Should the Board of Education continue to have statewide responsibility? Should its members be elected or appointed?

[Peter Kay]

Inspired by "Time for a Tune Up", by Jon M. Van Dyke, Honolulu Advertiser, May 18

[Dan L.]

I have commented before that the citizens of Hawai‘i are denied a right granted to every other American: that of going to meeting of our local school board to express our views about issues in our local schools. To make such a visit in Hawai‘i costs hundreds of dollars, and of course the views and ideas of neighbor island citizens get short shrift from the leadership in Honolulu.

A state school board in most states is advisory only, making broad policy decisions which are to be implemented at the local level, and always within guidelines set by the legislature. That, in my view, is the proper role for a state board. To have them setting day-to-day operating rules for every school in the state is not conducive to having a school system which can meet the needs of each community and its students.

Many people seem to feel that having local boards somehow requires local funding. That is absolutely not true. Funding can still be on a statewide basis, and should be. Equity in education requires no less. But decisions about how to spend those funds can and should be a local decision, made by local people in consultation with the constituents who elected them.

I believe that one of the reasons Hawai‘i’s education system is so bad is that local people have no control, no influence, indeed no voice at all. As such, they feel no sense of investment in their schools. When the local schools are ordered to follow some foolish edict from Honolulu (such as the order of about 20 years ago that no staff member shall speak Pidgin on school grounds), what is the recourse? Spend hundreds of dollars and a couple of days on a trip to Honolulu to talk to people who have no interest or concern with what goes on in the schools of the outer islands? It’s a guarantee of an out-of-touch, rigid, clumsy, expensive, wasteful system which serves no-one but the bureaucrats in Honolulu. And that’s what we’ve got, despite the best efforts of dedicated professionals who truly care about kids and understand the educational process.

Hawai‘i ranks among the lowest in the nation in retaining teachers. It has gotten so bad that I’ve even heard a legislative candidate seriously suggest that teachers be required by law to remain in the classrooms of Hawai‘i for five years as a condition of getting a teaching certificate from any college in the state!

Breaking up the educational monolith is one of the most important matters for a ConCon to discuss.

[Rick M.]

And what is the BIGGEST factor in the impervious educational monolith?

Answer: The teacher's union.

Remove the section in the constitution which allows government employees to unionize and with one stroke of the pen you've solved half the problem

[Peter Kay]

You are most definitely the hammer that sees nails all around you. I'm actually enjoying the dialog and appreciate you being so busy here.

[Peter Kay]

Excellent post, Dan! Analyzing and addressing the structural failures of this institution, for me personally, is Job 1 for ConCon. IMO nothing is more important to both our short & long term health as a state than having a second-to-none public education system.

I'd be really, really curious to find out which public ed system is #1 in the world and then figure out what it would take to duplicate it.

[John Mussack]

Aloha everybody!

Is it okay if I combine two of the pet peeves of some of you fellow members -- the BOE and unions?
What if we found a way to replace the current kind of BOE with a BOE that was tough enough to negotiate a contract with HGEA which preserved a little more transparency and accountability in the DOE? What kind of BOE would be tough enough to stand up to HGEA? An appointed one? An elected one? A bipartisan one?

Aloha!

[jk]

The statewide Board of Education should be eliminated, along with the statewide public education system, which should be replaced with small school districts, each with its own governing board, as well as charter schools and vouchers. The voucher for each student should be individualized so that, for example, the voucher for a child with a disablity is worth more than if the child did not have the disability. Each private school receiving a voucher should be prohibited from accepting any additional money for the education of the child. In other words, private schools should be prohibited from requiring parents to supplement the voucher. I don't think that amending the Constitution can guarantee improvments to public education, but it can create the conditions that make it easier for improvements to be made.

[cashpoor]

Elected definately!

Appointed seats like that give corrupt politicians and lobbyists more ability to effectively control more. If you don't believe me look at the white house right now.

[jk]

Jimmy, You correctly point out major problems resulting from an overly centralized organization. These problems have not been overcome during the past several decades despite good people with good intentions populating Hawaii’s public school system – from those in leadership positions to administrators to teachers to clerical and support staff. Without a change in the organizational structure, it is highly unlikely that the quality of education will improve substantially.

However, allow me to disagree with your statement that Hawaii’s public education system is workable and sound. Standardized test scores consistently place Hawaii in the lowest tier when comparing all states. Hawaii even falls behind some of the states in the Deep South. The dropout rate is another indicator of educational quality. A few months ago the Superintendent objected to an estimate by Education Week that Hawaii’s dropout rate was 35%. She countered by saying that it was “only” 15%. In my opinion, anything over 5% is too high.

Hawaii’s public education has continued to stagnate despite different Superintendents, different members of the Board of Education, and different members of the Legislature, all with different ideas from time to time. Without a change in the organizational structure, the next new idea will probably yield the same unfortunate result.

I have some ideas for decentralizing Hawaii’s public education system, but I think I’ve written enough for now.

[jk]

Jimmy, I agree that the size of a school complex is much more manageable than a statewide system. In addition, an independent school complex would likely be more responsive to community values and parental concerns. There's no need for a statewide Board of Education because, with independent school complexes, statewide educational policy would not be needed. A statewide BOE would only try to justify its existence by using its power to control the school complexes.

[jk]

Jimmy, You seem to be conflicted between supporting small independent school districts and supporting a centralized school system. Hawaii’s centralized system has been failing for decades. A constitutional amendment can replace the centralized system with small independent school districts. There’s no guarantee that it will work. But the existing centralized system is guaranteed to fail.

By the way, small independent school districts can exist. In fact, they can be found all across the country. One district has only three students.

You seem to want a reformed centralized system, with the central office performing certain functions. However, a small independent school district can perform all of those functions -- and better.

For example, negotiating union contracts on a statewide basis leaves no room for variation. A small independent school district negotiating with the unions would be able, for example, to extend school hours or increase the number of instructional days. Of course, that would involve additional costs, necessitating a reduction in expenditures for other things. However, the district should be allowed to make that tradeoff if it will improve the quality of education.

In addition, I am sure you are aware of the movement of veteran teachers from rural schools on Oahu (and possibly on other islands as well) to urban schools. As a result, rural schools have a greater proportion of inexperienced teachers than urban schools. The statewide system allows veteran teachers to take advantage of their seniority to move closer to their urban homes. That problem would be eliminated with small independent school districts because each district would negotiate with the unions. Since each district would be a separate employer, a teacher would not be able to transfer administratively from one district to another.

It’s a mistake to assume from the start that a centralized statewide school system can perform any function better than a small independent school district.

[Kaunaloa]

"It’s a mistake to assume from the start that a centralized statewide school system can perform any function better than a small independent school district."

to support that, we simply look at the other 49 states -- number with a lone, centralized school board -- ZERO. Number that outperform Hawai'i in whatever metric you'd care to use -- AT LEAST 40.

[jk]

Jimmy, I agree that this has been a healthy discussion of education issues.

Regarding contract negotiations with unions, the statewide system that you describe would be less efficient because it is a two-step process. Step one is the contract negotiated statewide. Step two is the amendments to the statewide contract negotiated by each district in order to meet the unique needs of the district. Small independent school districts would be more efficient because they would negotiate directly with unions in only one step. In addition, the creation of separate employers through small independent school districts addresses the problem of veteran teachers migrating from rural schools to urban schools, which the statewide system has failed to correct.

Contract negotiation is one of various functions (also including food service, repair and maintenance, capital improvements) in which some people intuitively believe that large districts have an advantage over small districts because of economies of scale. However, actual experience demonstrates otherwise.

Louisiana studied district size and found that expenditures per student are relatively constant at enrollment levels above 1,000 students. In other words, economies of scale are not achievable after a district reaches 1,000 students.

Also, that study found:

• The larger a school district becomes, the more resources it devotes to secondary or even non-essential activities.

• Instead of making up a larger percent of the budget as school district size increases, the percentage spent on teachers, books, and teaching materials decreases.

• States with the largest school districts have the worst achievement.

So instead of large districts achieving economies of scale, they suffer from “penalties of scale.”