Trump's cuts to teacher training leave rural school districts, aspiring educators in the lurch
Grado is now wrapping up her sophomore year in the University of Nebraska-Lincoln's teacher-training program. The first person in her family to go to college, she has been able to attend thanks to a scholarship program co-directed by UNL and Kansas State University to support aspiring teachers from rural places like Schuyler who could fill vacancies in their hometown schools.
"I never would have thought it was possible for me to come to a university like this one," said Grado. "This was kind of like a dream that came true."
Now that dream is in jeopardy because the scholarship program supporting Grado - like dozens of other efforts to train and retain rural educators - relies on federal grants eliminated by the Trump administration. In February, the Department of Education abruptly canceled $600 million in grants it said promoted "divisive ideologies" such as diversity, equity and inclusion. Two lawsuits filed in federal court against the cuts - one by the attorneys general of eight Democrat-led states and another by membership organizations of teacher colleges and teacher-residency programs - argued the department did not have the authority to abruptly withhold funds appropriated by Congress and that the cuts would cause "immediate and irreparable harm" to schools and students. In both cases, district courts temporarily restored funding, but in April, those judgments were overruled - one by the U.S. Supreme Court and the other by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit - allowing the cancellations to stay in place until further judicial review.
The Education Department, which did not respond to interview requests, has never provided a complete list of the terminated grants, but they included money for more than 200 projects under three programs designed to recruit and train teachers through scholarships, teacher-residency programs, mentoring, professional development and salary bonuses tied to gains in student learning. The funding cuts have forced many of those initiatives to lay off staff, withdraw scholarships and shut down altogether.
In some cases, delays in official termination notices combined with emergency funding from universities and foundations have kept programs operating for now, but their long-term prospects are precarious at best, given the Trump administration's efforts to not only cancel the grant programs but the entire Education Department. Grado's program has backfilled some money to cover expenses, but not the scholarship portion, which only has guaranteed funding for the remainder of the semester.
Some educators, experts and advocates say the grant cancellations threaten to exacerbate teacher shortages in many rural communities, forcing schools to rely more on underqualified teachers and worsening outcomes for students. Research on earlier teacher-training projects supported by the same federal grant programs suggest they have helped districts stem teacher vacancies and keep educators in classrooms.
"These types of teacher support programs are critical to rural schools trying to compete for the best teachers for their students,' said Robert Stafford, executive director of the Kentucky Rural Education Association, a nonprofit that supports rural educators. "When you've made those plans and developed partnerships and understandings with universities and others, and then you have that support pulled out from underneath you, it can be devastating for a small school district."
Related: Become a lifelong learner. Subscribe to our free weekly newsletter featuring the most important stories in education.
Research consistently shows that high-quality teachers are the most important factor in student achievement - yet there's a chronic shortage of them in low-income schools. The three grant programs targeted in February - the Teacher Quality Partnership (TQP), the Supporting Effective Educator Development (SEED) and the Teacher and School Leader Incentive (TSL) programs - were all established during the Obama administration to bolster the teaching ranks in these high-need districts.
The most severe teacher shortages are in rural areas, largely because of high turnover, according to a 2023 study co-authored by Richard Ingersoll, professor of education and sociology at the University of Pennsylvania. High-poverty rural schools needed to replace 28 percent of their teachers every year, compared with 19 percent in high-poverty urban schools, the study found. Teachers were also twice as likely to move from rural to urban or suburban schools as they were to move in the opposite direction.
"It's not a happy story," Ingersoll said.
Recent efforts to alleviate teacher shortages have focused on recruiting more local teacher talent. For example, the program supporting Grado, which began in 2023 and was funded by a three-year, $3.4 million federal grant, partners with six rural districts in the region. Dubbed Project RAÍCES (which means roots in Spanish), the program sponsors high school clubs that engage students in local community issues and has awarded 16 full college scholarships to students who plan to pursue teaching with the expectation that they'll return to lead classrooms in their communities.
Importantly, Project RAÍCES continues to support new teachers in their first years in the classroom, when quit rates tend to be high, by offering free professional development and paying stipends to experienced educators who serve as mentors, among other ways.
Bret Schroder, superintendent of Schuyler Community Schools, said in recent years his district and others have turned to recruiting teachers from overseas; last year, he hired roughly a dozen teachers from the Philippines. "Nothing against these teachers," he said. "But would I rather have a plethora of available teachers who grew up here, know the kids and their families and are already embedded in the community? Absolutely."
Many of the imperiled programs support teacher residencies, modeled on medical residencies, that combine coursework with teaching jobs and pair scholarships with a commitment to teach in a district partnering with the program. While many of the specific programs were too new to demonstrate results, studies of other teacher residencies and of programs providing ongoing support for budding educators show the models can help. For example, one report on teacher-residency programs nationwide cited research suggesting that 50 percent of teachers in high-needs schools leave the profession within five years, while 70 to 80 percent of participants in residency programs are not only still in the profession, but in the same district, after five years.
At East Carolina University (ECU), a residency program called edPirate supports 10 new teachers a year who commit to spending three years in one of six rural districts. The initiative (named after the East Carolina mascot) began in 2022 with a five-year, $4.8 million federal grant. When their funding was terminated in February, the program's leaders scrambled to find emergency support from university sources to cover their stipends for the remainder of the semester, but they had to let go of project staff, cancel contracts for things like program evaluation and certification support, and stop all recruiting efforts for next year's crop of teachers.
One of the rural districts partnering with ECU is Elizabeth City-Pasquotank, in North Carolina, where about 450 teachers serve a coastal town of about 19,000 people. Elizabeth City Superintendent Keith Parker said federal funding has been essential to districts like his with smaller populations and lower tax revenues. He credited the support for helping him attract applicants and reduce vacancies from more than 40 in the summer of 2022 to only four today. (Parker noted that vacancies peak in the summer and said he anticipated them to tick up before the next academic year.)
"These grants have allowed us to be competitive," he said. "We've been able to say to a young college graduate, 'Come here and teach, commit to us, because there are opportunities for you to grow here.'"
In addition, Parker said the terminated grants paid the salaries of at least four teachers, and the district needed to find a couple hundred thousand dollars immediately to pay them for the remainder of this academic year, requiring the cancellation or postponement of several dozen school maintenance projects, such as repairing leaky roofs.
Parker's district also partnered with another teacher-pipeline project funded by a recently terminated grant - an initiative to give rural teachers bonuses based on improved student achievement. That project was led by The Innovation Project (TIP), a collaboration of public school systems across North Carolina. Teachers in Elizabeth City and seven other rural districts were expecting to receive performance-based bonuses of up to $7,500 at the end of this school year, but there's no money now to pay them - a "devastating" loss, according to Parker.
TIP had to lay off support staff and four experienced teacher coaches they had hired from across the state to help mentor new teachers in rural partner districts.
"It was absolutely heartbreaking, to tell people, 'As of 5 p.m. today, you no longer have a job, and we can't pay you any sort of severance or anything,'" said Sharon Contreras, TIP's chief executive officer. "That's no way to treat this nation's educators."
Related: To fight teacher shortages, schools turn to custodians, bus drivers and aides
The cuts caught educators by surprise. In mid-February, a wave of form letters from the Department of Education, identical except for the recipients' names and grant numbers, hit the grantees' inboxes. The letters, signed by Mark Washington, the department's deputy assistant secretary for management and planning, informed recipients that their grants were being terminated because they funded "programs that promote or take part in DEI initiatives or other initiatives that unlawfully discriminate on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, national origin, or another protected characteristic." The letters demanded an immediate stop to all spending and gave recipients 30 days to appeal.
"There was a lot of confusion, and a lot of chaos about what does this actually mean," said Ben Seipel, a professor of education and graduate program director at California State University-Chico who leads the GREAT Teachers Pipeline, which received a three-year, $13.4 million grant in 2022 to recruit, train and support hundreds of teachers from a largely rural area of Northern California about the size of Ohio. They were in the final year of their grant when it was terminated. While the university was able to secure enough alternative funding to cover the program's spring semester obligations, recruiting for next fall's teachers went forward without assurances that money would be available to support them. Seipel and his team also scaled back plans for summer professional development workshops for teachers in their partner districts, and they shelved plans to track the longer-term impact of the teachers they trained for rural schools after the Education Department canceled the call for new grant applications.
The primary goal of the three federal grant programs at the center of the legal battles is to train and support skilled teachers for districts that need them most, according to the funding priorities published by the Education Department. But all three also focus on increasing teacher diversity as a secondary goal. The grantees interviewed for this story said their projects did not rely on quotas or preferences based on race or other demographic categories, as the termination letter alleged. Instead, they said their efforts increased educator diversity by lowering the barriers to pursuing a teaching career and by recruiting local teacher talent from communities with diverse populations. The legal cases center not on questions of diversity, though, but on whether the Education Department has the authority to terminate the grant programs established by Congress.
Related: Waiting for the traveling teacher: Remote rural schools need more hands-on help
The decisions of the Supreme Court and the Court of Appeals to let the cancellations stand for now is not promising for the plaintiffs.Regardless of what the courts ultimately decide, it appears likely that the Education Department will end most of its support for teacher-training programs going forward. President Donald Trump's executive order to dismantle the department, signed March 20, calls for returning power over education to the states. Already the education agency has lost thousands of staff members through layoffs and resignations, and it is investigating moving some responsibilities, including special education programs, to other agencies such as the Department of Health and Human Services.
"We currently have our applications open for the fall," said Seipel of Chico State, "but we know that some students are hesitant, because they just can't trust that the money will be there."
As for Grado, she's determined to find a way to finish college, even though she's not sure how she might pay for it - maybe loans, maybe taking a job at one of the packing plants to save money for tuition. In addition to her classwork, her training includes teaching periodic lessons at a nearby elementary school.
"I love being there, and I constantly think of my kids back home, and how much I would love to return and teach," she said. "I mean, that's what I came here for."
Contact editor Caroline Preston at 212-870-8965 or on Signal at CarolineP.83 or at preston@hechingerreport.org.
This story about teacher-residency programs was produced by The Hechinger Report, a nonprofit, independent news organization focused on inequality and innovation in education. Sign up for the Hechinger newsletter.
The post Trump's cuts to teacher training leave rural school districts, aspiring educators in the lurch appeared first on The Hechinger Report.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
42 minutes ago
- Yahoo
American Eagle Defends Sydney Sweeney Ad Campaign Amid Controversy: ‘Her Jeans. Her Story… Great Jeans Look Good on Everyone'
American Eagle is standing by its controversial ad campaign featuring Sydney Sweeney, which includes various commercials with the tagline: 'Sydney Sweeney Has Great Jeans.' The campaign creates a pun around 'great genes,' which ignited outrage online over American Eagle glorifying the Emmy nominee's white heritage and thin physique. Some users on social media even compared the ads to 'Nazi propaganda.' 'Sydney Sweeney Has Great Jeans' is and always was about the jeans. Her jeans. Her story,' the company said in a statement posted on social media. 'We'll continue to celebrate how everyone wears their AE jeans with confidence, their way. Great jeans look good on everyone. More from Variety JD Vance Urges Democrats Angry Over Sydney Sweeney Jeans Ads to Keep It Up: 'Continue to Tell Everybody' Who Thinks She Is Attractive That They're 'a Nazi' White House Says Liberal Outrage Over Sydney Sweeney's American Eagle Jeans Commercial Is 'Moronic' and a 'Big Reason Americans' Voted for Trump Katy O'Brian Says Sydney Sweeney 'Didn't Care' About Getting Hurt During Fight Scenes in Christy Martin Biopic: 'She Was Like, "If You Break My Nose, That's Fine"' Sweeney's American Eagle campaign caused so much chatter online that even Trump's White House weighed in on the backlash, with communications manager Steven Cheung calling the backlash a prime example of 'cancel culture run amok.' 'This warped, moronic and dense liberal thinking is a big reason why Americans voted the way they did in 2024,' Cheung added. 'They're tired of this bullshit.' Vice president JD Vance also mocked liberals for creating a hysteria around the American Eagle campaign, saying on an episode of the 'Ruthless' podcast: 'My political advice to the Democrats is continue to tell everybody who thinks Sydney Sweeney is attractive is a Nazi. That appears to be their actual strategy.' Vance continued, 'I mean, it actually reveals something pretty interesting about the Dems, though, which is that you have, like, a normal all-American beautiful girl doing like a normal jeans ad, right? They're trying to sell, you know, sell jeans to kids in America and they have managed to so unhinge themselves over this thing. And it's like, you guys, did you learn nothing from the November 2024 election? I actually thought that one of the lessons [Democrats] might take is we're going to be less crazy. And the lesson they have apparently taken is we're going to attack people as Nazis for thinking Sydney Sweeney is beautiful.' Even Stephen Colbert, who frequently speaks out against Trump and the White House, called the backlash against Sweeney and American Eagle overblown 'Now, some people look at [the ads] and they're seeing something sinister, saying that the genes-jeans denim wordplay in an ad featuring a white blond woman means American Eagle could be promoting eugenics, white supremacy and Nazi propaganda,' Colbert said this week on 'The Late Show.' 'That might be a bit of an overreaction.' Sweeney has yet to publicly comment on the outcry over the advertisements. Best of Variety New Movies Out Now in Theaters: What to See This Week What's Coming to Disney+ in August 2025 What's Coming to Netflix in August 2025


Los Angeles Times
an hour ago
- Los Angeles Times
9th Circuit keeps freeze on Southern California ICE patrols
The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals dealt a stinging blow to the Trump administration's mass deportation project Friday night in a fiery opinion upholding a lower court's block on 'roving patrols' across much of Southern California. 'If, as Defendants suggest, they are not conducting stops that lack reasonable suspicion, they can hardly claim to be irreparably harmed by an injunction aimed at preventing a subset of stops not supported by reasonable suspicion,' the panel wrote. The ruling leaves in place a temporary restraining order barring masked and heavily armed agents from snatching people off the streets of Southern California without first establishing reasonable suspicion that they are in the U.S. illegally. Under the 4th Amendment, reasonable suspicion cannot be based solely on race, ethnicity, language, location or employment, either alone or in combination, U.S. District Judge Maame Ewusi-Mensah Frimpong of Los Angeles wrote in her original order. 9th Circuit Judges Marsha S. Berzon, Jennifer Sung and Ronald M. Gould agreed. 'There is no predicate action that the individual plaintiffs would need to take, other than simply going about their lives, to potentially be subject to the challenged stops,' the opinion said. Fourth Amendment injunctions are hard to win, experts say. Plaintiffs must show not only that they were hurt, but that they are likely to be hurt again in the same way in the future. One way to meet that test in court is to show the injury is the product of a government policy. Throughout a hearing Monday, the appellate judges repeatedly probed that question, roughly doubling the administration's time to respond in an effort to get an answer. 'After the district court injunction here, the secretary of Homeland Security said, 'We are going to continue doing what we're doing' — so that's not a policy?' Berzon asked. 'The policy is to follow the 4th Amendment and to require reasonable suspicion,' said Deputy Assistant Atty. Gen. Yaakov Roth. Roth also rebuffed questions about a 3,000-arrests-per-day quota first touted by White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller in May. In a memo to the panel on Wednesday, Roth clarified that 'no such goal' had been established. The court rejected that argument Friday, writing that 'no official statement or express policy is required' to prove one exists. 'Agents have conducted many stops in the Los Angeles area within a matter of weeks ... some repeatedly in the same location,' the opinion said, making the likelihood of future stops 'considerable.' The ruling scolded the Department of Justice for 'misreading' the restraining order it sought to block, and said it 'mischaracterized' Judge Frimpong's order. And it rejected the government's central claim that its law enforcement mandate would be 'chilled' by the district court's order. 'Defendants have failed to establish that they will be 'chilled' from their enforcement efforts at all, let alone in a manner that constitutes the 'irreparable injury' required to support a stay pending appeal,' the panel wrote. The case is still in its early phases, with hearings set for a preliminary injunction in September. But the 'shock and awe' campaign of chaotic public arrests that first gripped Southern California on June 6 has all but ceased in the seven counties covered by Frimpong's order: Los Angeles, Riverside, San Bernardino, Orange, Ventura, Santa Barbara and San Luis Obispo. 'The underlying 4th Amendment law is not complicated,' said Mohammad Tajsar of the ACLU of Southern California — part of a coalition of civil rights groups and individual attorneys challenging cases of three immigrants and two U.S. citizens swept up in chaotic arrests. 'Even a more conservative panel would have been concerned about what the government is doing.' Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass, whose city was among a number of Southern California municipalities allowed to join the lawsuit this week, celebrated the news. 'Today is a victory for the rule of law and for the city of Los Angeles,' Bass said. 'Los Angeles will stand together against this administration's efforts to break up families who contribute every single day to the life, the culture and the economy of our great city.' The Trump administration has previously signaled its intent to fight judicial limits on its deportation efforts any way it can. It was not immediately clear where an appeal would proceed.


Hamilton Spectator
an hour ago
- Hamilton Spectator
After a reference to Trump's impeachments is removed from a history museum, complex questions echo
NEW YORK (AP) — It would seem the most straightforward of notions: A thing takes place, and it goes into the history books or is added to museum exhibits. But whether something even gets remembered and how — particularly when it comes to the history of a country and its leader — is often the furthest thing from simple. The latest example of that came Friday, when the Smithsonian Institution said it had removed a reference to the 2019 and 2021 impeachments of President Donald Trump from a panel in an exhibition about the American presidency. Trump has pressed institutions and agencies under federal oversight, often through the pressure of funding, to focus on the country's achievements and progress and away from things he terms 'divisive.' A Smithsonian spokesperson said the removal of the reference, which had been installed as part of a temporary addition in 2021, came after a review of 'legacy content recently' and the exhibit eventually 'will include all impeachments.' There was no time frame given for when; exhibition renovations can be time- and money-consuming endeavors. In a statement that did not directly address the impeachment references, White House spokesperson Davis Ingle said: 'We are fully supportive of updating displays to highlight American greatness.' But is history intended to highlight or to document — to report what happened, or to serve a desired narrative? The answer, as with most things about the past, can be intensely complex. It's part of a larger effort around American stories The Smithsonian's move comes in the wake of Trump administration actions like removing the name of a gay rights activist from a Navy ship, pushing for Republican supporters in Congress to defund the Corporation for Public Broadcasting and getting rid of the leadership at the Kennedy Center. 'Based on what we have been seeing, this is part of a broader effort by the president to influence and shape how history is depicted at museums, national parks, and schools,' said Julian E. Zelizer, a professor of history and public affairs at Princeton University. 'Not only is he pushing a specific narrative of the United States but, in this case, trying to influence how Americans learn about his own role in history.' It's not a new struggle, in the world generally and the political world particularly. There is power in being able to shape how things are remembered, if they are remembered at all — who was there, who took part, who was responsible, what happened to lead up to that point in history. And the human beings who run things have often extended their authority to the stories told about them. In China, for example, references to the June 1989 crackdown on pro-democracy demonstrators in Beijing's Tiananmen Square are forbidden and meticulously regulated by the ruling Communist Party government. In Soviet-era Russia, officials who ran afoul of leaders like Josef Stalin disappeared not only from the government itself but from photographs and history books where they once appeared. Jason Stanley, an expert on authoritarianism, said controlling what and how people learn of their past has long been used as a vital tool to maintain power. Stanley has made his views about the Trump administration clear; he recently left Yale University to join the University of Toronto, citing concerns over the U.S. political situation. 'If they don't control the historical narrative,' he said, 'then they can't create the kind of fake history that props up their politics.' It shows how the presentation of history matters In the United States, presidents and their families have always used their power to shape history and calibrate their own images. Jackie Kennedy insisted on cuts in William Manchester's book on her husband's 1963 assassination, 'The Death of a President.' Ronald Reagan and his wife got a cable TV channel to release a carefully calibrated documentary about him. Those around Franklin D. Roosevelt, including journalists of the era, took pains to mask the impact that paralysis had on his body and his mobility. Trump, though, has taken it to a more intense level — a sitting president encouraging an atmosphere where institutions can feel compelled to choose between him and the truth — whether he calls for it directly or not. 'We are constantly trying to position ourselves in history as citizens, as citizens of the country, citizens of the world,' said Robin Wagner-Pacifici, professor emerita of sociology at the New School for Social Research. 'So part of these exhibits and monuments are also about situating us in time. And without it, it's very hard for us to situate ourselves in history because it seems like we just kind of burst forth from the Earth.' Timothy Naftali, director of the Richard M. Nixon Presidential Library and Museum from 2007 to 2011, presided over its overhaul to offer a more objective presentation of Watergate — one not beholden to the president's loyalists. In an interview Friday, he said he was 'concerned and disappointed' about the Smithsonian decision. Naftali, now a senior researcher at Columbia University, said museum directors 'should have red lines' and that he considered removing the Trump panel to be one of them. While it might seem inconsequential for someone in power to care about a museum's offerings, Wagner-Pacifici says Trump's outlook on history and his role in it — earlier this year, he said the Smithsonian had 'come under the influence of a divisive, race-centered ideology' — shows how important those matters are to people in authority. 'You might say about that person, whoever that person is, their power is so immense and their legitimacy is so stable and so sort of monumental that why would they bother with things like this ... why would they bother to waste their energy and effort on that?' Wagner-Pacifici said. Her conclusion: 'The legitimacy of those in power has to be reconstituted constantly. They can never rest on their laurels.' ___