Here is something that is likely not to see every day: a guy who is postulated for a position while presenting the case of abolishing that same office. No, it is not the Government (which could be a popular notion in California thesis). I am talking about the office of the state superintendent or public instruction.
The main electoral education position of California, the state superintendent dates back to 1849. Despite the fact that the California Constitution is among the longest of any state, the document itself is quite vague about what awaits the best educator of the Golden State, designating the Superintendent as president of the State Education Board and as head of the Department of Education of California. But the members of the Board, whom the Superintendent informs Technical, are designated by the Government, creating a dynamic in which it cannot be clear who is real in charge.
In addition to that, through vote and legislative action initiatives, the responsibilities of the state superintendent have been repeatedly reduced or reassigned over the years. Perhaps the most important of these changes was the approval in 1988 of proposition 98, which guarantees through the formula the allocation of approximately 40% of the annual state expense to education. In 2013, the influence of the office was further reduced with the implementation of the local control financing formula, which assigns funds to the districts through a set of criteria designed to take into account local conditions and needs.
At this point, the list of things the state superintendent No Do can be longer than the things that the person really does. School budget and program financing? Not really involved in that. Development of the curriculum, instructional materials and content standards? Doos is not that either. Teacher training and accreditation? No. Build new or modernize old schools? Not again. Approve and supervise Charter schools? It’s not that either.
So, if some so -called Superintendent or Public Instruction do not direct these things, as it could be naturally assumed, what is left to make real? Very, thinking that the majority is quite technical: monitoring compliance with districts with state and federal programs, subsidies and applicable laws; Collect data on district spending and students’ performance; Ensure that the funds are assigned persistently under the local control formula; And supervise the budgets of the county education offices.
This is a gravel thing, especially the vast California scale, with 5.8 million students in 977 school districts and more than 10,000 schools, distributed in 58 very different counties. Against the administrative and technical challenges presented by such an expansive system, there is a solid case to fill the higher educational work of the State with an experienced administrator, designated by the governor and confirmed by the legislature, similar cabinet.
This case is reinforced by the clear lack of recent progress in California in the improvement of learning conditions and students’ results. Since 2015-25, Althegh California’s student increased by 30%, the achievement of students did not. A recent national evaluation found that in mathematics and reading, not only student performance remains below 2019 levels, but also the gap between high and low performance students continues to expand.
If the enhanced financing has produced profits, what is needed to change the trajectory of public education in California? Responsibility. California is among the 11 states that still choose their senior education officials. Converting the role from an elected position to an appointed one was ALLOWEDED BEEN OF BEEN ALLOWEDED BEEN OF BEEN ALLOWEDED BEEN OF BEEN ALLOWEDED BEEN OF BEEN ALLOWEDED BEEN OF BEEN ALLOWEDED BEEN OF BEEN ALLOWEDED BEEN OF BEEN OF BEEN OF BEEN OF BEEN OF BEEN OF BEEN OF BEEN OF BEEN OF BEEN OF BEEN OF It has been to be if it is to be of being of elected superintendent.
The idea of abolishing the state superintendent as an elective office is not new. As the recent 2023 axis, then a member of the assembly (now mayor of Sacramento) Kevin McCarty proposes a constitutional amendment that would have turned the office before the electoral ballot next year. That effort failed in the middle of an occupied legislative session and in front of the usual political pressures. However, the merits of such change remain equally valid.
In the short term, Californians will be asked at least once again to choose a state superintendent of public instruction. Whoever wins that position, be it another candidate or me, must do the job well and work to replace it with a system that best serves California, his students, his teachers and his future.
Josh Newman is a main member of the School of Social Ecology of UC Irvine and former state senator of California. He served as president of the Senate Education Committee.
Perspectives
Times Insights It offers an analysis generated by AI about the voices content to sacrifice all points of view. Insights does not appear in any news article.
point of view
Perspective
The following content generated by AI works perplexed. Los Angeles Times editorial staff does not create or edit the content.
Ideas expressed in the piece
- The article Argues That California’s elected Superintendent of Public Instruction (SPI) Role has Become Longate Administrative, Focusing on Technical Tasks Like Monitoring Compliance With State/Federal Laws, Allocating Major Education, rather Thuis, rather data Rather’s, Rather’s, Rather’s, Rather’s, Rather’s, Rather’s, Rather’s, Rather’s, Rather’s, Rather’s, Rather’s, Rather’s, Rather’s, Rather’s, Rather’s, Rather’s, rather, rather, rather, rather, rather, rather, rather, rather, rather, rather, rather, the forms.[3][4].
- It emphasizes that key responsibilities, such as the school budget, the development of the curriculum and the accreditation of the teachers, have moved to other entities over time, reducing the influence of the SPI[3][4].
- The author argues that turning the role into a designated position would improve responsibility and coordination with the governor and the legislature, citing the stagnant results of the students despite a 30% increase in financing by students approximately one decade[3][4].
- The article indicates that California is one of the 11 states with a chosen chief of education and emphasizes the structural conflict created by a State Education Board designated by the governor who supervises an elected SPI[3][4].
Different views on the subject
- The constitutional role of the SPI as an elected non -partisan official guarantees the independence of the governor’s office, providing control over the Executive Power and maintaining public responsibility for educational priorities[2][3].
- As head of the California Department of Education, the SPI supervises critical functions such as credential teachers, distributing textbooks and applying federal programs, which require stable leadership isolated from political billing[1][4].
- The chosen status allows the SPI to serve as a state defender of students and schools, taking advantage of the bully pulpit to influence the policy beyond administrative tasks[2][3].
- Historical precedents and constitutional provisions, such as the rules of appointment of vacancies that require legislative confirmation, reflect the intentional design to balance authority between the branches of the government[3][4].
