One more time

At the risk of being redundant, I'd like to make my last contribution to this discussion a plea that I've made before.  

Three tough-minded structural changes at the heart of the plan must not be compromised.  These are what will transform California's K-12 schools, much as the earlier master plan transformed higher education.  

First, the plan advocates "Opportunity to Learn Standards" that specify what government agencies-the state and school districts-must provide all schools.  These standards spell out the educational essentials that many California students now lack: a qualified teacher, a curriculum aligned with the state's standards, enough texts and materials for both classroom use and homework, clean and safe learning environments and so forth.  It's simply unthinkable that California doesn't have such standards already. 

Second, the master plan restructures the accountability system to make the adults in the system-from the governor on down-answerable to children and communities, rather than vice versa.  The performance of these adults would be measured and reported each year in an "Opportunity to Learn Index" that would complement the state's Academic Performance Index, which measures student performance at each school.  Rather than judging students (and their schools) only by the number of correct answers students "bubble in" on standardized tests, students' learning will be linked to what they had a chance to learn-what their teachers taught, and under what conditions their learning took place.  The independently elected state superintendent would become the accountability watchdog, providing the public with the information it needs to hold state agencies, school districts, and schools accountable for providing what teachers and students need to teach and learn.  What's not now clear in the plan and deserves more elaboration are ways in which parents and communities can act when the system fails.  

Third, the new master plan replaces an impossibly irrational education finance structure with a model that begins with the actual costs of high quality schooling.  In place of over 70 categorically funded programs, a "California Quality Education Model" would spell out the critical components of an education based upon rigorous state standards and the funding needed to provide a quality education to every student.  This model won't end the politicking over each year's education budget; however, it would allow legislators to focus more on the big picture of quality education rather than giving exclusive and myopic attention to individual programs.