This is being packaged as a way to streamline the department鈥檚 work. But out here in rural America, where I鈥檓 from, it’s clear that this kind of chaos will hurt the most vulnerable students first.

Under the plan, the Department of Labor will be responsible for overseeing K-12 programs. The Department of the Interior will run Native American education programs. The Department of Health and Human Services will 鈥嬧�媡ake over campus-based child care programs for college students. The State Department will assume international education and student-exchange functions, including programs that support global language and area-studies partnerships. And the administration has hinted that it will announce the transfer of additional programs in the coming months. 

There will be no clear authority, little technical assistance provided to districts like mine in rural areas, blurred accountability and conflicting priorities. This will interrupt funding and services that will wreak havoc on student outcomes.

Rural districts already operate with limited staff and underfunded central offices. In many places, one superintendent will be handling Title I, special education, federal grants, transportation, food service and student services all on their own 鈥� often while also overseeing district operations. Now, imagine telling that same superintendent that instead of leaning on the Department of Education for guidance, they must contact Labor for help with one set of programs, Interior for another, HHS for a third and the State Department for others. That鈥檚 not reform; it鈥檚 an obstacle course.

In addition, these agencies all use different payment systems, which only complicates the flow of funding to districts. I have extensive experience working with the G5 payment system, the Department of Education鈥檚 central online platform for managing grant funds. I鈥檝e used earlier versions under multiple administrations 鈥� Bush, Obama, Trump and Biden. While no system is perfect, G5 has been relatively straightforward and predictable. When issues arise, there鈥檚 a clear structure for technical assistance and problem-solving.

That predictability would be lost. Requiring districts to navigate multiple payment systems across different agencies will introduce unnecessary complexity, slow reimbursements and increase the risk of errors. Small rural districts don鈥檛 have the administrative capacity to manage multiple federal accounting systems, and even short delays can disrupt payroll, special education contracts and student services.

These delays mean postponing reading interventions, suspending behavioral health services for vulnerable students or holding off on hiring staff. Since the creation of the Small Rural School Achievement program in 2001, which provides grants essential to bridging rural funding gaps, I hadn鈥檛 experienced a single delay in federal education funding 鈥� until this year. This is clear evidence that instability in Washington quickly reaches rural communities.

The students who rely most on stable federal support are the ones most harmed when a system enters a period of chaos. These include children with disabilities, Indigenous students, English learners and kids from low-income families. They depend on programs that require consistency, not fragmentation. If the Trump administration’s plan proceeds, those services will be stalled and undermined and could even vanish into bureaucratic gaps. 

If the administration really wants to support states, there are common-sense steps that won鈥檛 plunge schools into chaos, such as streamlining federal grant applications, reducing duplicate reporting requirements, updating outdated data systems and expanding technical assistance. These are practical changes that could make life easier for school staff and families.

At the end of the day, rural America survives on stability. We know what happens when a barn collapses or a herd scatters 鈥� everyone suffers, and it takes much more effort to bring things back under control than it would have taken to fortify the structure in the first place.

The same principle is true here. Breaking up the Department of Education and scattering its shards throughout the federal government isn鈥檛 reform. It鈥檚 disruption. And rural schools, tribal communities and vulnerable students will be the ones who pay the steepest price. 

It is evident that the White House will not stop until it wipes out the most basic protections and supports for the American people, including the youngest children. The first step was the attempt to defund Head Start and Early Head Start, impacting 800,000 young children across the nation. This order was halted by a federal judge in Washington, thanks to the lawsuits filed by Democracy Forward and attorneys general from 23 states. 

The mass layoffs will severely hamper the department鈥檚 ability to execute on its core responsibilities. This move is a direct assault on millions of students, teachers and families. It is clearly a precursor to dismantling the department without congressional consent, which would have an even more devastating impact. The department serves and protects the most vulnerable children and young adults, ensuring that they have equal access to education. This includes:

• 26 million students from low-income backgrounds 鈥� more than half of all K-12 students 鈥� who rely on the department for reasonable class sizes; school meals; tutoring; afterschool and summer programs; school supplies such as laptops and books; parent engagement programs; and, in some cases, transportation

• 9.8 million students enrolled in rural schools
  
• 7.4. million students with disabilities
  
• 5 million English learners
  
• 1.1 million students experiencing homelessness
  
• 87 million college students who receive Pell Grants and student loans聽

The department was created in 1980 with a single, crucial purpose: to ensure equal access to education and to promote educational excellence throughout the nation. Its creation followed decades of systemic inequities that left children in disadvantaged communities without the same learning opportunities as their more privileged peers. The department鈥檚 work has been a critical safeguard against discrimination in schools, whether on the basis of race, disability, gender or income. 

Without the federal government鈥檚 intervention and oversight, the more than 13 million children who live in poverty would be even more vulnerable to systemic inequities. The department ensures that federal dollars are distributed to those students most in need, ensuring that underserved children have the same opportunities for success as their wealthier peers. Without the federal oversight and the department’s support, these students will fall even further behind, and the national achievement gap will grow wider.

The federal government is the only entity that can ensure a baseline level of educational equity across the entire nation. The department holds states accountable for ensuring that all children, regardless of where they live or what their socioeconomic status may be, receive a quality education. If this accountability is removed, the children most at risk 鈥� those in underfunded schools, children of color, children with disabilities, English learners and those experiencing homelessness 鈥� will be the first to suffer. These children would be denied the critical services and protections they need to succeed in school and in life.

Moreover, the president鈥檚 plan to turn education policy over to the states would completely dismantle the federal safety net that ensures that the most vulnerable children are not left behind. Each of the 50 states has different priorities, resources and political climates. While some might be able to provide excellent educational opportunities, others will leave children behind, particularly in rural or economically disadvantaged areas. Inequities between states could widen to an intolerable degree, and the resulting lack of uniform educational standards would only further disadvantage the children who need the most help.

To be clear, the department cannot be dissolved at the whim of a sitting president. Under the Constitution, only an act of Congress can create or dismantle a federal agency. The president does not have the unilateral power to eliminate an entire federal institution that serves the educational needs of millions of children across this country. Attempting to do so would not only undermine the law, but also inflict tremendous harm to the very foundation of America’s educational system.

The idea that dismantling the department could somehow improve that system is not only misguided, but dangerously na茂ve.

It鈥檚 vital that we, as a nation, recognize the long-term damage this action would cause. The attempt to dismantle the Department of Education is not just an attack on a government agency 鈥� it is an attack on the future of America’s children.

To parents across the country: This policy is not only unconstitutional 鈥� it is a grave threat to your children鈥檚 future. Whether your child is in a classroom in New York, Los Angeles or a small town in the Midwest, the U.S. Department of Education has worked to ensure that their educational opportunities are protected, funded and regulated. A president who seeks to eliminate this essential agency is jeopardizing the future of every single student in America.

This is why we must all rise up and make our voices heard. We must demand that our leaders stop this dangerous plan in its tracks, that they fix what isn鈥檛 working and that they use this opportunity to reimagine public education and invest in a more effective, equitable system that gives all children the opportunity to succeed.

For 24/7 mental health support in English or Spanish, call the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration鈥檚 at 800-662-4357. You can also reach a trained crisis counselor through the by calling or texting 988.

LUFKIN 鈥� Georgia DeVries misses sleeping in a car.

鈥淚t was safer than any house I鈥檝e been in,鈥� the 17-year-old said.

By her count, she鈥檚 lived in at least 13 different places since the sixth grade, including multiple homes with her mom, extended stays with friends and family, and four trips to behavioral health clinics.

Get stories like this delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for 蜜桃影视 Newsletter

Then last November, after staying with her aunt, she ended up in her now ex-boyfriend鈥檚 broken-down Mitsubishi parked on his family鈥檚 property.

It wasn鈥檛 much, but she felt at peace 鈥� most of the time.

This is how many teenagers in rural Texas experience homelessness: a revolving door of sheltered and unsheltered living, friends鈥� couches, stints with extended family, nights spent outdoors. Homeless shelters are not an option in Lufkin, a town of 34,000, 90 miles south of Tyler, the nearest major city. Shelters here don鈥檛 take unaccompanied minors without reports of violent abuse.

A dearth of shelters is just one way homeless teens in rural areas are at a more significant disadvantage than their urban peers, experts say. A lack of good-paying jobs, poverty and drug abuse can be more common.

Poverty rose in between 2018 and 2022; a majority of those counties are considered rural. East Texas had a higher rate of opioid abuse than the rest of the state, according to a regional needs assessment based on data from 2018 to 2020. Texas, as a whole, was one of eight states where rural communities suffered higher drug overdose rates compared to their urban counterparts, according to a 2022 published in the International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health.

And teens in rural areas are harder to track, making it more difficult for policymakers to design solutions based on quality data.

More than U.S. residents in 2023 were counted as homeless, according to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. . The statistic is based on an annual census of homeless people on a single night in January.

Rural and nonrural communities have similar rates of youth homelessness, according to a 2021 study by the University of Chicago鈥檚 Chapin Hall, a think tank focused on public policy that supports families.

But these annual counts 鈥� which Chapin Hall鈥檚 research is based on 鈥� face criticism across the board as they struggle to measure homelessness accurately, even in urban areas.

Erin Carreon, a researcher at the University of Chicago, said there is likely a significant undercount in rural areas. That鈥檚 because rural teens are often 鈥渉idden鈥� from counters.

Georgia, for example, was with her then-girlfriend during the 2023 count, escaping the census.

鈥淲hen we think of homelessness, we might think of people in shelters or we might think of people on a busy street corner that people are walking by,鈥� Carreon said. 鈥淚n a rural area, young people are more likely to stay on couches, inside vehicles if they are outdoors, and it might be in a more secluded and hidden spot.鈥�

Six years ago, Georgia was living with her grandma and legal guardian, Jan DeVries. That’s when Georgia鈥檚 mother asked her to move to Beaumont, a much larger city about 100 miles southeast of Lufkin.

Georgia said she was excited. But after just one week at the new home, she clearly made a mistake. She left to move in with her girlfriend in Lufkin and stayed for two years.

A lack of early, stable relationships and a stubborn independence streak led Georgia to move in and out of homes frequently, DeVries said. In the years following the breakup, Georgia would stay with friends and family, sometimes lasting just one night.

Georgia acknowledges she has played a significant role in contributing to her homelessness. Her mental health is not the best, she said. She is seeking help and meets with a therapist weekly.

While DeVries has been one of the most stable forces in Georgia鈥檚 life, they鈥檝e had their own falling out over Georgia鈥檚 sexual identity.

DeVries said she tried not to judge Georgia, who first came out as a lesbian when she was about 14 and then bisexual when she was older.

鈥淚 just didn鈥檛 like the fact that she was going to make her life that much more difficult for herself,鈥� DeVries said.

LGBTQ+ youths were twice as likely to experience homelessness as their peers, according to another by Chapin Hall.

Georgia loved the company of little stray black cats that roamed the area near the broken-down car she called home last November. A stray dog would wander by occasionally, too, she said.

She is stick-thin. And she rocks a short, modern-day punk haircut dyed a mix of red, blue and green. Tattoos she did herself using a gun purchased online cover her body.

Like any teenager, she can be talkative at points or sit pensively, staring into space.

鈥淚 could have stayed there forever,鈥� she said.

However, the freedom she felt came with some consequences. It was November, and the East Texas region was experiencing its first cold front. She posted videos on TikTok of her breaking down, crying about how lonely she was.

Her feet hurt from the cold. And once, she slept for nearly 48 hours straight fighting a urinary tract infection. A cousin later dragged her to the doctor鈥檚 office for help.

鈥淭here wasn鈥檛 a whole lot I could do about it,鈥� DeVries said. 鈥淵ou pray real hard: 鈥楶rotect her. Protect her. Protect her.鈥� Because she was out there and you can鈥檛 make her understand about the danger she鈥檚 putting herself in. It was misery.鈥�

There wasn鈥檛 anywhere else for the teen to go in Angelina County. Local shelters only accept people over 18 unless violent abuse is reported.

Service providers don鈥檛 have an incentive to seek out these teens, because they have nothing to offer them. And public schools are supposed to act as a safety net, but students rarely know that, said Carreon, the University of Chicago researcher.

The Lufkin school district has a social worker. However, there鈥檚 little help for the kids who . And Georgia doesn鈥檛 remember the last time she was in a classroom.

Two adults who have tried to help Georgia are Pam and Yvonne Smith. They started the Kaleidoscope L.Y.F.E. Foundation to provide access to mentorship for at-risk youth.

Before launching the nonprofit, Pam Smith worked in the juvenile justice system and Yvonne worked at another youth advocacy center. For years, they watched the state and local foster care system struggle. Statewide, the system that is supposed to help young Texans find stable homes has faced scrutiny for staff , home placements and placing kids in hotels when foster homes were unavailable.

Local leaders and organizations, the Smiths say, have failed to close the gap.

鈥淭hese kids are underage and can’t do anything for themselves,鈥� Yvonne Smith said. 鈥淭hey’re stuck in a situation where they鈥檙e supposed to be an adult but are not legally able to act as one.鈥�

They don鈥檛 receive support from the state, they can鈥檛 register themselves for school or GED programs, and they can鈥檛 sign a contract for an apartment or utilities, Yvonne Smith said.

Communities can begin to address homelessness by establishing strategies to divert teens from this path, according to Carreon. And she suggested that federal funding be made more broadly accessible to those communities.

Carreon thinks it really starts with schools, giving them the resources to identify these kids and provide them with help.

鈥淢aking sure schools have the capacity to fulfill their roles is really key,鈥� she said.

Until that happens, rural teen homelessness will likely remain invisible and abstract.

Georgia had to move out of the car after it was vandalized.

And DeVries insisted Georgia return home before Christmas. She waits up each night for Georgia, who walks home from her job at Little Caesars. Georgia likes the work because she can munch on pizza during her breaks.

She puts aside as much money as she can for a car.

This article originally appeared in at .

The Texas Tribune is a member-supported, nonpartisan newsroom informing and engaging Texans on state politics and policy. Learn more at texastribune.org.

, the latest in a series of 10 research reports on rural education, shows that roughly 9.5 million students attend public schools in rural areas 鈥� more than 1 in 5 nationally. Nearly 1 in 7 of those rural students experience poverty, 1 in 15 lacks health insurance and 1 in 10 has changed residence in the previous 12 months.

Roughly half of all rural students live in just 10 states. Texas has the largest number, followed by North Carolina, Georgia, Ohio, Tennessee, New York, Pennsylvania, Indiana, Virginia and Michigan. Texas has more rural students than the 18 states with the fewest combined.

In 13 states, at least half of public schools are rural: South Dakota, Montana, Vermont, North Dakota, Maine, Alaska, Oklahoma, Nebraska, Wyoming, New Hampshire, West Virginia, Mississippi and Iowa. In 14 other states, at least one-third of all schools are rural. 

More key findings from this edition of Why Rural Matters:

• More access to psychologists and guidance counselors is needed. In non-rural districts, there are an average of 295 students per guidance counselor or psychologist. In rural districts, the ratio increases to 310:1, with seven states (Minnesota, California, Mississippi, Alaska, Louisiana, Indiana and Michigan) having ratios worse than 400:1. 

• More access to gifted and talented programs is needed for Black and Hispanic students in rural districts. Though 17% of students in rural schools identify as Hispanic, they represent only 9% of participants in these schools’ gifted programs. Similarly, 11% of the rural school population identifies as Black, but only 5% of the gifted student population in rural schools is Black. In contrast, 65% of rural students are white, as are 77% of participants in gifted programs. 

• Rural areas appear to offset some of the impact of poverty on educational outcomes. Overall, students experiencing poverty scored 27 points lower than their peers on the grade 8 NAEP math assessment and 22 points lower in reading; in rural schools, these differences were 22 and 18, respectively. Socioeconomic equity in reading appeared to be highest within rural schools in Arizona, Idaho, Texas and Oklahoma, and most concerning in Illinois, Mississippi and Virginia. For math, the most equitable states were Hawaii, Arizona, West Virginia and Oklahoma; the least equitable states were Colorado and Louisiana.

• Many rural areas continue to lack basic internet access. The pandemic made clear that adequate internet connectivity is essential to equitable education opportunities. However, 13% of rural households lack minimum broadband connection for streaming educational videos or engaging with virtual classrooms. In six states, more than 1 in 6 rural households doesn’t have at least a basic broadband connection: New Mexico (21.4%), Mississippi (20.6%), Alabama (18.9%), West Virginia (17.5%), Arkansas (17.4%) and Louisiana (17.2%). 

• Students in rural districts are more likely to graduate high school than their non-rural counterparts. In the majority of states with enough rural students to make data available, (34 of 46), rural students graduate at rates higher than their non-rural peers. Despite facing a range of spatial inequities, the unique strengths of rural areas 鈥攕uch as smaller schools and close community ties 鈥� combined to create graduation advantages of at least 5 percentage points in Nebraska, Connecticut, Maryland, Massachusetts, New York and Rhode Island.  

• Many states provide a disproportionately larger share of school funding for rural districts because of the higher relative costs of running rural schools. Fourteen states, however, devote disproportionately less: Nebraska has the greatest disparity, followed by Vermont, Rhode Island, Iowa, Delaware, South Dakota, Michigan, Indiana, Wisconsin, Connecticut, Idaho, Illinois, Massachusetts and Minnesota. 

• Rural school districts in Delaware, Oklahoma, North Carolina, and Nevada are the most racially diverse in the United States. In these states, two students chosen at random from a school in a rural district are more likely than not to be of a different race or ethnicity. 

• Communities surrounding schools in rural districts on average have a household income of nearly three times the poverty line. Rates were lowest in New Mexico (1.85) and highest in Connecticut (5.32).

As post-pandemic recovery continues, states and local districts must reevaluate what it means to provide a public education that meets student and family needs and prepares young people for life beyond pre-K-12 schooling (including college and career readiness and engaged citizenship). These challenges are widespread but are most intense in the Southeast, Southwest and Appalachia. What is needed is the will to address them.

The results published in Why Rural Matters 2023 make clear that policymakers cannot ignore the difficulties faced by rural schools and the students they serve.

This becomes even more surprising considering the significant challenges rural schools face in delivering science, technology, engineering and math education and retaining STEM educators. For example, the average rural school offers half as many advanced mathematics courses as those in urban areas, and nearly half of rural students attend a school that offers only one to three . And although rural schools serve nearly one-fifth of the country鈥檚 public school students 鈥� more than attend the nation鈥檚 85 largest school districts combined 鈥� they receive only 17% of . Imagine how this plays out: academic achievement gaps, few STEM classes, inadequate facilities and low (or no) budget for student projects.

As a rural educator, I see this reality every day. Rural teachers are used to making do with less and finding ways to keep students challenged, engaged and on track within our limited resources. At Greenon Local Schools, out of this creativity came a low-investment, high-impact approach to making STEM education accessible and engaging while still meeting state standards. We call it STEM with a purpose, but it is more commonly known as . 

Invention education is a highly flexible, cross-curricular, project-based approach to bringing traditional STEM learning to life through hands-on problem-solving. In our rural setting, it has been especially meaningful to connect students to the real-world challenges of their communities and engage them in deeper STEM learning.

Students start by identifying a local problem. My students were motivated by reports of pollution in our water, and they decided to design a tool to prevent debris from entering sewer systems. 

Small-town communities are known to be tight-knit and supportive, which we used to our advantage. Everyone from the Ohio State Department of Transportation to county engineers, a local welding shop, an international specialist in pump technology and a regional environmental nonprofit happily stepped in to advise the students. They were able to learn from these experts, access diverse knowledge and skills that traditional classrooms can’t always offer and gain insight into a variety of potential careers. 

The sophomores, juniors and seniors on our invention education team ultimately designed a system of nets to cover the end of the pipes that channel storm drain water directly into local waterways. Their prototype, monitored by an app they also developed, allows for the free flow of water while catching debris but not harming wildlife.

The system was designed to meet the needs of the professionals who would ultimately use it (which the students ascertained from their work with the community professionals), yielding a solution that is practical for rural environments and can be managed by a small crew without heavy machinery. With support from the Lemelson-MIT program and Microsoft鈥檚 #MakeWhatsNext patent program, the Greenon InvenTeam received a issued by the United States Patent and Trademark Office in January 2022.

Not all invention education efforts end in a patent. In fact, most don鈥檛. But the pursuit of a patent is not why we teach it. As rural educators, we know the creativity, confidence and inventive mindset these students experience as they do the work will set them up well in whatever academic or career path they choose. We have also seen how invention education can be transformative for students too often left out of STEM pursuits, including young women, those from low-income families and students who do better with hands-on learning than in traditional classroom settings. On our Greenon High team of 16 student inventors, 14 are young women. Contrast that to the fact that are held by women.

Rural students do not go to college at the same rates as their urban and suburban peers, and they are in four-year degree programs and at selective schools. But invention education has elevated our students鈥� preparation for and intention to continue their studies. Of the 16 patent holders on our team, 13 matriculated at four-year universities, while others enrolled in community college, the military or technical training. Nearly all are majoring or specializing in a STEM-related area.

Invention education isn鈥檛 a magic solution to all the challenges of rural education. But it is one way of bringing more students, educators and community members into purposeful, effective STEM education. Not every one of my students will become an engineer, doctor or scientist. But I know that collaborating, learning through failure, using the design process and cultivating an inventive mindset are life skills all students need, regardless of where they live.

When education students from Kentucky鈥檚 Morehead State University entered a virtual classroom with guest lecturer Chea Parton to discuss rural literature, many felt ashamed of the rural communities where they grew up鈥攁nd where many of them would return to teach after graduation. 

By the end of Parton鈥檚 guest lecture, some of those opinions had started to change. 

鈥淓ven though she only spoke to my students for an hour, she already blew their minds,鈥� said Alison Hruby, Ph.D., an associate professor of English education at MSU. 

The stories that the students read and heard as children told them that rural folk were backward and ignorant. That the land they were raised on was just flyover country. And that to find success, they must leave their hometowns and move to larger cities.

Parton, Ph.D., spoke to the students about her project, , which promotes expanding literature curriculums to include works that speak directly to young rural students in middle school and high school classrooms.  

By teaching stories like Wilson Rawls鈥檚 Where the Red Fern Grows, about a boy and his two hunting dogs in rural Oklahoma, or Julie Murphy鈥檚 顿耻尘辫濒颈苍鈥�, about a self-proclaimed 鈥渇at girl鈥� conquering her small town Texas beauty pageant, students are able to see themselves represented in their school work.

Parton鈥檚 lesson seemed to stick, Hruby said. The future school teachers viewed their hometowns more favorably, reflected critically on how literature can affect students鈥� views of where they are from, and began to think about how to incorporate Parton鈥檚 work in their own future English lessons.

鈥淸The students] really wish they had read more literature that represented their home towns in a more positive light,鈥� Hruby said.

Literacy In Place is an online repository of rural literature resources. Parton, a rural language and literacy scholar, to provide book lists, lessons, and activities to students, English teachers, education professors, and anyone else interested in discovering how place (specifically rural place) affects the way stories are told.

Parton said that she based Literacy in Place on three principles: 

1. Rural stories are worth telling.
2. Rural stories are worth reading and worthy of study.
3. And rural cultures (imperfect as they may be) are worth sustaining.

鈥淚 realized that rural culture is a culture and that it鈥檚 different,鈥� Parton said. 鈥淚 started thinking about me as a teacher and how my rurality affects the way I teach. Nobody was doing that work. That鈥檚 when I started Literacy in Place.鈥�

Parton said many middle and high school classrooms use culturally sustaining pedagogies, or teaching practices, that integrate community history and culture into lessons and activities. That approach teaches students core academic skills through their own unique identities. 

She realized that while this practice successfully uplifts many urban and suburban stories, rural schools there are many important rural narratives left untold. And that the absence of these stories allows negative rural stereotypes to persist.

鈥淚n teacher education programs, when we teach what culturally sustaining pedagogy is,鈥� Parton said. 鈥淲e teach from an urban perspective because that鈥檚 where it came from. So no one鈥檚 really learning how to sustain rural cultures in their teaching鈥攅ven teachers who come from rural places.鈥�

Parton鈥攚ho traded soybean fields in rural Indiana for city streets in Austin, Texas鈥攕ees herself as a prime example of what happens when rural life is not celebrated or sustained.

鈥淕rowing up, I ingested all of the negative things that people say about rural people and I believed those things,鈥� Parton said. 鈥淚 believed them about myself.鈥�

Parton鈥檚 relationship with rural life and her passion for literature have affected her teaching methods. She believes that most people don鈥檛 recognize the value or complexities of rural people and small town life. 

The key, she said, is that it鈥檚 not just city folks who make this mistake, but rural folks as well. And people make these discoveries about themselves and others through literature, she said.

鈥淚 think that literature is so powerful in helping people understand their own identities and understanding identities different from theirs,鈥� Parton said. 鈥淏ecause story is identity and identity is story.鈥�

Stephanie Reid, Ph.D., an assistant professor of literacy education in the Phyllis J. Washington College of Education at the University of Montana, incorporated Parton鈥檚 program into her spring 2022 young adult literacy and literature class.

Reid and her students found that Parton鈥檚 work also highlights the complexity that exists within rural identity.

鈥淢y students paid especially close attention to their own assumptions and definitions regarding rural life and living and to how those assumptions were shaped by where they are from and the communities in which they have spent time,鈥� Reid said. 鈥淚 believe it also heightened their appreciation of the importance of place and the diversity of rural identities and experiences that exist across rural contexts and communities.鈥�

When Reid鈥檚 students begin teaching in their own classrooms, she hopes the future educators 鈥渒now and value their students and that they take the time to learn the people and communities that comprise the teaching context.鈥�

The influence of Parton鈥檚 program on students encourages Hruby and Reid.

鈥淚鈥檓 really excited that she鈥檚 doing what she鈥檚 doing,鈥� Hruby said. 鈥淏ecause it seems like such a small thing, but it鈥檚 really going to have a huge impact.鈥�

They also hope Parton鈥檚 work marks a shift in the education field鈥攐ne that amplifies important rural perspectives and voices from their current spot at the back of the line. 

鈥淩ural educators and students have constructed incredible knowledge, and university personnel should seek to create spaces for these folks to share their knowledge and expertise,鈥� Reid said. 鈥淭hose from non-rural backgrounds will benefit from listening, reading, and learning.鈥�

For Parton, the work continues. She hopes to re-write and correct the meaning of 鈥渞ural鈥� in the hearts and minds of young folks across the country.

鈥淭his is what culturally-sustaining teaching in a rural capacity would look like,鈥� Parton said. 鈥淏eing critical of rural places and not looking at them through rose-colored glasses, but at the same time helping the things that are really special and unique and important about rural places flourish.鈥�

This originally appeared at  and is published here in partnership with the .