The Trump administration moved on Wednesday to advance a new vision of “patriotic education” in American schools and universities, announcing a plan to prioritize federal grants for programs that promote what it called an “inspiring and ennobling” account of the nation’s history.
Education Secretary Linda McMahon outlined the proposal, which would add “patriotic education” to the list of discretionary grant priorities used by the Department of Education. The move, she said, is intended to foster “informed patriotism” among students by focusing on the country’s founding principles and political traditions.
“It is imperative to promote an education system that teaches future generations honestly about America’s Founding principles, political institutions, and rich history,” Ms. McMahon said in a statement. “To truly understand American values, the tireless work it has taken to live up to them, and this country’s exceptional place in world history is the best way to inspire an informed patriotism and love of country.”
According to the proposed rule, published in the Federal Register, “patriotic education” entails a presentation of American history that is “accurate, honest, unifying, inspiring, and ennobling,” with an emphasis on the nation’s progress toward its “noble principles.” The department intends to steer grant funding toward programs that advance this vision, including those that help students engage with founding documents and primary sources.
The proposal is open for public comment until Oct. 17.
The announcement is the latest in a series of efforts by the administration to shape how American history is taught. In March, President Trump issued an executive order, “Restoring Truth and Sanity to American History,” which restricted federal funding for programs that “degrade shared American values” or “divide Americans based on race.” That order prompted reviews at institutions like the Smithsonian and the National Park Service, leading to the removal of exhibits detailing the brutalities of slavery and other difficult chapters of U.S. history.
Now, the Education Department’s grant priority could extend that influence. Higher education insiders have expressed concern that the administration’s planned $495 million in grants for historically Black colleges and universities, for example, may come with conditions requiring them to adopt a sanitized curriculum.
Historians and education advocates were swift to criticize the move, framing it as a politically motivated attempt to whitewash the past.
“I agree that American history should be presented with accuracy and honesty, based on solid historical evidence, and doing so does inspire people,” said Sarah Weicksel, executive director of the American Historical Association. “But the department’s priority statement has a narrow conception of patriotism and patriotic education.”
Dr. Weicksel and other scholars argue that the administration’s approach ignores critical elements of the nation’s history—such as slavery, systemic racism, and the disenfranchisement of women and minorities—in favor of a simplified, celebratory narrative.
“That context tells us that the administration is interested in telling an uncomplicated celebration of American greatness,” she said. “Doing that flattens the past into a set of platitudes that are not rooted in the broader historical context, conflicts, contingencies and change over time that are central to historical thinking.”
Secretary McMahon’s other stated priorities for grant funding include evidence-based literacy, expanding education choice, returning education authority to states, and advancing artificial intelligence in education. But it is the “patriotic education” initiative that has drawn the most intense scrutiny, coming amid a broader national debate over how history is taught and who controls the narrative.
Supporters of the administration’s approach say it is a necessary corrective to what they see as a trend toward negative and divisive portrayals of American history in classrooms.
“Students deserve to learn about what makes this country exceptional,” said a senior department official who spoke on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss internal deliberations. “This is about giving them a foundation of knowledge that instills respect, not resentment.”
“This isn’t education—it’s indoctrination,” said Timothy Reese, a professor of education policy at George Washington University. “Telling only the flattering parts of our history doesn’t make students more patriotic. It makes them unprepared to grapple with the complexities of the world they’ll inherit.”
The department’s proposal will now enter a public comment period, during which educators, historians, and civil rights groups are expected to weigh in extensively. Whether the rule is finalized may depend on the outcome of the upcoming election, but for now, the battle over American history—and who gets to tell it—is again front and center.