State right to ignore fed mandates on schools

We ought to thank our Utah state lawmakers for passing a law (SB162) that requires them, or the governor, to approve use of $100,000 or more in state money to fund federal programs. For years, our lawmakers have been in the forefront of fighting the Bush administration's efforts to take states' rights in controlling their schools. The No Child Left Behind law has been most intrusive with its one-size-fits-all approach.

The passage of SB162 appears to be prompted by a lack of trust and confidence lawmakers have in the State Board of Education overseeing the state's public schools and in carrying out lawmakers' legislative intent regarding policies such as teacher pay and vouchers.

SB162 brings to the surface an underlying problem: Utah's archaic education-governance structure. It has a layer of boards originally designed to give local control but has become a bureaucratic labyrinth where everyone and no one is responsible for carrying out the legislative intent that the State Board of Education is supposed to monitor. The board has the responsibility for supervision of public education but has demonstrated an inability in carrying out its legislatively mandated responsibilities. It has allowed programs to be administered by a bureaucratic layer of state and local school boards without the necessary oversight to assure programs are being carried out as intended by lawmakers.

Rep. Greg Hughes, R-Draper, proposed HB471, which died in the Rules Committee. It would have further reflected lawmakers' lack of confidence in the State Board of Education. It was a bill that called for the State Office of Human Resources to administer the teacher salary supplementary program rather than the state board. The idea of a state unit, other than the state board, distributing pay could be a forerunner in restructuring the state's education-governance system. That unit would be responsible for the recruiting, hiring, certifying and establishing of salary schedules for effective teachers and those working in fields where shortages exist. The role of state and local school boards would change from policy boards to monitoring contracts with schools that would be operated by limited-liability corporations owned by parents and teachers. The above ideas are those proposed by the New Commission on the Skills of the American Workforce for states interested in reforming their schools for the new economy. (See "Tough Choices or Tough Times" at www.skillscommission.org.)