Keep Focus on School Debate (Jeff Hankins commentary)

Now, don’t pass over this column after seeing that’s it about education again.

In recent months, we have tried to contribute to the dialogue and debate over education issues as the state contemplates a system overhaul in response to the state Supreme Court’s ruling in the Lake View case. It’s without question a major business issue that dwarfs any other topic, so indulge us a bit.

Gov. Mike Huckabee managed to gather a large group of editorial writers and columnists for lunch recently and gave us an update on education proposals, then unveiled a compromise plan the next day. He also broke the sobering news about the revised revenue forecast that will lead to state spending cuts of more than $60 million during the next four months.

His willingness to back off the plan to make school superintendents state employees was the key starting point for compromise. He’s standing by the arbitrary 1,500-student cutoff that will lead to consolidation and the July 1, 2004, deadline for implementation.

Huckabee observes that the Arkansas Association of Education Administrators has been firmly unified in its opposition to key points of the administration’s plan. That organization is now known to be behind the legislation that would shift control of the state Department of Education to the Legislature — a move that is simply absurd and unconstitutional.

It seems as if everyone is tossing out extremes to set the stage for compromise efforts. For example, the bill that would create one school district for each county makes the Huckabee plan look generous by comparison. And the state Board of Education’s recommendation to raise curriculum options from 38 to 60 credits will lead to something in between.

Ray Simon, director of the Education Department, has put together four levels of standards districts would have to meet:

• Curriculum and accreditation. A lower number of required course offerings makes standards easier to achieve, and vice versa. This is why the final number will be important.

• Teacher salaries. Think statewide pay schedule on this compared with huge disparities that exist today from district to district. Simon even suggests that we would see higher pay for physics and math teachers — who are in short supply — than for social studies and physical education teachers.

• Facilities. Simon admits this may be the “trickiest” part of consolidation but that a facilities adequacy study will provide a blueprint. The state would have significant control over new buildings and space utilization issues in its quest for equality.

• Efficiencies. The state will determine what a model high school teaches, looks like and costs. Every school would be judged against that model.

Small districts have avoided consolidation in the past by raising property taxes enough to stay alive. The efficiencies standards would make that impossible.

Huckabee’s plan has another element that makes a lot of sense: standardized statewide accounting for spending. Districts would share terminology and line items to show exactly how much money is spent on classroom instruction, athletics, buses, facilities and such. So even if movements to remove state funding of athletics and other extracurricular activities fail, the state board could establish limits on spending.

Overall, Huckabee’s resolve remains solid even though he admits to an uphill fight with many legislators, some of whom are more concerned about getting small pork projects for their districts through general revenue grants than aggressively tackling the big-picture funding issues.

With major budget cuts looming and a lack of interest in raising taxes or consolidating schools, it’s time for reality to set in for the Legislature.