California is about to overhaul the way it runs K-12 schools. Will it fix a fragmented system?

California is on the brink of a total overhaul in the way it governs K-12 schools, but whether those changes actually happen or fade into irrelevance will come down to one person: the next governor.

“We used to ask, who’s in charge here? It was everybody and nobody,” said Michael Kirst, former head of the State Board of Education. “Now we know. It’s the governor. That’s a total sea change – I never thought I’d live to see it.”

In January, Gov. Gavin Newsom proposed a realignment of the education governance structure, which for more than a century had been fragmented between the state superintendent of public instruction, State Board of Education, governor’s office, the Legislature, local school boards and a dozen other entities. That system was so diffuse, according to the think tank Policy Analysis for California Education, that policies were rarely implemented evenly and it was easy to blame someone else when things went wrong.

Newsom’s proposal, Assembly Bill 181, passed overwhelmingly in July. It calls for a new governor-appointed education commissioner, who will oversee the California Department of Education and ensure that policies set in Sacramento are enacted in classrooms. It also strips most duties from the state superintendent, a voter-elected position that will soon have few job responsibilities besides championing various education policies.

The idea is that one person – the governor – will be in charge. Most other states, particularly those with high test scores like Mississippi and Massachusetts, have a similar system.

But that alone won’t fix California’s convoluted K-12 governance, according to researchers Heather Hough and Jason Willis, who recently published a report through a state agency called the California Collaborative for Educational Excellence on what the state needs to do next. 

The new education commissioner needs to simplify and clearly communicate goals for schools, provide stricter oversight and offer more direct assistance for struggling schools. Basically, the state needs to take more responsibility for improving student outcomes, Hough said.

“Right now, if a district is performing badly, there’s not a lot of clarity about what should happen,” said Hough, an education policy consultant. “The state has to be able to step in.”

For example, if a school has persistently low scores on standardized tests, the education commissioner should intervene, Hough said. That could mean bringing in experts, tutors or other resources, or removing barriers. If all else fails, the commissioner should have the power to take drastic action such as replacing the superintendent, she said.

So far, California’s gubernatorial candidates have offered few hints about their plans for education commissioner or K-12 schools generally. 

Xavier Becerra, a former state attorney general and cabinet member under President Joe Biden, said in a recent televised debate that he thinks schools are mired in too much bureaucracy, and schools should hold back students who are failing. Steve Hilton, a former Fox TV commentator, said in his platform he favors education savings accounts that would allow parents to use public funds to pay for private school.

Neither campaign responded to requests for more information.

Pressure on new education commissioner

The next governor will name an education commissioner after they take office Jan. 4, and there won’t be much down time. By early June, the commissioner must produce a draft report for the Legislature on how he or she plans to reshape the system. A final report is due in the fall.

Among the commissioner’s priorities should be strengthening – and expanding – the Department of Education so there’s more oversight and assistance for schools, said Marshall Tuck, executive director of the advocacy group EdVoice.

“We will not have a state that is effectively educating all students unless we have a highly effective state Department of Education,” said Tuck, who ran for state superintendent in 2014 and 2018. “It’s just not possible. And it’s something we have not had.”

Overall, he’s hopeful that the new education commissioner and governor will have the political clout to persuade all the major players in education policy, including the powerful California Teachers Association, to support changes in governance. Previously, the teachers union had opposed Newsom’s plan because its members thought it shifted too much power away from voters and toward the governor. In the past, the teachers union spent heavily on superintendent candidates – including those running against Tuck. 

“This is a real opportunity to change things,” Tuck said. “But it’s very, very important that the governor makes this a top priority and appoints the right person.”

California Teachers Association President David Goldberg said his organization is looking forward to working with the new commissioner, regardless of the union’s past opposition to the idea. 

“We’re hoping for an ally,” Goldberg said, “someone who will advocate for the same things we do and elevate the voices of families and teachers.”

‘An extraordinary opportunity’

In Humboldt County, Superintendent Michael Davies-Hughes is optimistic about the possibility for positive change, and how it could bring about better outcomes for students. A more streamlined system, with a stronger state Department of Education, could reduce the paperwork burden for local schools. That, he said, would give teachers and administrators more time to help students in the classroom.

“Educators spend too much time navigating the bureaucracy. If we can remove those barriers, students will benefit,” said Davies-Hughes, who’s the incoming head of California County Superintendents.

School staff often spend hours a week filling out state-mandated paperwork. For instance, every three years school districts are supposed to make a report describing their finances and goals. One from a small district could top 100 pages. Los Angeles Unified’s is nearly 800 pages. The reports are supposed to be updated regularly.

The new commissioner will have a difficult job balancing policy in Sacramento with the needs of local school districts, Davies-Hughes said. The commissioner will also have to take risks and be willing to stand up to powerful political interests, if necessary.

“This person will have to break through a system that’s been in place for decades,” he said. “Otherwise the current problems will just be exacerbated.”

El Dorado County Superintendent Ed Manansala said that the new commissioner’s role will be important, but it’s only the start. Larger changes in governance could have a long-lasting, beneficial impact on schools and students.

“It’s an extraordinary opportunity to rethink how the whole system works,” Manansala said. “But we need to be able to speak openly about what’s working and what isn’t, and collaborate to create a more focused and coherent system.”

Kirst was an architect of the Local Control Funding Formula, which in the early 2010s shifted the bulk of budget decisions from the state to local school boards. Even though the new structure calls for more power concentrated at the state level, Kirst feels it’s the right path forward.

“I don’t think it affects local control. It adds efficiency,” said Kirst, who’s an emeritus education professor at Stanford. “It’ll actually improve local control because it gives teachers and schools clearer guidance.”