Get News on your cell
First, kill off the school boards
10:34 AM Wed, Jan 16, 2008 | Permalink
E-mail News tips
 |
 |
|
April 2008
Categories
Documents dallasnews.com
News Blogs |
There’s an interesting article in the Jan/Feb issue of The Atlantic. The headline is “First, Kill All the School Boards.” The author says this nation’s obsession with local control of schools is a primary reason why our kids appear to be losers when it comes to global competition. His argument is a bit simplistic, at times, but there was one point in the article where he was talking about urban boards, and I paused and said, “That's DISD.” The money quote: “Board members routinely spend their time on minor matters, from mid-level personnel decisions to bus routes. … Because of ‘Progressive-area’ reforms meant to get boards out of ‘politics,’ most urban school districts are independent, beyond the reach of mayors and city councils. Usually elected in off-year races that few people vote in or even notice, school boards are, in effect, accountable to no one.” It was the first sentence of that paragraph that caught my attention (although the latter half has some merit, too) because as I was reading it, WFAA’s 10 o’clock news presented a piece on the Skyline magnet dust-up. Part of their footage was of trustee Ron Price urging angry parents to contact Superintendent Hinojosa. Price then said "and tell him I asked you to call him tomorrow.” Not to diminish the Skyline issue, but is it, to coin a phrase, "trustee-worthy"? |
|
|
|
|
|
Comments
Posted by Jean Pierre @ 12:16 PM Wed, Jan 16, 2008
The argument for getting rid of boards of education has merit. However, urban school districts require oversight. Voters appear to have given up that responsibility, so it leaves the politicians to take up that role. Having the district report to the mayor may not be the answer. But I agree we need to think of a better idea.
Posted by park @ 1:09 PM Wed, Jan 16, 2008
By removing the school board, the last vestige of the people's voice in the educational system is gone. The myth of bringing in a strong mayor to run the system is just that--a myth. Because of a reform movement in '95 in Texas, the board has little control over the superintendent other than to fire him. That leaves essentially no one accountable to the voters.
Try this link to look at what superintendents from the Broad program are doing: www.peytonwolcott.com
The evidence points to the need for more citizen oversight, not less.
Posted by Kent Fischer @ 1:30 PM Wed, Jan 16, 2008
Interesting that "park" mentions the Broad program -- two of Broad's big-name districts, Boston and NYC have both been taken over recently by mayors. In fact, I was talking just yesterday with a top district official who commented that Boston and NYC are two districts Dallas is modeling itself after.
Posted by Bill Betzen @ 8:06 PM Wed, Jan 16, 2008
Look at the mechanics of "citizen oversight." The current system involves a very tiny minority of active citizens. The general public knows next to nothing about the events in the DISD Board. If the mayor were more directly responsible, at least they would want things to go well in DISD because it could lead to them loosing an election. The mayor would be watching the Board and DISD. Boston and NYC may have it right!
Posted by jean Pierre @ 8:52 AM Thu, Jan 17, 2008
Kent makes an excellent point for having the school district under a mayor and his or her education czar. Another idea would be a state office whose only job would be oversight over school districts. Having board trustees is a tired idea and their meetings take a long time and waste a lot of administration time. Let's think of innovative solutions. We're in the 21st century now.
Posted by Dr. Steve @ 9:21 AM Thu, Jan 17, 2008
So what makes Dallas mayors, dominated by recycled real estate developers, lawyers, and journalists, qualified to run a +/- 180,000 person public school district?
Posted by Kent Fischer @ 9:52 AM Thu, Jan 17, 2008
Lemme just make a quick comment here, because a couple of readers have messaged me to ask why I support eliminating DISD trustees. For the record, I'm not advocating that. The intent of this post was to call attention to an article arguing for a radical idea. And to point out the irony that, as I was reading that article, the nightly news featured a story that spoke to the question.
Posted by Dr. Steve @ 10:39 AM Thu, Jan 17, 2008
Mayoral/Council, or worse, state, control means more centalization. As Thomas "Tip" O'Neill said, "All politics is local." Let's keep it that way.
Posted by park @ 12:02 PM Thu, Jan 17, 2008
Who here would advocate removing the legislative and judicial branches of government on the national level so that we could have a stronger executive branch? Voter participation isn't that great for national elections either, but as citizens we understand concentrating power usually isn't the answer.
We need an actual townhall in Dallas where these issues can be discussed and debated as well as the virtual townhalls created by blog participation.
Posted by Lew Blackburn @ 4:44 PM Thu, Jan 17, 2008
This is interesting. Does anyone have an idea of a better system? As a current school board trustee, I welcome your suggestions.
Posted by Jean Pierre @ 9:54 PM Thu, Jan 17, 2008
Thanks for asking Trustee Blackburn. Boards have become too political. And once a month meetings take up too much time and can be long and unproductive. There is a better way, I'm sure.
One idea is to have something like the General Accounting Office to oversee the affairs of school districts. Every quarter or so, that office would audit the district and report on their findings.
The close scrutiny the districts get now are unnecessary.
Posted by Dr. Steve @ 8:43 AM Fri, Jan 18, 2008
Boards are meant to be political. Parents and taxpayers have a say. Trustees are accountable to them. That is representative democracy.
I read the article. The gist is that central (federal) planning is superior to local (school board) planning. Toward the conclusion it makes a tawdry comparison of public education to centrally planned retirement (social security) and health care, as though these are commendable models for education.
If one finds one's life more fulfilled and comfortable by having it planned by bureaucrats, as opposed to exercise of individual rights and responsibilities, perhaps one should consider availing him/herself of one of the few remaining Marxist paradises in the world, like Venezuela or Cuba. "As for me, give me liberty or give me death." Apologies to Patrick Henry.
Posted by park @ 10:00 AM Fri, Jan 18, 2008
Either the Board or the Superintendent in Dallas has already shrunk the voice of the people by limiting remarks by the public and holding meetings during the middle of the day. It seems they are allergic to their constituents.
Of course board meetings are political; they are an exercise in open government. I'm sure those parents from Skyline would really enjoy voicing their complaints about moving programs to the federal government.
Posted by William @ 11:51 PM Mon, Jan 21, 2008
Actually I'm not for killing everyone on the school board as much as just abolitioning the school board by firing everyone on it. But I'll have to give the idea more thought because it does sound creative. I will have to agree that the weirdos have gained control over the minds of our children.
Posted by 3GradMom @ 9:58 AM Tue, Jan 22, 2008
Would it be possible to discuss breaking the DISD into smaller districts making the representation closer to home. Perhaps Mr. Fischer would write about what measures would have to be taken to have more local control.
Posted by Diane Birdwell @ 7:19 PM Wed, Jan 23, 2008
This is all moot, since the same small group of rich North Dallas families and businessmen still control local politics in Dallas. They have for decades, and nobody is willing to tell the story. They move their invisible hand, and policies get made. They move it another way, and a program is cut.
The Board of Trustees of DISD rarely cares what the citizens think, because usually less than 4% of them voted in the last local election. They are dazzled by the old oligarchy. Until a true grassroots movement in this city rises up, nothing will change.
Posted by park @ 12:29 PM Sat, Jan 26, 2008
The story has been told extremely well by Royce Hanson in Civic Culture and Urban Change. He concludes by stating the Citizens Council, Scovell et al, the Breakfast Club are very interested in running the school district while the rest of us are engaged in consumerism, not active citizenship. All the attempts at removing the board and substituting a strong mayor are further moves to centralize power away from the grasp of interested parents or citizens, and yes, Hinojosa is very dazzled by the old oligarchy. I'll bet they even have his email address. Too bad parents and citizens are kept at arm's length from the emperor.