State education officials give only token attention

By John Florez
Published: Sunday, April 17, 2005 7:37 p.m. MDT
E-MAIL | PRINT | FONT + - 
The No Child Left Behind legislation reminds me of our first apartment in Washington. It was a high-rise, and when things needed fixing we were to call the front office, where we were told they would "put it in the book." After several complaints and two months without results, I asked why we got no response and the answer was, "I don't know, we just put it in the book."

All this Washington posturing about "accountability" is tantamount to "put it in the book," and this administration has made it a fine art when it comes to demonstrating their commitment to minorities. They are now requiring states to "aggregate" minorities, where there are 10 or more minority students in a school, so they can determine if they are being underserved. I don't understand why the state is arguing over 10 and holding out for 40. The Utah State Office of Education will just put it in the "data warehouse" anyway, with all the other reports schools have to prepare, where it will never see the light of day. And therein lies the problem.

The one benefit of the NCLB regulations is that they have again forced states to make sure minorities are given the same opportunity as other students. The state's resistance to generating reports by race speaks volumes of its commitment to equal opportunity. Under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act, states are already required to assure nondiscrimination in all programs and activities. The problem is that the State Board of Education, which has the responsibility for assuring compliance with all federal laws, seems to give only token attention to carrying out the intent of those laws.

Story continues below
President Reagan created the "New Federalism." That called for block granting programs to the states and requiring state government to designate a state entity to monitor compliance. He believed in the integrity of state officials to carry out their responsibilities. Had the states been doing so, it may well be that the federal government would not have had to remind the states that they are responsible for making sure that all students are receiving a quality education.

A basic principle of management is "that which gets monitored gets done." Using that standard, the Board of Education gets a failing grade. Information should be used to manage, not to justify, its existence as the state board has done.

Any good manager would want to know if there are problems in the delivery of services to customers. Yet, the Board of Education seems to use data only to justify to legislators the need for more money, instead of what it's supposed to deliver. Matter of fact, one of the board's stated goals is to get more money, and one of the great accomplishments in its annual report is the creation of the "data warehouse." I wonder how many stockholders in a private corporation would consider that a success.

Comments

You can be the first to comment on this story.