Linda McMahon, selected by President-elect Donald J. Trump to serve as education secretary, brings a less traditional educational background to the role compared to previous candidates.

While in college, she earned certification as a French teacher but ultimately did not pursue a teaching career after marrying at a young age. Her involvement in education includes 16 years on the board of trustees at Sacred Heart University in Connecticut, where a student center bears her name, and a brief tenure on the Connecticut State Board of Education, from which she resigned in 2010 to run for the U.S. Senate as a Republican.

Despite her unconventional résumé, McMahon has been described by Trump as a “fierce advocate” for transforming the U.S. education system in line with his priorities. A cornerstone of this agenda is expanding school choice, which reallocates funds from public schools to families for private education. This policy, a focus of former education secretary Betsy DeVos, has gained traction in several states through taxpayer-funded voucher programs.

“Linda will work tirelessly to expand school choice across every state, empowering parents to make the best educational decisions for their children,” Trump stated during the announcement of her nomination. He also highlighted her business acumen as the former CEO of World Wrestling Entertainment, which he believes will help her advance his goal of returning educational control to the states by reducing federal oversight.

McMahon’s educational philosophy, shaped by her leadership at the America First Policy Institute, includes advocating for patriotic approaches to teaching American history, enhancing parental access to classroom content, broadening technical education opportunities, and reducing the emphasis on four-year college degrees. She has praised apprenticeship programs, often citing Switzerland as a model, and has supported legislative efforts to extend federal Pell grants to skills training and technical education programs.

In a September column for The Hill, McMahon emphasized the importance of providing alternative pathways to success beyond traditional college degrees, arguing for greater support of vocational training. However, her support for such initiatives, particularly a House bill that would make Pell grants accessible to short-term programs, has drawn criticism. Critics, like Aissa Canchola-Bañez of the Student Borrower Protection Center, worry these measures could benefit for-profit colleges with questionable practices.

The for-profit education sector, however, has welcomed her nomination. Jason Altmire, president of Career Education Colleges and Universities, expressed confidence that her leadership would address regulatory challenges imposed during the Biden administration.

McMahon’s stance on combating campus antisemitism, as reflected in America First Policy Institute publications, calls for universities to explicitly disavow antisemitic language and reexamine diversity, equity, and inclusion programs. Critics argue these programs exacerbate antisemitism by framing societal dynamics in terms of oppressors and victims.

Her nomination has sparked polarized reactions. Union leaders, public school advocates, and some Democrats have sharply criticized her, accusing her of prioritizing dismantling the Department of Education and diverting funds from public schools. Becky Pringle, president of the National Education Association, declared, “McMahon’s only mission is to strip resources from public schools.” Others, like Gaylynn Burroughs of the National Women’s Law Center, dismissed her as an unqualified loyalist.

Conversely, supporters of school choice have celebrated her selection. Tiffany Justice, co-founder of Moms for Liberty, praised McMahon as a patriot committed to empowering parents. Some observers, including Robert C. Scott, the leading Democrat on the House Committee on Education and the Workforce, have taken a wait-and-see approach, reserving judgment until her Senate confirmation process.

Ted Mitchell, president of the American Council on Education, offered a more balanced perspective, acknowledging McMahon’s contributions to workforce development during her tenure as head of the Small Business Administration and her experience as a long-time trustee of Sacred Heart University. Mitchell noted, “She understands the challenges of managing a small college in today’s economic climate.”

Reactions to McMahon’s nomination reflect the broader divide over education policy and her potential impact as the next secretary of education.