Now, I realize this idea may well catch on and run like wildfire through all 3 people who frequent this blog, but the whole subject infuriates me so much, I have to put down my solution to it, its cathartic.
Every year around legislation time here in Utah we hear the same thing, not enough money is going to schools, why aren't we putting more money into schools, etc.. I found it especially nauseating this year as people were wanting to 'hold education harmless' in this budgetary crisis, even though they got like a 10% funding increase just last year, when everyone thought the State was flush with money. Heaven forbid they feel the bite of the budget axe like everyone else.
This post won't be about how we should decrease funding for education, I'm not espousing that position (though it is important to note that we spend more on education as a state than any other thing budgeted). This post will be about how that vast sum of money could actually be put to some sort of efficient use.
One of the biggest problems is the popular idea that we need 'local' control over our schools. I don't even know if anyone has ever defined that in the debate, as it makes no logical sense. Are people fearful that those in Vernal will push their Godless views on us Davis Countians? Or maybe that the special and unique needs of the student in Washington County couldn't possibly be addressed through the same curriculum as the kid going to Bear River. "Local Control" has acheived near unimpeachable status, it is good because it is good. We value it, because it is valuable. Ridiculous.
I would like to tear local control from the cold dead fingers of the bloated beasts that are school districts, and give all that power to the state. Let me explain. If one were to do a little reasearch (which I have), one would find that the number of administrators in a fairly good sized school distric (say Davis County), is just seven people fewer than the population of Albania. There are 5 curriculum supervisors for special education alone. Now we are not talking about Special Ed teachers, no, we are talking about district level administrators, making well over what the top teacher in the district is being paid. Now, forgetting for a moment that it shouldn't take 5 people to administer special ed for Davis County, let alone just the curriculum; does anyone really think that every single school district in the state needs a duplicative position, coming up with curriculum for the special ed needs of a school that may be within walking distance of the next district to the North, or South?
This is the bare bones of my proposition.
All local school districts are disbanded. There is a superintendant of schools for the state of Utah. This superintendent then has around 2 dozen assistant superintendants (or whatever title makes people happy). Each of these individuals, like VP's in a corporation, are in charge of a different area/geographic locale. When there is a local issue, this assistant can meet with the principles, teachers, whoever is needed from the local area. And guess what, instead of having some giant monstrosity of a district building, that meeting could take place in any number of buildings that the government already owns....called schools.
There can be a curriculum committee, for the entire state, as the kids in different areas of the state do not need separate curriculums. You can have specialists (either serving as assitant superintendants, as previously mentioned, or on the curriculum committee), for things like Special Ed. or ESL.
There can be one, count em one purchasing agent, so that instead of each district having separate contracts for books, paper, etc., there is one. Guess what, paper is the same in St. George as it is in Logan, and Houghton Mifflin doesn't have different Chemistry textbooks in Tooele.
There are 200+ individuals on Davis County Schools payroll that make more than the highest paid teacher. People scream that teachers need to be paid more. Well, from the way it looks, its not because there isn't money being spent on the State level.
The current division in the school districts in the Salt Lake Valley is going to cost the State an estimated 1 million dollars, just this year. And what was the purpose of that? Why did the people rise up and kick out the west side of that school district? That's right 'local control', which in this case was a catch phrase that merely covered up the idea that the wealthier east siders just didn't want their money going to the poorer west side schools. Nice.
I would love anyone, please, to point out how anything that a local school district does couldn't be done better on the state level. I would love for anyone to point out what would be worse through State control, without using the phrase 'local control'.
The education budget in this state could be cut significantly, and I'm not even talking about taking that money away, but think how much more could be done with that money. Of course, the UEA would collectively crap a brick at the very idea. Why? Who knows. They like to be contrary, case in point.
What about local school boards you say? I again throw down the gauntlet, please tell me what benefit they give the community. The only thing of substance that I know of that the Davis county school board did, was effectively end the Church's allowing missionaries to do service in public schools, everywhere in the country. Thank your local school board member, it was the best service I got a chance to do, until we were told we couldn't anymore, because of the consequences of a Davis County School Board decision.
So, please, I beg of you, anyone who thinks this is a flawed idea, please give a better one, or somehow try to defend the current system. Its not that I have to be right, its that I want a better system. So if this isn't it, let me know what would be.
4 comments:
Privatize all schools. Make a standard price for all school tuition. Give each student a credit equaling that amount. Let loose the dogs of war.
I personally don't like that idea but it is one.
Amen Dan!
Jimmy is dumb.
Great ideas, Dan. I would add, make this statewide superintendant of schools a non-partisan elected position, not an appointed one. They both have disadvantages, but I think this way would keep things a little more open and above board.
Besides the money wasted on the district level, something needs to be done about the wads of cash thrown at individual schools, that they have to invent programs to consume--as long as the money doesn't go to teachers or classroom materials. I'm serious; we're talking piles of money here.
Oh yeah, and what about excess administration at the school level? How many vice principals does one school need?
Post a Comment