On April 11, 1953, President Dwight D. Eisenhower put into effect Reorganization Plan No. 1 of 1953, creating a new cabinet level department within the federal government. The new Department of Health, Education, and Welfare (HEW) was a consolidation of organizations dealing with national social concerns. Some of the organizations dated back to 1785 when the Congress of the Confederation first set aside public lands for schools. This paper concerns the creation and growth of the department of Health, Education and Welfare, including it's various educational programs, educational research programs, aid to higher education, federally impacted areas, and other HEW programs which affect education.

This study investigated the perceptions of influential relationships between Texas public university presidents, university system chancellors, and state legislators. The study's purpose was to examine Texas public universities engagement in lobbying type behaviors and whether public policy is affected through interaction and communication with legislative leaders. Moreover, of importance for this study was to identifying if Texas public universities actively work to influence the Texas legislature and if lobbying behavior exists whether or not that behavior influences public policy formation within the Texas legislative process. Lastly, this study focused on perceptions dealing with the Texas statute prohibiting state governmental agencies, including public universities and university systems, from influencing legislation through use of state funds. The study was conducted in the winter of 2003 and had 29 president / chancellor respondents and 88 legislator respondents. Three survey instruments were developed by the researcher to determine Texas public university president, system chancellor, and state legislator perceptions and attitudes concerning lobbying type activities, influence, and state statute compliance. Data reported consist of percentages, t-Test of significance, and Cohen's d effect size measure. Results from the study show agreement between the groups in areas of activities utilized to influence the legislative process and actual influence of public policy. Disagreement within statute compliance was reported between the groups.

When the national Democratic Party began to transform to progressive era politics because of the New Deal, conservative reactionaries turned against the social welfare programs and used red scare tactics to discredit liberal and progressive New Deal Democrat professors in higher education. This process continued during the Second World War, when the conservatives in Texas lumped fascism and communism in order to anchor support and fire and threaten professors and administrators for advocating or teaching “subversive doctrine.” In 1948 Texas joined other southern states and followed the Dixiecrat movement designed to return the Democratic Party to its original pro-business and segregationist philosophy. Conservatives who wanted to bolster their Cold Warrior status in Texas also played upon the fears of spreading communism during the Cold War, and passed several repressive laws intended to silence unruly students and entrap professors by claiming they advocated communist doctrine. The fight culminated during the Civil Rights movement, when conservatives in the state attributed subversive or communist behavior to civil rights organizations, and targeted higher education to protect segregated universities. In order to return the national Democratic Party to the pro-business, segregationist philosophy established at the early twentieth century, conservatives used redbaiting tactics to thwart the progressivism in the state’s higher education facilities.

This study provides a qualitative look at Texas' Professional Service Providers' (PSPs) strategies for supporting low-performing schools. Four PSPs were selected for participation based on the number of schools they helped exit the Texas Title I School Improvement Program from 2007-2012. Data collected and analyzed included provider and principal interviews, providers' progress reports documenting services, and principals' evaluations of provider services. Results indicated key support strategies in two of four cases were supporting and mentoring/coaching while communicating and building trust were important in the other two cases. Communicating, reviewing information, and planning were important across all cases. The quality indicators aligning with the PSPs' strategies were fit, comprehensiveness, and coherence. They were also the most common across all cases. Finally, analysis of the evaluation of provider services revealed PSP-1 with the highest ratings, followed by PSP-2, PSP-3, and PSP-4 respectively. The findings suggest, first, that PSP support has a dual nature. Contextual support was provided based on the campus leaderships' skills and requests. PSPs also ensured coherence among the strategies of all stakeholders. Secondly, a hierarchy of quality service indicators aligned to the PSPs' strategies: fit, comprehensiveness, and coherence. Finally relationships are vital to a successful provider-campus relationship. The findings have implications for PSP selection, professional development, and evaluation.