(TNND) — Education Secretary Linda McMahon talked about the administration’s efforts to dismantle her federal department and how the changes will affect students during a fireside chat Wednesday evening hosted by the Cato Institute, a libertarian-leaning think tank.

“The president certainly feels as I do, that education is best handled closest to the child,” McMahon told moderator Neal McCluskey, the director of Cato’s Center for Educational Freedom. “It is parents, teachers, superintendents who are with these children every day, who understand the ... interaction between communities and the schools, who can best handle that education assignment. Because there is no one-size-fits-all in education.”

President Donald Trump pledged during the campaign to shutter the federal Department of Education to empower state and local control of classrooms.

Trump signed an executive order in March designed to do just that.

Of course, closing the Department of Education would not terminate the programs administered by the department.

And Trump can’t unilaterally close the Department of Education, which was created in 1979 with programs that mostly already existed.

“This department was set up by statute. Congress will have to vote to close it,” McMahon said.

But, she said, education is “best handled closest to the states.”

Shuttering the federal department is “no small task,” McMahon said.

The quickest place to start is relocating some of the pieces of the department, which has already seen the size of its workforce cut in about half.

McMahon said students aren’t reaching the level of achievement under the existing system that they should.

“Our recent NAEP scores, which is the national report card for our country, showed just awful, awful scores throughout the country,” she said.

Less than a third of fourth- and eighth-grade students scored as proficient or better in the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) reading assessments.

American students showed similar levels of proficiency in math assessments.

McCluskey said Thursday that his conversation with the secretary was "very productive."

He’s an advocate for dismantling the U.S. Department of Education, and he said the administration is moving in the right direction.

Doing so is important both practically and symbolically, McCluskey said.

The Constitution doesn’t give the federal government power over education, he said.

And eliminating the cabinet-level Education Department would decrease the federal government’s influence on education.

“So, symbolically it would be very important to get rid of the Department of Education, even if all of its functions remained, even if you didn't shrink the bureaucracy,” McCluskey said. “Because it clearly is not something that should be directly influenced by the president. And when you have a secretary, that's what it means.”

But the administration is eyeing improved efficiency with its moves, as well.

McMahon said they’re trying to cut the “fat” in her department.

“And you're going to try to avoid cutting muscle,” she said.

McMahon said during the Cato chat that Trump is looking to dismantle the bureaucracy of education, not education itself.

“Well, I think it really, you need to understand what the Department of Education does not do,” McMahon said. “We don't set curriculum. We don't buy books. We don't hire teachers in states. We don't do any of those things. We’re really more of a pass-through of funding at this particular point."

McMahon sought to calm fears that kids with disabilities would be harmed by the closing of the federal department.

She argued that school staff who know the child are best positioned to be their advocates.

And she said Trump won’t cut off federal funding for special education students.

“It may flow through a different agency,” McMahon said. “It may flow in a different way. But that funding is going to continue.”

The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act could be handled by the Department of Health and Human Services, she said.

The federal Education Department also provides assistance and funding for schools serving students from low-income families; enforces federal civil rights laws in schools; and provides grant, loan and work-study assistance to millions of college students.

“I really do think that a natural area for student loans to reside is in the Department of Treasury,” McMahon said.

The Department of Justice could absorb the Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights, she said.

Data collection, such as nationally run NAEP testing, must continue, McMahon said.

But she said private contractors or perhaps the National Science Foundation could take on those responsibilities.

McCluskey told The National News Desk that it was clear McMahon had thought through how her department could be dispersed to other parts of the federal government.

He admitted that Congress likely doesn’t have the political will to eliminate the Department of Education.

“What's important about the administration talking about getting rid of the department is we've now put it as a central issue to be discussed,” McCluskey said.

That could bear fruit for proponents of closing the department in a few years, he said.