According to the governor’s office, this act “will allow local school systems the opportunity to implement innovative strategies currently restricted by state law and policies.”
Although this approach fits nicely into the GOP strategy of blaming over-regulation for so many of our woes, the idea is both attractive and, at the same time, lacking in justification and specificity.
First, the attractive part.
Who can disagree with the notion that local school boards should have the flexibility to, as the governor’s press release stated, “implement innovative strategies to best meet the needs of their students”?
However, this sweeping solution does not identify the “strategies currently restricted by state law and policies.” What are these strategies? Why are they restricted? In most cases, restrictions are in place for a reason. What is the justification for restrictions being there and how would removing them lead to better learning?
House Speaker Mike Hubbard, R-Auburn, has told the Associated Press that, for example, schools might use this flexibility to alter their operating hours or pay for computers with money reserved for textbooks.
Those options could be valuable for certain schools. Yet, Alabamians deserve to know more of these details.
In return for being allowed to circumvent current restrictions, schools would “agree to greater accountability for student achievement,” leaving open the question of how this accountability will be measured. For example, is this another way to factor teacher performance into the evaluation process?
The press release assures Alabamians that innovations allowed would “not conflict with state accountability standards and assessments,” but it suggests the possibility that changes in the standards and assessments could be among the innovations a school system might be allowed to implement. Would that be possible?
In short, when this legislation goes before committees, hard questions need to be asked and clear answers need to be given.
As we said, the devil is in the details.
