The role of the “state education agency” in today’s education reform

• The role of SEAs has changed over time, from simple research collection to state and federal compliance to being pushed into reform.
• SEAs can help shape their future going forward.

​Before Thanksgiving, there was a lot of buzz about key programs within the U.S. Department of Education being moved to other federal agencies. The announcement was another signal to states that the Trump administration is serious about winding down the federal education department.

As education is undergoing a major overhaul under the Trump 2.0 administration, here’s one institution people need to be more aware of: the SEA, or state education agency.

The SEA is the agency in a state that oversees the K-12 public education system. For that reason, it’s likely to become a key instrument in the shift away from federal education bureaucracy to state empowerment under the Trump administration.

Below is a brief history of SEAs and the opportunity to shape the SEA’s role in the years ahead.

The basics of SEAs

A state education agency is precisely as it sounds: it’s the agency within a state that implements and oversees K-12 public education.

Most often, it is called the Department of Education or the Office of Education. Its internal policymaking body is the state board of education, which makes rules based on statutes passed by the legislature. (A few states don’t have a state board.)

The primary executive for the SEA is called the state superintendent, commissioner, or secretary, but all are commonly known as the “chief state school officer.”

The structure and power of boards and whether boards or chiefs are elected or appointed vary among states.

State-level education governance, of course, is broader than just the SEA. A state’s overall approach to education policy very much takes its cue from the legislature, which is the statewide lawmaking body. Governors also have varying powers in education policy across states, such as vetoing legislation or appointing members to the state board.

But increasingly, it’s the SEA that has been tasked with taking on larger, more significant roles in education policy and reform.

A quick history to today

Because education was a private, religious, or local endeavor until the introduction of the common school in the 1830s, the political structure of public schools as we know them today also took shape then. Two of the first well-known state education agencies include the Massachusetts State Board of Education, established in 1837, and the Board of Commissioners of Common Schools in Connecticut, established in 1838, whose secretaries were well-known common school advocates, Horace Mann and Henry Barnard, respectively. Barnard also championed and led the first federal department of education, which was created in 1867 and tasked with collecting information on schools and teaching.

While state boards of education (or SEAs) have existed since then, comparatively minimal scholarship exists about them. This is because for years, they were “small, anemic organizations,” many of which collected data, dispersed funds, or managed small federal programs. Most decision-making resided at the local level.

Scholars have noted that it wasn’t until the 1970s, a few years after Congress passed the 1965 Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) with its title programs aimed at helping vulnerable students, that “comprehensive state education policy…emerg[ed].” ESEA sought to accomplish its goals by pushing state education agencies into federal law compliance work, making them “crucial partners” to the U.S. Department of Education. In fact, Title V of ESEA provided grants to SEAs to beef up their capacity to fulfill this compliance role. Thus, with the federal government both increasing the SEA’s workload and paying for its growth, the SEA’s role was altered.

These same scholars note that, thanks to the 1983 report “A Nation at Risk,” the 1980s were a time of reform that put some pressure on SEAs to become involved. Likewise, Congress in the 1990s pushed for state standards, which increased focus on improving education at the state level. But SEAs faced a significant change with the 2001 reauthorization of ESEA, which created the federal law and program known as No Child Left Behind (NCLB), championed by the Bush administration. This time, the federal government became more prescriptive in its reform efforts, requiring states to develop academic standards in specific subjects for certain grades, corresponding assessments, and a clear accountability structure for annual progress reporting to the federal government. This work largely fell to SEAs to develop these reforms and ensure ongoing compliance to continue receiving federal funding.

The Obama administration tried a new path for education improvement, which also fell to SEAs. Rather than adding requirements, it sought to incentivize states to make changes through competitive grants such as Race to the Top and School Improvement Grants. These opportunities pushed states and their SEAs further into a reform mindset, or “performance management,” rather than oversight – something they were often not equipped to do at all, or to do well.

Furthermore, the onerous requirements of NCLB led to severe frustration, prompting SEAs to seek waivers from specific federal mandates. Ultimately, this era culminated in the 2015 bipartisan reauthorization of the law, the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA), which expanded states’ flexibility in developing their accountability systems to improve education in their states.

Still, even with greater flexibility and creativity, what remained were the vestiges of the NCLB structure on SEAs: an increased expectation for improving education outcomes, with little regard for increased capacity to fulfill it. Meanwhile, SEAs were still accountable for other state responsibilities, like ensuring compliance with state education law, overseeing teacher licensure, and supporting districts and schools in numerous ways.

A few years later, during the 2020 COVID-19 pandemic, SEAs were tasked with navigating public policy issues at the federal, state, and local levels simultaneously. They oversaw the massive federal spending effort, the Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief (ESSER) funds to help address the challenges of the pandemic; sought federal waivers from certain testing requirements that couldn’t be met; and assisted districts and schools in navigating on-the-ground safety issues alongside other state public policymaking. SEAs were again a key middleman for federal and state law compliance and statewide public-school support.

Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign promised to abolish the U.S. Department of Education, but aside from proposed budget cuts and cutting staff in specific departments, the administration primarily championed state education choice programs, showcasing state leadership. Trump’s second term immediately prioritized the dismantling of the U.S. Department, with an executive order signed within the first few months of 2025.

Since then, states have witnessed many rapid federal education structural changes, without much understanding of how to plan for the future. Already, there have been significant reductions in the federal education department staff. Grant funds were temporarily frozen while federal leaders reviewed whether states were using them correctly. Most recently, after a historically extended government shutdown and further education department furloughs, major education programs were transferred to other federal agencies. Most notably, major K12 programs were moved to the U.S. Department of Labor.

Such energy for change at the federal level almost certainly means changes for SEAs. The reality is that SEAs are not a comprehensive, unilateral body for pushing reforms, yet they will be the entity most likely forced to adapt to any changes. Furthermore, as states are given more opportunities to own their education policy landscape, many will look to SEAs to fill a leadership role. Here are essential questions SEAs should consider as their future role is being shaped.

Opportunities ahead

What state-level duties of state boards or superintendents already exist? All SEAs should understand the existing legal responsibilities of state boards or superintendents, as outlined in state constitutions or statutes. They should identify if they are fulfilling these and to what degree they are doing them well. They should continue to seek to fulfill their required duties with excellence and take note of areas for improvement.

What should be the vision and purpose for the SEA? After determining what the law currently requires, leaders should evaluate what they believe the SEA’s purpose ought to be in the future. SEAs will play a key role in shaping the future of the state’s education system in collaboration with other state government bodies, but to do their part, SEAs need a clear vision for themselves. For instance, does responsibility for student outcomes reside primarily with districts or the SEA? Should reform flow from the state legislature or SEA? What is the balance between an SEA existing to help its professional stakeholders versus to equip parents as partners in education? While the federal government has frequently imposed its plans on states and thereby shaped SEAs’ roles over time, state leaders should determine their education objectives and how state and local governmental bodies will play a role.

What changes are needed to meet the SEA’s new vision and purpose? Because many duties of state boards and superintendents are outlined in statute, they can be adjusted by the legislature if necessary. SEA leaders can advocate for legislative changes that match a renewed state education vision and the aspirational vision of the SEA. Likewise, internal administrative governance and culture should be evaluated to ensure the agency can fulfill this vision. Ensuring alignment of vision, purpose, and legal requirements allows SEAs to succeed.

Conclusion

SEAs have been a quiet yet necessary institution during changes in education policy over time. As the federal role has changed, so too has the SEA role changed.

With so much federal disruption in education policy right now, the SEA’s role is likely to evolve further as states seek ways to respond to a new federal landscape. The good news is that, with renewed focus on state leadership and less top-down pressure, SEAs can help shape their future in this reform era.