ABSTRACT

This chapter argues that federal policy can serve conflicting purposes. On the one hand, it is necessary for protecting rights when states and local governments refuse to do so. Federal policy can serve as a moral compass guiding ethical decisions, a needed legal foundation for efforts to protect and defend rights, and a source of funding to augment inadequate local resources. On the other hand, policy is often ignored or shaped by powerful groups to serve their own interests, giving the illusion more than the substance of change. To explore these issues, the chapter examines three forms of policy tools beginning with the landmark Brown v. Board of Education: court cases, funding levers, and regulations. Each is discussed in terms of one or two forms of inequity, including racial segregation, language policy, disability policy, gender inequity, and social class. The chapter argues that, while the tools by themselves do not constitute a panacea since both dominant groups as well as historically oppressed groups use the same policy tools to advance their interests, educators need to be familiar with the history of their use.