The Administrative Presidency and K–12 Education Policy: Equity and Oversight During the Trump and Biden Era

• In Event: Addressing Equity Through Federal Education Policy During the Obama, Trump, and Biden Administrations

Abstract

Objectives

This paper examines how Presidents Joe Biden and Donald Trump used executive and administrative power to address K-12 education equity issues. How did the two administrations differ in their enforcement of civil rights and student rights, oversight of state implementation of the Every Student Succeeds Act, and promotion of school choice? These policy differences are further illuminated by our federal system as states adopt varying responses to the administrations’ actions.

Perspectives

This paper draws on two perspectives in political science, namely the administrative presidency and federalism. First, given the states’ constitutional authority in K-12 education, studies of policy implementation have shown the effects of state and local practices and politics on federal policy objectives (Saultz et al.2017; Bellwether Education Partners, 2017; Manna, 2011). Second, U.S. presidents exercise broad executive power. Executive-directed, or unilateral, actions maintain the force of law and constitute “the distinguishing mark of the modern presidency” (Howell, 2003, p. 175; Kagan, 2001). Executive action is facilitated by a wide range of administrative tools and coordinative structures, such as the White House Domestic Policy Council (Henig, 2013; McGuinn, 2016). Unilateral actions, however, are subject to reversal in succeeding administrations and state resistance (Goelzhauser &Konisky, 2019).

Methods

We created a purposeful database of 107 executive and administrative actions on equity-related education issues that occurred from January 2017 through May 2021. The database included executive orders, administrative guidance, waivers, amicus briefs, “dear colleague” letters, and policy reviews. We categorized the action’s direction (e.g., promoting civil rights or preserving state rights) and magnitude (e.g., strengthening or restraining federal oversight) on equity issues. We then aggregated the evidence to form contrasting patterns of equity policy between the Biden and the Trump eras.

Data Sources

Our database of 107 equity-oriented, unilateral actions came from the Office of Elementary and Secondary Education (42%), the White House (19%), Office of Civil Rights (7%), and the Department of the Interior (7%), among other governmental agencies.

Findings

While 46% of Trump’s actions reduced federal involvement, 48% of Biden’s actions strengthened federal support for equity and civil and student rights.

Trump’s action aimed at weakening federal oversight. The administration rolled back Obama-era guidance that bolstered the rights of racial minorities, transgender students, and people with disabilities. Its efforts to significantly reduce civil rights enforcement were challenged by a coalition of Democratic state attorneys general (Fiddiman &Yin, 2019).

In contrast, Biden demonstrated extensive commitment to equity and civil rights. Biden’s unilateral initiatives are mediated by our federal system, where the Republican Party controls 24 states. Partisan dispositions have led to different state response on the rights of transgender athletics, oversight of for-profit educational providers, and the adoption of curriculum on racial diversity.

Significance of the Work

The administrative presidency and federalism constitute two critical factors in understanding education governance and policymaking. This paper specifies how these governing features interact in shaping educational equity.

Authors

• Kenneth K. Wong, Brown University

• Coral Flanagan, Vanderbilt University