FEDERALISM

What is Federalism?
• The mixed or compound
mode of government,
combining a general
government (National) and National States
 with regional
governments (States) in a
single political system.
Tax and Funding
• States will have
freedom in where to
allocate funding and
what projects are to
be prioritized
Decentralization
States
s
De ak
n d

cis ing
M Fu
io
n
En La
re fo w
u rce
t m
gi sla en
Le t
Where would you find Federal Government?

Brazil
26 States

Canada
13 USA
Provinces and Territories 50 States
Pro’s and Con of Federalism in
Education
Pro
1. Education becomes more responsive to local
conditions
2. The State sets educational standards, mandate
standardized tests, supervise state colleges and
universities’ funding coming from local state and
federal government, and education follows the
contours of State socio-economic and political
conditions.”
Con’s

1. Ethnicity may be emphasized at the expense of

national identity, and access and equity may
suffer in poorer regions,”
2. There will be no National Standards and there
will be disparities across jurisdictions, and the
Federal Government will not be in a position to
adjust and address these disparities, 
How Federalism Matters in
Education
It's a matter of size
Education advocates suffer from severe bouts of
Finland and Singapore envy. They tend to ignore
that most of these nations have populations of 5
million or so, or about the population of
Maryland or Massachusetts. Trying to make rules
for schools in a nation that's as large and diverse
as the U.S. is simply a different challenge.
It aligns responsibility and accountability
with authority.
•  One problem with tackling education reform from
Washington is that it's not members of Congress or
federal bureaucrats who are charged with making
things work or who are held accountable when they
don't. Instead, responsibility and blame fall on state
leaders and on the leaders in those schools, districts
and colleges who do the actual work. The more
authority moves up the ladder in education, the more
this divide worsens.
It steers decisions towards the practical. 
• No Child Left Behind promised that 100 percent of students would be
proficient in reading and math by 2014. President Barack Obama wants to
ensure that all students can attend community college for "free" – though
most of the funds would come from states. It's easy for D.C. politicians to
make grand promises and leave the consequences to someone else. State
leaders must balance the budget and are answerable to voters for what
happens in schools and colleges; this tends to make them more pragmatic in
pursuing reform. When policymakers are embedded in a community, as
mayors and state legislators are, there is also more trust and opportunity for
compromise. That kind of practicality might disappoint firebrands eager for
national solutions, but it's a better bet for students than the wish lists and
airy promises of Beltway pols.
It leaves room for varied approaches to
problem-solving.
•  One of the perils of trying to "solve" things from Washington is that
we wind up with one-size-fits-all solutions. No Child Left Behind
emerged from a wave of state-based efforts to devise testing and
accountability systems. Those state efforts were immensely uneven,
but they allowed a variety of approaches to emerge, yielding the
opportunity to learn, refine and reinvent. That's much more difficult
when Washington is seeking something that can be applied across 50
states.
It ensures that reform efforts actually have
local roots.
•  The Obama administration's Race to the Top program convinced lots
of states to promise to do lots of things. The results have been
predictably disappointing. Rushing to adopt teacher evaluation
systems on a political timeline, states have largely made a hash of the
exercise. Free college proposals make the same mistake; they depend
on states and colleges promising to spend more money and adopt
federally sanctioned reforms, an approach that seems destined to
frustrate policymakers' best-laid plans.
The Roles of Federal and State
Governments in Education
Federal Authority
1. Equal access to education
2. Safeguarding students' constitutional rights
3. Safeguarding teachers' constitutional rights.
4. Every Student Succeeds Act
Federal Authority
5. The federal government plays a role in evaluating each school
district by administering the National Assessment of Educational
Progress (NEAP), also known as the Nation's Report Card.
6. Federal agencies such as the National Science Foundation
and the Department of Education publish recommended teaching
strategies and materials. States and local governments are free to
adopt or ignore these recommendations as they see fit, although
no funding will be awarded if the school district adopts these
recommended practices.
State Authority
• . The states are the entities primarily responsible for the
maintenance and operation of public schools. The states are
also heavily involved in the establishment, selection, and
regulation of curriculum, teaching methods, and instructional
materials in their schools. Consequently, each state has
different standards and policies which may impact the quality of
education offered.
State Authority
• 2. Each state's constitution requires it to provide a school
system where children may receive an education. Many state
constitutions also contain express provisions for creating
educational curricula. Some state constitutions even empower
state authorities to select textbooks and educational materials.
Besides constitutional authority, state governments also have
authority to legislate in this area, or they can authorize officials
to establish, select, and regulate curriculum.
State Authority
• 3. State legislatures have also set mandatory 
requirements for students to graduate. In cases where state
rules and regulations for courses do exist, they must be
followed. Local school districts may, however, offer courses and
activities in the instructional program beyond those required by
state statute. Other states delegate more of their authority. They
usually prescribe a model curriculum framework, allowing local
authorities to develop their own curricula based on the general
state goals.