Utah should streamline educational governance

By John Florez
Published: Monday, March 17, 2008 12:23 a.m. MDT
E-MAIL | PRINT | FONT + - 
Andy Grove, former chairman of Intel, said it well, "If you are not paranoid, you are out of business." That was his advice to business leaders who wanted to stay competitive when massive change occurs. It's advice our state elected leaders would do well to consider as they wrestle with trying to fix an archaic educational system.

It's advice successful companies have taken in restructuring their organizations to meet the needs of today's era of globalization. They quickly downsized, resized and reinvented themselves. They became lean, high-performance organizations that transformed their workplace from one rewarding loyalty and driven by process to one that is market driven.

Utah state lawmakers now find themselves frustrated in trying to prepare students with a world-class education while dealing with a bloated education governance structure. It is burdened with layers of bureaucracies, so responsibility is diffused and the status quo protected by people in the system, the "stakeholders" — state and local school boards, bureaucrats and their protectors. Missing are the parents and taxpayers, the real "stakeholders."

State and local school board members are quick to call for local control but abdicate controversial decisions to lawmakers; yet, average citizens can't name their school board representative. And, when parents try to get an answer at a school board meeting, they are given two minutes and then dismissed without ever receiving an answer. Parents, however, are not being singled out because lawmakers are given the same treatment.

Story continues below
The challenge lawmakers have in reforming education is to do what today's successful businesses had to do, streamline their organizations so they can meet the current market demands and build in flexibility to respond to an unknown future. The current system sets up the applicable parties for failure and conflict, where responsibility is diffused among the system so that no one can be held accountable for results. Furthermore, dedicated administrators have to answer to many bosses who often demand or give different directions. Change will require eliminating or redefining the role of school boards and defining who is responsible for assuring the legislative intent of policies is carried out.

Under the state Constitution, the State Board of Education is responsible for supervision of our public education, and the Legislature is responsible for the composition of the board and determining the state's education policy. Lawmakers, serious about renewing our educational system for the 21st century, should consider a streamlined, leaner and more responsive system, as recommended by the New Skills Commission (www.skillscommission.org), that might include the following: A three-member state school board selected jointly by the governor and the Legislature; schools operated by parents and teachers as limited-liability corporations; limiting local school boards' role to letting out and monitoring contracts; and assigning the state board to be responsible for recruiting, hiring and certifying teachers and establishing salary schedules for effective teachers and those working in shortage fields. Furthermore, the state board would be responsible for establishing a board of examiners that would create an exam on core subjects that could be given to students at the 10th grade, and students who score well enough would be guaranteed the right to go to college.

Read all 12 comments

Recent comments

I know a lot of people with supposed credentials that haven't...

re Credentials? | 11:29 a.m. | March 17, 2008 at 9:15 p.m.

Most people became aware that something was wrong with math education...

Utah Math Education Hurting | March 17, 2008 at 9:14 p.m.

What are Mr. Florez's credentials? He writes 90% of the time...

Credentials? | March 17, 2008 at 11:29 a.m.