RE: Question 1: Who's in charge?

On governance

WHO IS IN CHARGE? Until 1976 the school districts were in charge. They had both a political and governing function. Then, the state took over the financing of schools. It was triggered by the Serrano-Priest court decison. Voters responded with proposition 13 in 1978: "Why endure high local taxes when all the money goes into one pot in Sacramento anyway?"  Voter passed prop 98 in 1988 to force the state to spend big portion of the Sacramento pot to education.  So, theoretically, the State Assembly and Senate are now in charge. In practice, however, this does not work.

PROBLEMS:

1) Professional issues became politicized: Phonics is Republican, Whole Language (WL) is Democratic.

 It reminds one of the late Soviet Union where some methods were condemned as "capitalistic bourgeois" methods. When party line changed, methods of teaching changed too.

2) The state legislature does not govern the schools directly but, being a law-making body, is trying to do it by providing incentives for the School Districts.

  The number of regulations and incentives ("Do this or you will lose money,  do only this with these funds..") has grown exponentially. Their main impact in classrom is requiring that more time be spend filling out forms and 'compliance' paperwork.  Filling in the expected answers on compliance papers does not really help new teachers, who are  are just beginning and can not always judge what is best for different children either. New teachers  in their education classes and are told, these days "Write what you must, but teach as you know  best." Such paperwork, along with the bureuacrats  to process it, has eaten up billions of dollars of educational funds.

   Good experienced teachers continue to use a mix of phonics and whole language  tools, as needed by individual children, and will keeping doing this no matter what Mr. Bush or Senator X will say, unless state installs full time observers in classrooms to enforce the party line.

   Some members of the public become apoplectic at this rebellion and blame all the failures of education on teachers not obeying the rules.  Other realize that it is the only sensible response of an intelligent well-educated person trying to get work done in the increasingly dysfunctional system.

   Meanwhile, some hope that  "accountabilty" and the state tests will create enough  fear to enforce what compliance paperwork  did not.  If the state will test the students on the minutiae of phonics, the teacher must teach it  whether the child actually needs it or not.  (Millions of adults read quite well  without being able to identify  a schwa sound.)

  District employees have became bureaucrats, managing the paperwork, interpreting the directives, scheduling training workshops on the latest jargon and regulations, developing "curriculum," etc.  Now that we have state standards, a state curriculum, couldn't we eliminate these district-level bureaucrats? Now that we have tests holding teachers "accountable" will we eliminate the compliance paperwork and workshops?  Place your bets!

  IS THERE A SOLUTION?  YES!

 A Modest  Proposal: 

 Abolish the current system of dual governance.

  Do not do it by fiat, for all schools at once.  Just allow every school which satisfies certain criteria (support of parents and faculty, diversity...) a chance to become a state charter school.  The consent of the district SHALL  NOT be required.

  In these state charter schools,the principal will have the right to hire and dismiss faculty, who will remain state employees as far as certification, benefits, and pensions are concerned. The principal and faculty will be responsible for meeting the state standards but the methods by which they do this will not be prescibed. All  money will go directly to school.  None will be directed to the district, as is presently done for charters. Decisions about how to spend it will be made at the school site as limited by law. Principal may contract with the districtor with local business, for services, such as maintenance and supplies. State inspectors and tests will hold each school and its principal accountable for meeting the state standards.

 Many districts will wither away. Some will mend their ways and start to provide real services to the schools. For the first time since 1974 there will be real accountabilty for the districts.

The State Department of Education will provide the legal shield for individual schools, so that routine issues will not be decided by the courts as it happens too often today, but by the administrative appeal process, while basic issues and goals will be set by the legislature.

  All sides on the ideological spectrum want the schools to improve.  This plan would recreate the control loop and allow local control of the means of achieving common goals set by the standards, aproved by the legislature.  The person who makes local choices, the principal, can then be held accountable for results of the choices.

 CONCLUSION:

 Prior to 1980 districts had a function. They were not designed for today's situation. Districts became bloated middle bureaucracy which does not govern, does not serve, the main product which is  an incredible amount of paperwork which does not mean anything. Main effect of making the formula for allocating money even more complex would further increase amount of that paperwork.

 If we abolish the dysfunctional school district layer, then sun will shine again over California schools.  County educational offices would take over certain functions which are listed in the recommendation 34.  In 15 years we could have a decent, functioning, public educational system.