President-elect Donald Trump has tapped former U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA) chief Linda McMahon to serve as the next U.S. secretary of education, pending any hearings and confirmation in the Senate. Critics of McMahon have pointed out that she has no K-12 classroom or school administration experience. She has, however, been a long-time ally of Trump, providing $6 million to his campaign in 2016.
Watch the video above as Straight Arrow News contributor Adrienne Lawrence reviews what she says are the many red flags about McMahon’s nomination, and why she believes McMahon’s approach to education is fundamentally wrong.
Be the first to know when Adrienne Lawrence publishes a new opinion! Download the Straight Arrow News app and enable push notifications today!
The following is an excerpt from the above video:
The potential consequences of McMahon’s efforts will extend beyond individual students to the fabric of society itself. A narrow workforce-oriented education system may produce skilled workers, but it risks neglecting the cultivation of an informed citizenry. Said another way, “We the People” won’t be in an intellectual position to know we’re being hoodwinked by the wealthy, and that’s what McMahon has set up.
Think of how we handled things during the Cold War, 1957, when the Soviets launched Sputnik. Well, the U.S. responded by investing in education, sciences, humanities. Our government recognized that fostering innovation required more than job training. It demanded critical thinking, creativity, a broader understanding of the world around us. Those investments pay dividends, not just in technological advancements, but also in intellectual enrichment.
Compare that with McMahon’s vision, which prioritizes immediate economic outputs over long-term societal gains. Education is not just a means to a paycheck. It’s the foundation of a functioning democracy and a thriving society.
There are significant challenges facing education today — rising inequality, outdated infrastructure, underpaid teachers, and so on. These challenges require leaders who value education as a public good, not as a subsidiary of the labor market. McMahon’s vision is not the bold reform education needs.