The Department of Education is about to disband the English Learner Support Office
Overview:
The US Department of Education plans to disband the Office of English Language Acquisition, which supports more than 5 million English learners, as part of a broader effort to downsize and restructure the agency.
The US Department of Education is moving forward with plans to disband the Office of English Language Acquisition (OELA), the agency’s flagship office responsible for supporting the nation’s more than 5 million English language learners, as part of a broader effort to overhaul the agency.
The proposed closure, which was first referred to Congress in a letter written in February and first reported by Education Week, comes after a year of major layoffs at the department. The workforce has been reduced from about 4,000 employees to about 2,000, and many programs have been eliminated, merged, or transferred to other federal agencies in line with President Donald Trump’s long-term goal of reducing the federal government’s role in education.
The letter outlining the repeal of OELA outlines where OELA-directed programs will move within the Department of Education:
- Title III formula grants will go to the Office of Elementary and Secondary Education State Support and Accountability, which administers other large formula grants like Title I.
- OELA’s National Professional Development grants will move to the office of effective teacher development programs.
- The Native American and Alaska Native Children in School Program will move to the Indian education department’s office “to better align with other programs that support Native American children and youth.”
OELA has historically overseen nearly $1 billion in Title III funding, which supports services for English learners, professional development for teachers, and resources to help schools meet the needs of multilingual students. Under this proposal, these responsibilities would be redistributed to all other offices within the Department of Education rather than being kept under a central agency.
Administration officials say the move is aimed at streamlining operations and giving states more flexibility. “The Department of Education is focused on restoring education to states while preserving critical funding and reducing unnecessary operations that can hinder support for students and families,” said Kirsten Baesler, assistant secretary for the Office of Elementary and Secondary Education.
However, critics argue that dismantling OELA jeopardizes the organization’s oversight and support of an at-risk student population. Rachel Gittleman, president of AFGE Local 252, which represents the department’s employees, agreed that it’s difficult to rebuild once programs are dismantled. “I think we can and we will rebuild, but how long and how long, I think that’s something a lot of people are trying to figure out and figure out right now,” said Rachel Gittleman, president of AFGE Local 252, the union that represents workers in the department. “I wouldn’t be in the job I’m in if I didn’t believe that rebuilding was possible.”
Education experts also note that although federal law still requires schools to serve English learners, the absence of a dedicated office may make it difficult to operate. Former OELA director Jose Viana emphasized that the office provides a central voice and expertise to multilingual students in national policy debates.
The reorganization is done under the provisions of the Education Organization Act, which allows the Secretary of Education to reorganize certain offices with advance notice to Congress. That 90-day notice period is expected to expire soon, paving the way for a formal dissolution.
Beyond OELA, the department has begun extensive structural changes, including transferring certain functions to agencies such as the Department of the Treasury, the Department of Labor, and the Department of Health and Human Services. These measures have created ongoing legal challenges, although the administration can continue to operate while the cases proceed through the courts.
However, because most of the changes were made through bureaucracy rather than legislation, future administrations may choose to restore programs or re-establish offices such as OELA. Abolishing the Department of Education itself would require congressional approval.
As the debate continues, educators, policymakers, and advocates remain divided over whether the reforms will lead to more effective governance, or less support for some of the nation’s most vulnerable students.
