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

[jk]

Jimmy, Thank you for acknowledging the benefits of small school districts. Economies of scale are not sacrificed with the creation of small independent school districts as long as they have enrollments of 1,000 or more.

You have a separate concern about small schools (not districts). However, that concern would exist whether the statewide system continues or whether the statewide system is divided into small independent districts. By the way, there is lots of evidence that students who attend smaller school perform better than students who attend large schools, if other factors are held constant. So although it costs more per pupil to educate a student in a small school, there is a trade off in performance.

Getting back to collective bargaining, the current statewide contracts give an advantage to the unions when a district tries to amend a particular contract it to fit its unique needs. Unless a district offers a union a big benefit for amending the statewide contract, the union can sit tight and refuse to negotiate because it already has a contract.

Your 2% estimate of the difference among contracts may well be accurate. However, that 2% can make all the difference in the world, especially if it includes the number of hours in a work day and the number of days in a work year. School districts that are independent and which reflect the values of their communities would diverge, simply because communities in Hawaii are so different from each other. Different districts may want to use their employees differently. So I believe that there would be more divergence within that 2% over time.

Let’s get back to the negotiations of 15 or so separate new contracts with HSTA that would happen with the creation of small independent districts. HSTA would have an incentive to negotiate when the old statewide contract expires because its members won’t want to work without a contract. So it is unlikely that HSTA will extend the negotiations indefinitely.

Currently, labor unions representing electricians, carpenters, plumbers, housekeepers, etc. negotiate with many employers, so HSTA should be able to negotiate with only 15. It would be understandable that HSTA may have cost concerns about negotiating with more than one employer. However, if it means that the quality of education will improve, I am sure that HSTA members will support it.

Independent districts should negotiate their own collective bargaining contracts because they can gain educational advantages by doing so. The economies of scale argument for a statewide system and a statewide contract is not convincing because these advantages do not exist under that system.

[jk]

Jimmy, I would like to clarify that my intent in citing the figure of 1,000 was to show that independent school districts can be as small as 1,000 students without losing economies of scale. That would include both the 15 district concept and the 42 district concept you described.

Regarding the formulation of independent districts, it shouldn't be just a numbers game. The ConCon is an opportunity to consider the characteristics of Hawaii’s various communities and to group communities with similar characteristics in the same district.

Also, in establishing the independent districts I think we should be wary of the “one size fits all” mentality that currently permeates Hawaii’s public school system. Perhaps some districts should be composed of one high school and its feeder schools, and other districts composed of two or more high schools and their feeder schools. I admit that I don’t know enough about Hawaii’s communities to make these decisions.

Regarding collective bargaining, you have revealed the depths of my ignorance about this subject. Thank you for informing me about how different employers collaborate through the Hawaii Employers Council when they negotiate with labor unions.

Instead, I should have given the example of how hospitals negotiate with the nurses union. As you know, each hospital negotiates separately. Similarly, school districts across the country negotiate separately with teachers unions. Maybe Hawaii’s geographic isolation hampers our understanding of how districts on the mainland do it, and perhaps it will take people like you to examine what is happening there so that it can be applied to Hawaii.

You are concerned about a union declaring an impasse during collective bargaining and moving the process to binding arbitration. Rather than risk revealing any more of my ignorance about collective bargaining, I would like to ask you how the statewide system addresses this issue and how it is different from the issue that would face independent districts. Is there any difference?

In my opinion, independent districts would benefit by bargaining with unions because it would enable them to change staffing patterns, allowing them, for example, to vary the school day and the school year. By contrast, the current statewide contract promotes a “one size fits all” mentality and discourages creativity. It also magnifies errors, as evidenced by the current contract, which has reduced the number of teachers who are available to teach summer school to such a low level that some schools have had to drop summer school altogether. The educational benefits that would be realized by independent districts negotiating contracts outweigh any financial benefits realized by a statewide system.

After you have the last say about collective bargaining, I’ll be ready to talk about why independent districts would perform the function of repair and maintenance better than a statewide system.

[Dan L.]

With all due respect, I would heartily disagree that we have a "very workable and sound public education system." We have a miserable school system, underfunded in every aspect, managed by people who have little knowledge of conditions off O‘ahu. The lack of achievement by our young people proves it. The best education I have seen on Hawai‘i Island is in the charter schools, and the DOE hates the charter schools and does everything in its power to destroy them, including firing an administrator who had the temerity to speak in favor of charter schools to the Legislature.

We need state funding, to preserve equality. But we need local decision-making, with at the very least one school district per island, and preferably more on the islands with larger school populations. School boards should be elected by the citizens of the school district.

If anyone doubts the disastrous condition of our schools, check out how long teachers remain in the profession in this state. Most of them leave after just a few years, either to seek other employment or to go the mainland to pursue their careers in more favorable conditions.

I am opposed to a voucher system, as it allows tax dollars to be spent on religious schools, which in my view is a violation of the First Amendment to the U. S. Constitution. But we should institute open enrollment. This would allow any student to enroll in any public school in which there is room for him or her. I have seen this system work very well in other states.

[jk]

Dan, I agree with what you say about DOE’s pernicious treatment of charter schools, the continuation of statewide funding of public education, the creation of a system that is based on the principle of local decision making, elected school boards, and open enrollment.

Regarding vouchers, I also believe that public money should not be used for religious purposes. However, I also feel that vouchers would provide parents with educational alternatives that are not currently available to their children. A voucher system would also create competition in public education that could motivate all schools to do better. Would you favor vouchers if any school receiving a voucher would be prohibited from providing religious training to students?

[Al Beeman]

The BOE is a disgrace and should be abolished and replaced by only a central Board of Regents with the sole purpose of monitoring the quality of education being offered in each school compared to several high performing US states and other key countries. The Board of Regents should also be charged with setting the standards for each grade level and the requirements for obtaining various High School degrees.

Schools should be a County Level function or lower (as County residents desire) including everything from buildings to teacher employment. Each district should be autonomous reporting to a locally elected school board. All school board members and administrators should be subject to recall at any time by the parents/guardians having students in the district.

Funding should come from the legislature to each school board with the same amount allocated for each student in the state. School board financial records should be audited by the State.

No tenure should be allowed to anyone at any level.

Students should be allowed to go to any school in their district.

[cashpoor]

I agree with Al, Thanks!

[jk]

Jimmy, There are contradictions in your last posting:

1. You say, “The discussion is gaining some focus on a solution towards eliminating the statewide school system.” Then, however, you say that your proposal only reforms the statewide system.

2. You say, “We would have to delete Article XV Section 4 because English and Hawaiian are the official language of the State of Hawaii.” Then, however, you say, “I will also strongly oppose any move to delete Article XV Section 4 from the Hawaii State Constitution.”

These contradictions make it difficult to determine what you really mean. Do you care to explain these contradictions?

[jk]

Al, You raise a good point that Hawaii’s school should be compared not only with other schools in the U.S., but also with those in other countries because Hawaii’s students will in the future be competing globally for jobs. The most desirable jobs will go to those who are the best educated. I also agree with you about autonomous locally-elected school boards.

However, I disagree with your proposal for a Board of Regents on the state level that sets standards for each grade level. My view is that any function should be pushed down to the lowest possible level because if done at a higher level it has the potential to magnify mistakes.

For example, the Hawaii Content and Performance Standards (HCPS) has been developed for statewide use by the DOE. It took years to develop HCPS, and then when it was completed, it was found to be unworkable. It took more time to overhaul HCPS to create version 2. HCPS is now in its third version, and it is 15 years later.

If it could be guaranteed that the statewide Board of Regents would come up with relevant and usable standards in a timely manner, I would agree with you. However, experience with the current statewide system indicates otherwise. Unworkable standards have the potential to confuse the proposed independent school districts by leaving them without objectives. Furthermore, districts should formulate their own standards because that process, if managed properly, can help to unify each district by creating common understandings and facilitate implementation.

[Peter Kay]

I've been extraordinarily busy the past week and have not had time to take a peek at this forum until tonight and I must say the dialog has been incredibly impressive. While I admit that I lack the institutional knowledge to properly judge the soundness of your ideas, the dialog is exemplary.

Jimmy, Dan L, Al, jk, and everyone else participating: you folks absolutely rock and have added considerable equity to our brand. Mahalo Nui!

You've driven me to enable the wiki function of this site so that you can actually make direct edits to the Constitution, ala wikipedia. I'll keep you all posted.

Excellent! Keep it up! At this rate we'll have concluded a comprehensive ConCon before the physical event ever gets started.

[jk]

For the sake of discussion, I’d like to offer my vision for reorganizing public education in Hawaii. I admit it is somewhat blurry in parts, so I’m sure it can be improved. Suggestions are welcomed. The reorganization is based on the following:

1. Research shows that smaller independent districts provide better education.
2. Research shows that maximum economies of scale are achieved with 1,000 students in a district, and larger districts don't achieve additional economies of scale.
3. The financing of public education should continue to be done on a statewide basis in order to ensure fairness.
4. Management functions should be pushed down to the lowest possible level in order to ensure that they will be done in ways that are most sensitive to the needs of students.
5. Competition in public education should be increased to motivate improvement.

Here goes:

Each high school complex (a high school and intermediate and elementary feeder schools) would be an independent school district with its own elected school board. Each board would have the authority to set educational policy, allocate funds received from the legislature, and negotiate with unions. (There are approximately 40 high school complexes in Hawaii.)

Charter schools would continue to be independent, each with its own board. A new charter school agency, appointed by the Governor, would be created that would have the power to grant charters, assess the quality of education at each charter school, and retract charters.

Vouchers would be an option for parents who want their children to be educated at private schools. Any voucher would constitute a contract between the State and the private school accepting the voucher. The voucher contract would prohibit the private school from offering any religious training to the student, with the exceptions of teaching about the role of religion in a broad historical context and comparative religion courses. The voucher contract would also prohibit the private school from requiring any additional tuition from the student.

(The details of the financing of public education are the haziest parts. The legislature funds operations and capital improvements separately. Capital improvements apply only to public school facilities and not charter schools or private schools.)

The Legislature would fund the operations for public education in a lump sum. That lump sum would be distributed through a per student formula developed by another new agency appointed by the Governor. The formula would consider the characteristics of the student. For example, more money would be allocated for a non-English speaking student or a disabled student.

That formula would be used to distribute funds to the various districts. The formula would contain an additional factor to determine funding for charter schools and vouchers.

This reorganization would mean that the statewide Board of Education would be dissolved, along with the central office and much of the bureaucracy of the Department of Education (DOE). The financial management system of the DOE is so obsolete, by the way, that the DOE does not even know how much it spends on the bureaucracy. However, when the DOE’s budget was about $2 billion (it’s about $2.5 billion now), it estimated its overhead administrative costs to be about 6%. Maybe 6% doesn’t seem like a lot, but in dollars that would have been $120 million. Of course, some of the administrative overhead functions are necessary. But many are not. All of the money previously allocated to perpetuating the bureaucracy would go to the various independent school districts, and each would be able to decide which functions to keep and which to discard.

There are a lot of possible objections to the reorganization, including the following:

1. Unions won’t like it because they would have to bargain with 40 or so districts instead of just one.
2. DOE bureaucrats won’t like it because many of them would be laid off.
3. Board of Education members won’t like it because they would be stripped of their power and status.
4. The Legislature won’t like it because they won’t be able to micro manage the public schools.
5. Providing vouchers to the approximately 40,000 students who are now attending private schools would cost hundreds of millions of dollars.

And there is only one reason to like the reorganization – better education for Hawaii’s children.

[Al Beeman]

Hi Jimmy,

I see the "Board of Regents" much like the Board of Regents in New York State. They set standards of what is to be studied and what study is needed to get a degree, that is all, the Regents are not a school board. I think they should not all be educators but biased towards the marketplace that students are headed into when they graduate.

I think each parent and each taxpayer needs to know how their children's schools are doing compared to other schools in Hawaii, to schools in other top performing states and key countries outside the US. We (the US) seem to have a slipping education system below the college level. I do not trust the statistics provided by No Child Left Behind and I suspect that system will be radically altered when the Bush Administration leaves office.

My point is that schools should be funded directly by the State to a local entity (not thru the useless centralized DOE) at whatever the fair rate per child would be. Counties should be allowed to organize their schools however their taxpayers and parents want. One school board per island, or all the way down to a school board for each community but a school board gets full control and full financial responsibility for the most cost-effective use of the funds provided by the State. School boards should be elected by the taxpayers in their area, no appointments, with recalls allowed. It is our kids and our money and our facilities and our teachers/administrators so the success or continued failure needs to be directly owned by us as well.

I actually think that most teachers and most unions would love to negotiate locally with people who actually care rather than continue to deal with the hopelessly bureaucratic and insensitive BOE.

[Al Beeman]

I see your point however I think a Board of Regents could serve an important state-wide quality control function making degrees and grade levels actually worth something. I think such a function is needed also because kids tend to move from one school to another around the state.

I suspect the HCPS process took so long BECAUSE the BOE controlled it.