Tribal Colleges and Universities

Background

Before Executive Order 13270 was revoked, it had a significant impact on the recognition and support of Tribal Colleges and Universities (TCUs) as crucial educational pillars for Native American communities. The order established a structural framework through which these institutions could align more closely with federal educational goals and obtain much-needed resources. A key feature was the creation of the President's Board of Advisors on Tribal Colleges and Universities, which played an advisory role in aiding TCUs to improve their institutional profiles. By fostering long-term development and operational sustainability, the policy helped these colleges function as both cultural preservers and educational providers in economically challenged areas.

Operational adjustments within numerous federal agencies were necessitated by this executive order. For instance, the Department of Education, along with other participating agencies, developed Three-Year Plans outlining strategic engagement and support for these institutions. Agencies provided technical assistance to enhance the competitiveness of TCUs for federal grants and resources. The initiative also sought to align programs and initiatives between the TCUs and broader federal educational goals, such as those outlined in the No Child Left Behind Act. The increased focus on performance indicators and objective measures allowed TCUs to better navigate federal funding streams.

From a social policy perspective, the order placed significant emphasis on the role of TCUs in community development, especially in preserving indigenous languages and cultures. With the backing of the federal government, TCUs could expand their educational offerings, improve infrastructure, and adopt new technologies, promoting greater educational access and success rates for American Indian and Alaska Native students. Moreover, there was a strong push to encourage private sector partnerships, which sought to supplement federal efforts and drive additional resource inflows towards these institutions, further enhancing their ability to serve their communities comprehensively.

Reason for Revocation

President Obama's decision to revoke Executive Order 13270 was influenced by a broader ideological shift towards more inclusive and collaborative approaches to educational reform. A significant part of Obama's strategy was to modernize and streamline federal initiatives to create broader frameworks that encapsulated indigenous education within a national context—thereby integrating these educational systems more thoroughly into the national fabric. The revocation made way for Executive Order 13592, which retained a focus on TCUs but placed them within the broader agenda of American Indian and Alaska Native education.

The revocation was not an indication of diminished support for TCUs; rather, it reflected a strategic realignment. The Obama administration was keen on addressing the systemic challenges facing Native American education by fostering inter-agency cooperation and emphasizing comprehensive, cross-sector partnerships to implement reforms more effectively. This approach intended to break down silos and optimize resource allocation by leveraging combined federal, state, and private efforts to solve persistent educational and cultural challenges in Native American communities.

It was also partly reflective of a policy drive to ensure that educational strategies were consistent with evolving legislative frameworks and social dynamics. Obama's approach was characterized by a commitment to equity and inclusion, with an understanding that indigenous educational needs should not be isolated but rather integrated into broader educational priorities. By doing so, the administration hoped to create an environment where all minority-serving institutions, including TCUs, could thrive more effectively within a unified federal policy architecture.

Furthermore, the revocation should be seen within the context of policy evolution, where previous executive orders were assessed for their efficacy and replaced with more comprehensive instruments when necessary. It marked a continuation rather than a discontinuation of support, signaling a refinement of tactics to address enduring and emerging educational challenges facing Native American communities.

Winners

Large educational technology corporations, such as Blackboard and Pearson, possibly stood to benefit from the evolving policy landscape. With the introduction of newer executive orders placing emphasis on technology and innovation in enhancing institutional capacities, these companies might have found additional opportunities to provide digital infrastructure and educational tools to TCUs. This aligns with the strategic push towards modernizing educational delivery and improving access to high-quality instruction through technology.

The broader higher education sector could also be seen as beneficiaries, as the revocation formed part of a cohesive plan that potentially streamlined resource delivery across minority-serving institutions. By integrating TCUs into a more extensive network of federally supported educational institutions, other colleges and universities could find it easier to collaborate, share resources, and innovate alongside TCUs, fostering an environment conducive to collective growth and improvement.

The private sector had previously been encouraged to engage with TCUs, and this policy shift continued to facilitate those engagements. Financial institutions and philanthropic organizations might have found the revised policy framework more conducive to investing in indigenous educational programs, seeing the potential for a robust partnership model that aligns with corporate social responsibility objectives. The new cooperative climate envisioned under Obama’s strategic frameworks might have appealed to organizations seeking meaningful and impactful investment in indigenous communities.

Losers

With the revocation, the immediate institutional structure that guided TCUs' specific interactions with federal agencies through the previous executive framework experienced a shift. TCUs that capitalized on the earlier defined, direct lines to federal support might have initially found the transition challenging as they adapted to the new system under Obama's framework. This transitional phase could have led to temporary disruptions in accessing federal support, causing uncertainties.

Some tribal communities, particularly those in extremely rural and isolated regions, might have perceived the revocation as diluting the focused federal attention they received. Although the broader policy frameworks sought comprehensive inclusion, the specificity and visibility previously afforded to TCUs may have been seen as less pronounced, raising concerns about the prioritization of indigenous educational issues amid a wider policy agenda.

Those involved directly in the administration of the President’s Board of Advisors on TCUs could have been affected by the restructuring process that followed revocation. The change could have led to shifts in roles, responsibilities, and potentially funding cuts to administrative budgets, posing challenges for individuals and stakeholders accustomed to the earlier structures and processes. This impact, while potentially short-term, might have influenced the execution of various ongoing initiatives at that time.