The teaching of key scientific topics such as evolution are imperative for scientific literacy, but educators face pressure to eliminate or downplay these topics due to perceived controversy. Although teachers usually bear the burden of ensuring that these topics are taught appropriately, some of this responsibility must also fall upon administrators. As the leaders of the educational community, administrators have a duty to ensure that teachers have the oversight, support, and resources necessary to provide high quality instruction. Through a systematic review of current literature, it was shown that the root causes of controversy regarding certain topics covered in science education were a misunderstanding of the modern scientific paradigm and the misconception that certain religious and political beliefs are incommensurate with the modern scientific epistemology, that there has been a long history of legal and political pressures influencing science curriculum, that science teachers' knowledge and perceptions regarding socially controversial science topics have improved over the past few decades, and that there is very little known about administrators' knowledge and perceptions of science education in general. Through the use of a sequential explanatory study, including a quantitative survey and qualitative interviews, conducted among building and district level administrators in Louisiana, it was discovered that, among the sample included in this study, there was a moderate level of understanding and acceptance of evolution, and a lower level of knowledge of evolution education law bordering on uncertainty. Administrators in this sample also self-reported a moderate level of understanding of the nature of science and a severe lack of knowledge of the NGSS. Administrators also reported perceived conflict from students, parents, and community members, but reported no, or extremely rare, instances of actual concerns from these stakeholders. Although most administrators reported a desire to support their teachers, most rely on adherence to state standards, adopted curriculum, or instructional coaches to provide this support which demonstrates that they are willing to remove themselves as the dominant actors of negotiation within their networks in favor of playing a more passive role in science education. [The dissertation citations contained here are published with the permission of ProQuest LLC. Further reproduction is prohibited without permission. Copies of dissertations may be obtained by Telephone (800) 1-800-521-0600. Web page: http://www.proquest.com/en-US/products/dissertations/individuals.shtml.]