TOPEKA — Andover school superintendent Brett White said a Kansas House bill laying the groundwork for damaging assaults on accreditation of Kansas public schools was based on the false assumption districts intentionally operated in violation of state rules, regulations or laws.
White said the bill introduced at request of Kansas Policy Institute, a conservative Wichita think tank founded by an executive at Koch Industries, ignored an elephant in the room — that the Kansas Legislature violated state law for a decade by not fully funding special education programs in public schools.
“The old cliche that people who live in glass houses should not throw stones is fitting as it relates to this legislation,” White said. “I would also submit that constituents are tired of the politicians’ attacks on educators and public education. I observed this frustration and disgust at a legislative coffee last spring in Augusta. Many people there were appalled and fed up with the way that politicians conduct business in Topeka.”
He said public schools serving about 500,000 students were best governed by the Kansas State Board of Education and locally elected school boards. House Bill 2612 was another example of “finger pointing and petty antics” of politicians and special interests dedicated to harming public schools, he said.
The Kansas Policy Institute’s renewed assault on public education, defended Monday by Republicans on the House K-12 Budget Committee, would allow organizations and individuals to formally allege noncompliance with laws, regulations or rules to set the stage for districts to be stripped of accreditation. The bill wouldn’t hold private schools to comparable accreditation standards.
‘Crisis point’
The House committee didn’t act on the bill, which generated opposition testimony from 79 people and praise from a lone witness — former Kansas House Speaker Mike O’Neal, who lobbies for Kansas Policy Institute at the Capitol.
O’Neal said intense reaction to the bill had the intended result, because KPI’s objective was to stir enough controversy for a candid discussion about shortcomings of public schools and districts across the state. Shallowness of the accreditation system was evident in the state Board of Education’s refusal to strip deficient districts of the credential, he said. If accreditation was to have meaning, he said, districts must be held accountable for lack of evidence of growth in student academic performance.
“If we’re going to have an accreditation requirement that satisfies the intent of the existing statute, we can no longer ignore its failure to stimulate and incentivize improvement in student performance and the quality of instruction,” he said. “Isn’t it time to rip the Band Aid off and come to grips with the fact that our accreditation system is broken and needs to be fixed?”
He said the status of public education in Kansas, borne out by scores on standardized tests, had reached a “crisis point” warranting intervention by the Legislature.
A broad collection of teachers, principals, superintendents and organizations representing interests of public schools denounced the legislation. Opposition testimony questioned the quest to create a process whereby any person or organization, including out-of-state special interest think tanks, could initiate challenges to a district’s accreditation. Once accreditation was severed, the bill would mandate the state Board of Education conduct an audit demonstrating compliance before accreditation was restored.
Marian Seacat, a music teacher in Bucklin, said school accreditation was more than a series of numbers, a conflict on how tax dollars should be spent or disagreement on how a report should be completed.
“Accreditation affects every student in a school district and should not be used as a … punishment based on the interpretation of a law,” Seacat said.
Just say no
Jim Karleskint, who lobbies for United School Administrators of Kansas, said the House legislation had the potential of non-accrediting every public school in Kansas. He said it was reasonable to assume accreditation of a school district could be lost due to an oversight.
“Allowing an individual to challenge whether or not a school district is in compliance of a state law or statute has the potential to allow a displeased patron to create an audit of the district on questionable grounds. Non-public schools are not given the same expectations,” he said.
Jane Oeser, principal of Central Plains Elementary in Holyrood, said accreditation should remain in hands of the state Department of Education. She said agency had the staff, skills, understanding and experience to work with schools and school districts on deficiencies.
She encouraged supporters of the House bill to put welfare of children first when working on education law.
