scholarly journals Education Policy Trump Style: The Administrative Presidency and Deference to States in ESSA Implementation

2020 ◽  
Vol 50 (3) ◽  
pp. 423-445
Author(s):  
Kenneth K Wong
Keyword(s):  
School Choice ◽  
Civil Rights ◽  
Education Policy ◽  
Elementary And Secondary Education ◽  
Policy Goals ◽  
Public School Choice ◽  
Private And Public ◽  
The 1960S ◽  
K 12 ◽  
Every Student Succeeds Act

Abstract Since the 1960s, U.S. presidents have used their executive, administrative, and political power to pursue policy goals in elementary and secondary education. This article analyzes the K-12 education policy strategies pursued during the first three years of the Donald Trump presidency, focusing on two main aspects of Trump’s approach to education policy. First, I analyze Trump’s heavy reliance on executive and administrative tools and his use of these tools to promote state flexibility, diminish federal direction on civil rights issues, and expand private and public school choice. Second, I examine the Trump administration’s approach to implementing the Every Student Succeeds Act of 2015 (ESSA), especially in reviewing state plans pursuant to the ESSA. The administration took a highly deferential approach as states sought approval for their ESSA plans and in a way that suggests the Trump presidency is shifting federal involvement in K-12 education policy away from prioritizing equity and oversight.

All Means All: Connecting Federal Education Policy and Local Implementation Practice Through Evidence and Equity

Inclusion ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 45-59 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mary Clare Schuh ◽  
Kimberly M. Knackstedt ◽  
Jake Cornett ◽  
Jeong Hoon Choi ◽  
Daniel T. Pollitt ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Civil Rights ◽  
Education Policy ◽  
Inclusive Education ◽  
Federal State ◽  
Elementary And Secondary Education ◽  
Local Practice ◽  
Policy Domain ◽  
Federal Education Policy ◽  
Education Act ◽  
Every Student Succeeds Act

Abstract This article discusses equity-based inclusive education and federal policy drivers that can be used to make positive sustainable change in state, district, and local practice to improve the academic, social, and behavioral outcomes for all students including students with extensive support needs and those with labels of intellectual and developmental disabilities. Educational policies addressed include the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA), Individuals with Disability Education Act (IDEA), Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA), and civil rights legislation such as the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). The policy domain feature of the Schoolwide Integrated Framework for Transformation (SWIFT) model is examined regarding how it was implemented in districts and schools, working toward the goal of providing an equity-based inclusive education for all students. Translating federal education policy into state, district, and local practice requires leadership and political courage to align federal, state, and district policy with the vision and values of equity-based, inclusive education.

Washington View

2018 ◽  
Vol 99 (6) ◽  
pp. 72-73
Author(s):  
Maria Ferguson
Keyword(s):  
School Choice ◽  
Civil Rights ◽  
Education Policy ◽  
Technical Education ◽  
School Funding ◽  
The Other ◽  
Career Technical Education ◽  
Every Student Succeeds Act ◽  
To Receive ◽  
The U.S

Maria Ferguson suggests that implementation of the Every Student Succeeds Act, school choice, and career technical education will dominate the conversation about education policy in 2018. On the other hand, school funding inequities, as discussed at length in a recent report from the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, deserve more attention than they are likely to receive.

scholarly journals Building a Constituency for Racial Integration: Chicago's Magnet Schools and the Prehistory of School Choice

2019 ◽  
Vol 59 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-34 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nicholas Kryczka
Keyword(s):  
Urban Education ◽  
School Choice ◽  
Civil Rights ◽  
Magnet Schools ◽  
Urban Landscape ◽  
Urban Revitalization ◽  
Educational Choice ◽  
Academic Education ◽  
Civil Rights Era ◽  
The 1960S

Chicago's magnet schools were one of the nation's earliest experiments in choice-driven school desegregation, originating among civil rights advocates and academic education experts in the 1960s and appearing at specific sites in Chicago's urban landscape during the 1970s. The specific concerns that motivated the creation of magnet schools during the civil rights era—desegregating schools and arresting white flight—were decisively wedded to notions of parental choice, academic selectivity, and urban revitalization. While magnet schools enacted innovative curricula in self-consciously multicultural spaces, their scarcity, combined with their function as a spur to middle-class urbanism, ratified new regimes of inequality in urban education. This article frames magnet schools’ engineered success as a necessary prehistory for the rise of educational choice-and-accountability reforms later in the twentieth century.

scholarly journals From No Child Left Behind to Every Student Succeeds: Back to a Future for Education Federalism

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Heise
Keyword(s):  
No Child Left Behind ◽  
Education Policy ◽  
Education Reform ◽  
Structural Changes ◽  
Individual Autonomy ◽  
Elementary And Secondary Education ◽  
Children's Education ◽  
Left Behind ◽  
Children’S Education ◽  
Every Student Succeeds Act

117 Columbia Law Review 1859 (2017).When passed in 2001, the No Child Left Behind Act represented the federal government’s most dramatic foray into the elementary and secondary public school policymaking terrain. While critics emphasized the Act’s overreliance on standardized testing and its reduced school-district and state autonomy, proponents lauded the Act’s goal to close the achievement gap between middle- and upper-middle-class students and students historically ill served by their schools. Whatever structural changes the No Child Left Behind Act achieved, however, were largely undone in 2015 by the Every Student Succeeds Act, which repositioned significant federal education policy control in state governments. From a federalism standpoint, the Every Student Succeeds Act may have reset education federalism boundaries to favor states, far exceeding their position prior to 2001.While federal elementary and secondary education reform efforts since 2001 may intrigue legal scholars, a focus on educational federalism risks obscuring an even more fundamental development in educational policymaking power: its migration from governments to families, from regulation to markets. Amid a multidecade squabble between federal and state lawmakers over education policy authority, efforts to harness individual autonomy and market forces in the service of increasing children’s educational opportunity and equity have grown. Persistent demands for and increased availability of school voucher programs, charter schools, tax credits programs, and home schooling demonstrate families’ desire for greater agency over decisions about their children’s education. Parents’ calls for greater control over critical decisions concerning their children’s education and schooling options may eclipse state and federal lawmakers’ legislative squabbles over educational federalism.

scholarly journals Legislating education policy and equity at the ballot box: A descriptive analysis of the prevalence and content of education ballot initiatives over time

2019 ◽  
Vol 27 ◽  
pp. 9
Author(s):  
Amy N. Farley
Keyword(s):  
Civil Rights ◽  
Education Policy ◽  
Direct Democracy ◽  
Equal Opportunity ◽  
Descriptive Analysis ◽  
State Level ◽  
Negative Consequences ◽  
Ballot Initiatives ◽  
K 12 ◽  
Over Time

Political scientists have long studied the use of direct democratic ballot initiatives—proposed directly by citizens and put before a statewide vote—as currently allowed in 24 U.S. states. Despite the application of ballot initiatives to legislate education policy, however, education scholars have not yet adequately investigated this phenomenon within American public education. In a comprehensive analysis of state-level direct democracy in education, this article examines the content and prevalence of education ballot initiatives used to shaped U.S. education policy over time. Analyses suggest voters have considered 282 ballot initiatives regarding a variety of education issues, including those related to both K-12 and higher education and addressing policy issues related to finance, governance, and civil rights and equal opportunity. Further, the prevalence of education initiatives has increased and their content has evolved over time, particularly with the advent of, and increase in, initiatives seeking to limit the rights and opportunities of traditionally underrepresented students. These findings contribute to scholarship regarding state-level education policymaking in general, and call on researchers to consider further the benefits and potentially negative consequences of direct democracy as an education policymaking tool, particularly for minoritized students.

scholarly journals Education Policy Think Tank Models and Mission

2017 ◽  
Vol 24 ◽  
pp. 33
Author(s):  
Callie McLean ◽  
Lily Robin
Keyword(s):  
School Choice ◽  
Education Policy ◽  
Think Tanks ◽  
Disadvantaged Students ◽  
Think Tank ◽  
Heritage Foundation ◽  
Use Of Data ◽  
Data Analyses ◽  
K 12 ◽  
Topic Choice

This paper explores how two advocacy think tanks—the Heritage Foundation (Heritage) and Center for American Progress (CAP)—engage in research on K-12 education and attempt to influence education policymaking. Through our research, we discovered both expected and surprising differences and similarities between the think tanks. Differences included topic choice, particularly around school choice and disadvantaged students, the use of data analyses to underpin positions, and the volume of publication. Similarities included the mix of output type. Our most notable finding was that the model and mission of each think tank drove topic choices and how each conducted research and interacted with the policy world and media.

Washington View

2017 ◽  
Vol 98 (8) ◽  
pp. 72-73
Author(s):  
Maria Ferguson
Keyword(s):  
School Choice ◽  
Education Policy ◽  
Donald Trump ◽  
K 12 ◽  
Intention To Change

In the first few months of the new administration, President Donald Trump and Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos have made a number of dramatic statements about their plans for K-12 education, including their intention to change certain education laws and promote specific kinds of school choice. Not only have those statements prompted a great deal of concern among many Americans, they have also invited a great deal of confusion about who has the power to make what sorts of decisions about education policy. This article offers a primer on some of the ground rules.

Oregon’s K–12 Ethnic Studies Bill

2019 ◽  
Vol 42 (2) ◽  
pp. 180-195
Author(s):  
Shirley A. Jackson
Keyword(s):  
Civil Rights ◽  
Indigenous Peoples ◽  
Ethnic Studies ◽  
Original Intent ◽  
Racial And Ethnic Minorities ◽  
Protected Group ◽  
Social Minorities ◽  
K 12 ◽  
Racial Ethnic ◽  
Do So

In 2017, Oregon passed House Bill 2845 requiring Ethnic Studies curriculum in grades K–12. It was the first state in the nation to do so. The bill passed almost fifty years after the founding of the country’s first Ethnic Studies department. The passage of an Ethnic Studies bill in a state that once banned African Americans and removed Indigenous peoples from their land requires further examination. In addition, the bill mandates that Ethnic Studies curriculum in Oregon's schools includes “social minorities,” such as Jewish and LGBTQ+ populations which makes the bill even more remarkable. As such, it is conceivable for some observers, a watered-down version of its perceived original intent—one that focuses on racial and ethnic minorities. Similarly, one can draw analogies to the revision of the Civil Rights Bill of 1964 when it included women as a protected group. Grounded in a socio-political history that otherwise would not have been included, this essay examines the productive and challenging aspect of HB 2845. Framing the bill so it includes racial, ethnic, and social minorities solved the problem of a host of bills that may not have passed on their own merit while simultaneously and ironically making it easier to pass similar bills.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document