California school principals object to Newsom’s K-12 plan

from Carolyn JonesCalMatters

This story was originally published by CalMatters. Sign up for their newsletters.

State Superintendent of Public Instruction Tony Thurmond said he was blindsided by Governor Gavin Newsom’s proposal Thursday to limit the chief’s duties, and he doesn’t agree with that, though it’s unclear what he can do to stop it.

“Tony Thurmond is proud and grateful to work with Governor Newsom. Both are champions of public education,” said Elizabeth Sanders, spokeswoman for the California Department of Education, which Thurmond heads. Sanders spoke for the chief.

“Unfortunately, on this particular issue, they disagree.”

In his State of the State address Thursday, Newsom proposed transfer of supervision of the Department of Education, a state agency with 2,000 employees, from the superintendent to the State Board of Education. The move would concentrate more power on K-12 schools with the governor appointing the school board.

The superintendent will remain an elected position, but with reduced and less defined duties.

Reference to a Report for December of California Education Policy Analysis, Newsom’s goal is to simplify California’s complex K-12 school governance system. Currently, education leadership comes from the governor, the legislature, the State Board of Education, the superintendent, and the Department of Education — all of whom may or may not share the same vision of how best to run schools and teach children. At the local level, school boards and county offices of education also have a lot of power over budgets and day-to-day school operations.

The result of the multi-headed leadership structure is that schools often do not know which policies to follow, according to the PACE report. The guidelines can be contradictory, redundant or simply inconsistent, the researchers found.

Multiple education advocacy groups supported Newsom’s proposal, saying it would clarify a system that has been confusing and ineffective for a century. California is one of the few states with such a model of education management.

“Unnecessary Interruption”

Thurmond’s staff had a few hints that there might be an announcement, but were otherwise caught off guard by Newsom’s proposal, Sanders said. They also did not talk to the PACE researchers about their report.

Thurmond questions the point of the change, Sanders said.

“It’s unclear how this would benefit students and families,” Sanders said. “This is an unnecessary disruption. … We need to stay focused on creating outcomes for students.”

If the governor really wants to help schools, he needs to pour more money into K-12 education. The Department of Education has been underfunded for years, she noted, and schools could use more funds for initiatives such as tutoring and compulsory kindergarten.

John Affeldt, managing attorney at Public Advocates, a nonprofit law firm focused on education, also questioned the value of Newsom’s proposal. It would take power away from voters and give it to the governor, which might be great if the governor supports public education, but could backfire if the governor doesn’t, he said.

“It might improve the governance structure a bit, but I’m not sure it’s worth the trade-off,” Affeldt said. “It could be a lot of political theater for a little real change.”

This article was originally published on CalMatters and is republished under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-No Derivatives license.