seeing under this administration is a# desire to promote certain types of curriculum,## for example, what they refer to as a# pro America or patriotic curriculum## that would be in public schools across America.

We've also seen a number of edicts and# mandates come out of the department## that have to do with teaching racism and gender# and diversity issues.

Those are steps into the## classroom that we haven't seen very frequently# in the last few years.

We really are seeing## the federal government start to really reach into# classrooms in a way that we are not familiar with.

JOHN YANG: There have been some states# have tried to do this, haven't there?

JENNIFER SMITH RICHARDS: There have been some of# the states that tend to have majority Republican## legislatures have advanced several bills# that you might have heard of as anti-DEI## bills or anti-CRT bills.

A number of states# have passed anti transgender bathroom bills.

So some of these, you know, reforms# have been tested individual states## and have been upheld by courts so far in many# of the states.

So, yes, there is certainly a red## state testing ground for many of these ideas that# we're seeing play out now at the federal level.

JOHN YANG: And how have the results been, these# testing grounds?

What have been the results?

JENNIFER SMITH RICHARDS: I can't say for# sure in every state, but there have been## states where the testing grounds have really# held up.

So states have been able to adopt## laws that restrict pretty severely teaching# about racism and teaching about gender.

They## have been successful in passing bathroom# bills that prevent transgender students## from using the bathroom or locker room at# school that matches their gender identity.

Those have been in place.

And a# number of states have been pretty## successful in limiting just the# type of material that can be at a## school or in a school library or on a# teacher's bookshelf in her classroom.

And so we're seeing kind of a copying# of that at the federal level now,## where we're hearing for the first time, at least# in many years from the federal government that## they want to push certain types of curriculum# and certain types of teaching into classrooms.

JOHN YANG: Jennifer Smith Richards# of ProPublica, thank you very much.

JENNIFER SMITH RICHARDS: Thank you.