Major AEE Legislation

Overview

If you give the United States Constitution a thorough reading, you will be hard-pressed to find any mention of education. Education is not listed in the Bill of Rights, nor is it listed anywhere else directly in my name.   The closest that the constitution comes to mentioning education is in the 10th amendment.

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people. (Tenth Amendment, United States Constitution)

If the United States Constitution does not mention education as a right of the people or even a privilege, then what business does the United States government have in the management of education in the United States? 

A long time ago, the United States determined that education was a factor in National Defense and the welfare of the people in general. Because of this, the federal government has allocated resources to states and local governments to perpetuate and continue schools in the United States.

Most federal legislation about education is an effort to provide funding for State initiatives in a given area. For instance, the Smith-Hughes act of 1917 provided funding for establishing vocational education in schools in each state. The law itself did not create the schools, nor did they oversee the schools. They provided funding for vocational education because it was a national need.

The Smith-Lever Act established Cooperative Extension in connection to land-grant universities to inform people about the most current science developments in agriculture, home economics, and public policy. Specifically about agriculture, it helped farmers learn the best and most practical agricultural techniques, using the farmer's Fields as a classroom. This act was sponsored by Senator Hoke Smith of Georgia and Representative Asbury Lever of South Carolina.

Roughly ten percent of a local school's budget comes from federal funds.  Most schools cannot function without these funds. 

Objectives

By the end of this learning module, you will be able to explain various federal legislative acts related to agricultural and extension education.

The Opening Acts

In the 1800s, two major legislative acts were adopted by Congress and approved by the President. These two acts play a significant role in Agricultural and Extension Education today.

The Hatch Act of 1887

The Hatch Act of 1887, formally known as the Hatch Act of 1887 (P.L. 49-8, 24 Stat. 440), was a significant piece of legislation passed by the United States Congress and signed into law by President Grover Cleveland on March 2, 1887. This act is named after its sponsor, Congressman William H. Hatch of Missouri.

The Hatch Act of 1887 was instrumental in establishing the agricultural experiment station system in the United States. The key provisions of the act included:

• Establishment of Agricultural Experiment Stations: The act provided federal funding for the creation of agricultural experiment stations in conjunction with land-grant colleges and universities. These stations were tasked with conducting research on various aspects of agriculture, including crop production, animal husbandry, soil science, pest management, and other related areas.

• Research and Education in Agriculture: The primary goal of the Hatch Act was to promote scientific research and education in agriculture. By funding experiment stations, the act aimed to improve agricultural practices, enhance productivity, and address challenges faced by farmers and rural communities.

• Cooperative Extension Service: While the Hatch Act primarily focused on establishing agricultural experiment stations, it laid the groundwork for the later development of the Cooperative Extension Service through subsequent legislation such as the Smith-Lever Act of 1914. The Cooperative Extension Service expanded the reach of agricultural education and outreach to farmers and communities across the country.

Overall, the Hatch Act of 1887 played a pivotal role in advancing agricultural science and technology in the United States by supporting research, innovation, and education within the agricultural sector. It laid the foundation for the modern agricultural research and extension system that continues to benefit farmers, ranchers, and consumers today.

The FIrst Morrill Act, 1862

The Morrill Act of 1862, also known as the Land-Grant College Act, was a landmark piece of legislation in the United States that had a profound impact on higher education and agricultural development. It was sponsored by Vermont Congressman Justin Smith Morrill and signed into law by President Abraham Lincoln on July 2, 1862.

The key provisions of the Morrill Act of 1862 include:

• Land Grants for Higher Education: The act provided federal lands to each state for the establishment of colleges and universities focused on agricultural and mechanical arts education. The amount of land granted was based on the number of senators and representatives each state had in Congress.

• Promotion of Practical Education: The act aimed to promote education in practical fields such as agriculture, engineering, and industrial arts, in addition to the traditional liberal arts education offered by existing institutions.

• Accessible Education: One of the goals of the Morrill Act was to make higher education more accessible to a broader segment of the population, including farmers, laborers, and individuals from non-privileged backgrounds.

• Support for Research and Extension: The act laid the groundwork for future legislation, such as the Hatch Act of 1887 and the Smith-Lever Act of 1914, which provided funding for agricultural research and cooperative extension services through land-grant universities and agricultural experiment stations.

• Creation of Land-Grant Institutions: As a result of the Morrill Act, many land-grant colleges and universities were established across the United States. These institutions played a crucial role in advancing agricultural innovation, scientific research, and technical education.

Overall, the Morrill Act of 1862 was a pivotal step in the development of higher education in the United States, particularly in the fields of agriculture, engineering, and applied sciences. It contributed to the growth of a more practical and accessible educational system that continues to benefit students, researchers, and society as a whole.

The Second Morrill Act, 1890

The Morrill Act of 1890, officially known as the Second Morrill Act, was a follow-up legislation to the original Morrill Act of 1862. It was sponsored by Senator Justin S. Morrill of Vermont, who had also sponsored the first Morrill Act. The Morrill Act of 1890 further expanded on the concept of land-grant institutions and higher education accessibility, particularly for African Americans.

Here are the key aspects of the Morrill Act of 1890:

• Extension of Land-Grant Benefits: Like the original Morrill Act, the 1890 Act provided federal funding through land grants to support the establishment and maintenance of colleges that focused on agricultural and mechanical arts education. However, the 1890 Act specifically targeted states that had been excluded from the benefits of the 1862 Act due to their failure to meet the racial integration requirement.

• Inclusion of African American Institutions: The Morrill Act of 1890 required states to either admit African American students into the existing land-grant institutions or establish separate institutions for their education. This provision was aimed at promoting higher education opportunities for African Americans, who were often excluded from predominantly white institutions at the time.

• Focus on Practical Education: Similar to the original Morrill Act, the 1890 Act emphasized practical education in fields such as agriculture, engineering, and industrial arts. It sought to equip students with the knowledge and skills necessary for careers in these areas, thereby contributing to economic development and innovation.

• Support for Agricultural Research: The Act also supported agricultural research by establishing agricultural experiment stations at the land-grant colleges. These stations conducted scientific research to improve farming practices, crop yields, and livestock management, benefiting farmers and rural communities.

• Impact on Higher Education: The Morrill Act of 1890 played a significant role in expanding access to higher education for African Americans and promoting agricultural and technical education nationwide. It led to the creation of several historically black colleges and universities (HBCUs) that continue to serve diverse student populations and contribute to educational advancement and research.

Overall, the Morrill Act of 1890 was instrumental in advancing educational opportunities and agricultural innovation in the United States, particularly for marginalized communities that had been historically underserved.

The "Third Morrill Act" - Improving America's School Act of 1994

The Improving America's Schools Act (IASA) of 1994 had specific provisions related to Tribal Colleges and Universities (TCUs) as part of its broader efforts to enhance educational opportunities and outcomes for diverse student populations. The purpose of IASA concerning TCUs can be summarized as follows:

• Recognition of Tribal Colleges: IASA acknowledged the unique role and contributions of Tribal Colleges and Universities in providing higher education to Native American and Indigenous communities. TCUs play a vital role in preserving indigenous cultures, languages, and knowledge systems while offering academic programs that meet the needs of their students and communities.

• Financial Support: The legislation provided federal funding and support for Tribal Colleges and Universities to strengthen their academic programs, infrastructure, and student services. This funding was aimed at improving the quality of education and expanding access to higher education opportunities for Native American students.

• Capacity Building: IASA emphasized capacity building initiatives for TCUs, including professional development for faculty and staff, curriculum development, research opportunities, and partnerships with other institutions. These efforts aimed to enhance the overall effectiveness and sustainability of Tribal Colleges and Universities.

• Cultural and Community Relevance: The act recognized the importance of culturally relevant education and curriculum at TCUs. It encouraged the integration of indigenous perspectives, languages, and traditions into academic programs to better serve the needs and aspirations of Native American students and communities.

• Empowerment and Self-Determination: IASA supported the principles of tribal sovereignty and self-determination in education. It encouraged collaboration between Tribal Colleges, tribal governments, and federal agencies to empower Native American communities in shaping their educational priorities and strategies.

• Partnerships and Resources: The legislation promoted partnerships and collaborations between Tribal Colleges, mainstream institutions, and other stakeholders to leverage resources, expertise, and opportunities for Native American students. It facilitated access to federal programs, grants, and initiatives that supported the mission and objectives of TCUs.

In summary, the Improving America's Schools Act of 1994 recognized Tribal Colleges and Universities as essential institutions for Native American education and empowerment. It provided resources, support, and recognition to enhance the quality, relevance, and accessibility of higher education for Native American students while respecting tribal sovereignty and cultural identity.

Your instructor in this course spent time at the United Tribes Technical College in Bismarck, North Dakota.  See the website of this college below.

Next, take a look at the following article by M.D. Mobley on a review of federal vocational education legislation.

Here's My Take on Federal Legislation from 1918 to 1963

As the nation grew, so did the need for vocational education. More importantly, the complexity of the American education system developed during the twentieth century. The school curriculum evolved into a comprehensive curriculum with career and technical education subjects alongside traditional academic subjects. The United States Office of Education because the United States Department of Education in 1980. Vocational Education Act of 1963 superseded the Smith-Hughes Act, and the Federal Board of Vocational Education no longer exists. Much of the federal education legislation enacted in recent years has a more comprehensive purpose. For instance, Congress passed the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) in 1965 as part of President Lyndon Johnson's Great Society program. Its purpose was to provide resources so that every child has an opportunity for quality education. All other Acts of the same title that followed this 1965 legislation typically amend it or reauthorize funding. The "Improving America's Schools Act" of 1994 and the "No Child Left Behind Act" of 2001 are re-authorizations of the original ESEA of 1965. Both of these Acts provided funding to schools with agricultural education. The 1994 version of the ESEA increased federal support for technology in education. The 2001 re-authorization of the ESEA increased accountability for teachers and sought to find new methods for improving student performance in all subjects.

The United States government usually provides direction and guidance to states on the improvement of educational programs. The federal government provides only ten percent of the funding for public education in the United States, but it is a vital partner in funding education. The federal government's funding share handles shortfalls in local and state funding. For instance, the United States Department of Education (E.D.) works with the United States Department of Agriculture to provide the school lunch program and the Department of Health and Human Services to provide the Head Start early childhood program. The E.D. provides funding where the most good can be derived. Funded mandates are the traditional response of the federal government to the improvement of education, and the most significant period of federal funding for education began in the early 1900s.

Between 1918 and 1963, Congress passed several federal laws to modify or increase funding for vocational education. Senator Walter George of Georgia was the principal sponsor for many of these acts. The "George Acts" amended the Smith-Hughes Act by increasing funding in existing vocational education programs and expanding the reach of federal legislation into new areas of vocational education. Here is a summary of four "George Acts":

• George-Reed Act of 1929—Increased federal support for vocational education and gave home economics independent status as a division.

•  George-Ellzey Act of 1934—Repealed the George-Reed Act. This legislation provided additional funding for vocational education and implemented new distributive education financing.

• George-Deen Act of 1936—Increased funding for vocational education in the four areas: agriculture, home economics, trade and industrial education, and distributive education.

• George-Barden Act of 1946—Significantly increased annual appropriations for vocational education and altered the formula for distributing funds in favor of agricultural education. This Act also established area vocational schools for training students in vocational subjects. Because the federal funding provided by this Act allowed for vocational guidance and the purchase of equipment, vocational programs grew substantially in the years following its passage.

 National Defense Acts 

The National Defense Acts are reauthorized periodically, as they provide funding and leadership policy for the defense of the United States. For instance, the 1940 National Defense Act and the 1958 National Defense Education Act provided funding for creating a highly skilled workforce in times of war. These acts also provided training for all workers in war production, including women. The 1958 National Defense Education Act provided financial assistance for students enrolling at colleges and universities to prepare for these highly skilled and technical jobs of the future.

The Vocational Education Act of 1963

By the 1960s, vocational education under the Smith-Hughes Act needed revision to meet the changing needs of the American economy. More than any other law since Smith-Hughes, the Vocational Education Act of 1963 broadened agricultural education and made great strides in moving the program forward. It notably provided that instruction could be in non-farming areas of agriculture.

The 1960s was a turbulent period in America's history. Matters related to civil rights and America's involvement in the Vietnam War were lightning rod issues for most Americans. Underneath all this, the face of American agriculture was changing. The Fair Labor Standards Act extended federal minimum wage requirements to employers of most farmworkers, and the United Farm Workers began unionizing California farmworkers. Great strides were made in farm mechanization, and the need for skilled mechanics and technicians increased exponentially. Agricultural commodity groups significantly increased their lobbying efforts in Congress. Agricultural exports made up almost one-fifth of total U.S. exports.

The Vocational Education Act of 1963 expanded agricultural education in secondary schools to include a wide range of nonproduction agriculture, such as horticulture.

To meet the new challenges of the agricultural industry in the last half of the twentieth century and to meet the growing demand for a highly skilled workforce in all vocational disciplines, the federal government's presence in the classroom needed to change. The Vocational Education Act of 1963 replaced the categorical funding of specific vocational programs, such as agricultural education and trade and industrial education, with a population-driven funding formula to the states. Federal funding under this Act was distributed proportionally to the states based on the number of students within a specific age group.

The increased federal funding provided by the Vocational Education Act of 1963 made vocational education more flexible and open to emerging trends. This Act, sponsored by Senator Carl Perkins (1912–1984) of Kentucky and Representative Wayne Morris of Oregon, opened the door for vocational training in other areas, such as business education. Agricultural education expanded the options for youth to include careers beyond the farm in such areas as marketing, horticulture, agribusiness, and natural resources. The Act further provided funding for training youth with physical disabilities, creating work-study programs, and establishing vocational training centers.

The Vocational Education Act of 1963 also changed supervised experience in agriculture to include more than production agriculture. Unfortunately, this expanded variation of supervised experience led some states to abolish or reduce its value as part of the agricultural education model. The Act also abolished the supervisory role of the state agricultural education staff and relegated it to a consulting role.

Congress amended the Vocational Education Act of 1963 in 1968 and again in 1976. The 1968 amendments increased federal funding for vocational education and allowed for vocational guidance, career counseling, and the construction of other vocational schools. Fifty percent of the budget in vocational education was to be used on students with disadvantages or disabilities and for employment services to students. The 1976 amendments increased federal funding and established guidelines for eliminating gender discrimination.

The Perkins Acts

The Federal Vocational Education Acts of 1984, 1990, 1996, 1998, 2006, and 2018 bear the name of Carl Perkins. Carl Perkins was a member of the United States Congress from Kentucky, who served from 1949 to 1984. He was a strong supporter in Congress for vocational education legislation. These laws attempted to modernize vocational education further and to expand its emphasis on career and technology education. The 1984 act created federal legislation to support the efforts of vocational education in making the United States more competitive economically. The primary focus of the 1984 act was to improve the quality of vocational education for all students and improve the accessibility of vocational education for all students who wanted it. Congress earmarked more than half the funding provided by the first Perkins Act for special student populations—students with disadvantages or disabilities, adults, and single-parent families.

The Carl D. Perkins Vocational Education Act of 1990 increased funding for vocational programs to meet advances in technology. This Act also increased funding for curriculum integration efforts between vocational and academic subjects. It sought to move vocational education away from training for specific jobs and toward education in the more general aspects of careers. The Act further provided for the establishment of articulation agreements between secondary schools and colleges, and universities.

In 1996, the third Carl D. Perkins Vocational Education Act reauthorized funding for vocational education. Still, the emphasis was even stronger on curriculum integration and articulation agreements between secondary and postsecondary institutions. The 1998 re-authorization of Perkins retained the same focus on integration and required that students enrolled in career and technical education courses receive the same rigorous curriculum as other students.

Congress enacted the latest revision of the Carl D. Perkins Vocational and Technical Education Act in 2018. The new law, known as Perkins V, increased the emphasis on the career achievement of all students, not just those enrolled in career and technical education. It transferred the authority for determining academic performance measures to the states and stakeholders. Perkins V broadened the definition of special needs populations to include homeless students, foster children, and the children of parents serving in the armed services. The new Act also provided funding for students in state correctional systems. Perkins V emphasized the focus for educational efforts in rural areas through increased funding (Strengthening Career and Technical Education for the 21st Century Act, 2018)

Modern Legislation Influencing Agricultural Education

The following are major legislative acts and initiatives that influenced agricultural education in the United States.

 Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 2001

The Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 2001, also known as the No Child Left Behind Act, authorizes most federal funding for elementary and secondary education. The Act was to supplement local and state education funding to improve student achievement. The standards imposed by the Act are challenging. To receive continued funding, schools must meet selected goals. Schools that fail to meet rigorous standards have sanctions levied against them. There is a concern that the Act will harm career and technical education because of the focus on high-stakes testing and accountability. Will schools find it necessary to cut vocational programs to focus resources on helping students meet annual academic goals? This Act is a politically charged issue among educators, and only time will tell whether it meets its plans to improve student achievement in American schools.

The American Reinvestment and Recovery Act of 2009

The global financial crisis of 2007-2008 caused considerable damage to the worldwide economy. To put the United States back on the path to recovery, the United States Congress enacted the Reinvestment and Recovery Act of 2009. This Act provided more than $100 billion in spending on education and included funds for students with disabilities, disadvantaged youth, rural youth, and otherwise vulnerable populations. The Act also provided training and employment services, especially in critical need vocational areas such as health care and information technology. Funds were also allocated for the training of workers in areas of the economy where significant skill gaps existed. Funding did not specifically go to agricultural education in the states, but the influx of funds indirectly supported agricultural education. Just as a rising tide lifts all boats, the increased federal funding paid for administrative support structures that benefited agricultural education.

Common Core Standards and Agricultural Education

As the American Reinvestment and Recovery Act progressed through Congress, state officials worked toward a common core of educational standards that every child should master. The Council of Chief State School Officers and the National Governors Association prepared these common core state standards.

The purpose of these standards is to ensure that every child has the requisite knowledge and skills at each grade level. The Common Core is research-based, evidence-based, and aligned with the expectations required for college and career readiness. The standards encourage critical thinking and problem-solving skills. The Common Core initiative encourages agricultural educators to collaborate with other disciplines to help students meet the standards. For example, agricultural teachers might assign readings that encourage critical thinking and deeper reading comprehension. School teachers and administrators are working to align and crosswalk Common Core standards throughout the curriculum. The Common Core Standards initiative is an example of how non-governmental organizations move to affect policy related to agricultural education.

Every Student Succeeds Act of 2015

The Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 2002 (ESEA), also known as the "No Child Left Behind" Act, was a significant step toward measuring student progress and determining areas of improvement. However, the authoritarian nature of the Act made it a difficult fit for the thousands of school districts in the United States, each with its unique characteristics, problems, and concerns. The United States Congress passed the 2015 version of the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA), amending the ESEA to allow local school leaders to decide how to account for student achievement. Funding served students with special needs, students in poverty, and minority students. Testing and accountability measures remain in place but provide additional assistance to students to succeed regardless of societal stumbling blocks.

ESSA funding helped agricultural education by providing resources for under-served students in agricultural education courses. Funds went to career and technical education in general and agricultural education specifically for program improvement.

What federal legislation has had an impact on cooperative extension?

Here are some ideas.  Several federal legislations have had significant impacts on Cooperative Extension programs in the United States. Cooperative Extension is a nationwide educational network that provides research-based information and resources to agricultural producers, small businesses, families, and communities. Some key federal legislation affecting Cooperative Extension includes:

Smith-Lever Act (1914): This was the foundational legislation that established the Cooperative Extension Service as a partnership between the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) and land-grant universities. It provided funding for Extension activities aimed at disseminating agricultural research and promoting practical education for farmers and rural communities.

Morrill Acts (1862 and 1890): These acts established land-grant universities, which play a crucial role in hosting Cooperative Extension programs. The 1862 Morrill Act provided federal land grants to states for the establishment of colleges focused on agriculture and the mechanical arts, while the 1890 Morrill Act extended this support to historically Black colleges and universities (HBCUs).

Smith-Hughes Act (1917): This legislation provided federal funding for vocational education, including agricultural education, in secondary schools. Cooperative Extension often collaborates with high schools to provide agricultural and home economics education to students.

Hatch Act (1887) and Smith-Lever Act (1914): These acts, along with the Morrill Acts, form the "three-legged stool" of federal support for agricultural education and research. The Hatch Act provided funding for agricultural experiment stations at land-grant universities, which work closely with Cooperative Extension in conducting research and disseminating findings to farmers and communities.

The Agricultural Adjustment Act (1933): This New Deal legislation aimed to stabilize agricultural prices and incomes during the Great Depression. While not directly focused on Extension activities, it had indirect impacts by influencing farming practices, economic conditions in rural areas, and the demand for Extension services.

Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002 (Farm Bill): The Farm Bill is periodically updated and reauthorized by Congress, and it typically includes provisions related to agriculture, nutrition, conservation, and rural development. Cooperative Extension benefits from various programs and initiatives funded through the Farm Bill, such as research grants, outreach programs, and support for sustainable agriculture practices.

The Agriculture Improvement Act of 2018 (2018 Farm Bill): This legislation continued to support Cooperative Extension programs through funding for agricultural research, education, and outreach activities. It also included provisions related to rural development, nutrition assistance, and conservation efforts that can indirectly impact Extension services.

These federal laws have provided the framework, funding, and support necessary for Cooperative Extension to fulfill its mission of delivering research-based knowledge and resources to address the needs of farmers, communities, and stakeholders across the United States.

Summary

Federal legislation almost always follows in the wake of state and local efforts to solve a problem. This is the case with federal laws for agricultural and extension education.

60-Minute Assignment 

One of your assignments for this class is to create a visual timeline highlighting key milestones and developments in the history of Extension or agricultural education, including significant events, influential figures, and changes in educational approaches. Write short descriptions for each entry, explaining their importance. 

To help you get started  and encourage you to work together,  please add one piece of federal legislation along with 2-3 descriptive sentences to the following Google Doc. You and your colleagues can use this information to build your timeline.

Google Timeline Doc.