Put Some Meat Back on Davis’ School Bills

Teddy Roosevelt said that leadership was about the ability to speak softly and carry a big stick. But as Gray Davis prepares to sign his education reform package into law, it appears that the new governor has opted to yell as loudly as possible and carry a feather duster.

Throughout his campaign and his first months in office, Davis has stressed increased accountability as the key to educational improvement. But while promising newly strengthened requirements for students, teachers and administrators, Davis’ proposal is notable mainly for its tough-sounding rhetoric, while failing to supply the enforcement mechanisms to actually improve California’s schools.

Davis’ original reform package represented incremental progress toward higher standards for student achievement. Though his proposed legislation was not overly ambitious, the new governor deserved credit for focusing attention on the need for accountability and for sending a message to students that they would be required to work toward higher achievement and better results.

But Davis’ proposals have been systematically weakened by the education unions and their allies in the Legislature. What was once a package of well-meaning, albeit limited improvements, has been reduced to an empty vessel that allows schools and teachers to escape with no additional requirements for higher levels of accountability or performance.

None of Davis’ reforms received more attention than his call for a mandatory graduation test for high school seniors. The exam dovetails with the 10 required annual achievement tests in grades 2-11 that former Gov. Wilson pushed into law, and sends a strong signal to students and their prospective employers that a diploma actually means something.

But Democrats in the Legislature quickly stripped the graduation exam of its significance, creating exceptions that exempted large numbers of students. Among those no longer required to pass the exam are students with poor test-taking skills, so it is entirely possible that only those students who are capable of passing the test would be required to take it.

Davis also had wanted to rank the public schools in order of academic accomplishment, providing information to parents, community leaders and other interested parties as to the ability of each school to educate its students. But this bill also was stripped of its original intent, first by watering down the academic data with socioeconomic information, then by eliminating the requirement that schools show evidence of progress toward meeting state standards.

Finally, the rankings themselves were diluted. Instead of being classified on an individual basis, schools will be ranked in groups from the top 10th to the bottom 10th percentile. Unions say that this will remove the stigma for a school that receives a poor ranking, thereby undermining Davis’ hope that public scrutiny would lead to increased accountability and motivation for improvement.

Another proposed Davis reform, that teachers should be judged not by their students’ academic progress, but by the subjective observation of fellow teachers, is a bad idea that has been made worse. In an environment in which the teachers’ unions wield disproportionate influence over the fate of any reform effort, presenting them with the ability to reward or punish colleagues gives those union leaders veto power over the career of any teacher who challenges the status quo.

But to protect its members from even the slightest scrutiny, the unions have weakened this questionable proposal as well. Schools would no longer be required to use the state money for the review of veteran teachers, but could be diverted into unrelated training programs as well. And on the off-chance that an inadequate teacher might be somehow identified through this process, nowhere in the legislation has Davis outlined the steps that might actually remove a bad teacher from the classroom.

Davis has scheduled a bill signing ceremony for this week, But if the governor were truly serious about improving California’s schools, he would use this media event to veto the bills, and send them back to the Legislature with the demand that they be strengthened with the necessary steps to improve accountability and performance.

Politicians regularly tell the story of a student who receives a diploma that he is unable to read. But by signing these bills into law, Davis will allow his education reform to become a similar testament to the priority of form over substance.