
                         Roanoke Times
                 Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.

DATE: SUNDAY, September 4, 1994                   TAG: 9409070024
SECTION: EDITORIAL                    PAGE: D-2   EDITION: METRO 
SOURCE: 
DATELINE:                                 LENGTH: Medium

SCHOOL PROPOSALS: GOOD, BAD, UGLY

UNLIKE the basically sound recommendations of his Commission on Parole Abolition and Sentencing Reform (perhaps leaving aside cost estimates), the preliminary report of Gov. George Allen's education-reform "strike force" is a mixed bag of tricks.

It contains some good ideas, and potentially costly gimmicks. It also features one downright dangerous stunt: a gubernatorial power grab that would violate conservative wisdom and could hasten the decline of Virginia's once-proud system of higher education.

Among the good ideas: a longer school day and school year. Assuming the extra hours are spent in worthwhile fashion, this is one way toward a more globally competitive workforce.

Also a good idea: lengthening the three-year probationary period before public-school teachers win continuing contracts. Greater flexibility in deploying educators would be a good thing, assuming pay scales are high enough to attract and retain good teachers.

The value of some cost-savings recommendations are not as clear-cut as, say, merging the Schools for the Deaf and Blind in Staunton and in Hampton. Limiting the state's already limited support of non-state-owned museums (for example, the Science Museum of Western Virginia in Roanoke) could cost more in lost educational opportunities for Virginians than it would save in dollars. To its credit, the panel acknowledged that its cost-savings proposals would still leave public education with "significant funding needs."

One costly gimmick would be tuition tax credits for parents who choose private schools for their children. This is an unjustified giveaway, of doubtful constitutionality and propriety, and a danger not only to the health of public education but to the integrity of private schools.

Another gimmick: demanding that the federal government reimburse Virginia for the costs of educating 18,000 illegal aliens. Where might that end? Would the feds accede to Virginia's demand, then bill the commonwealth for state taxes collected on immigrants' income made possible by their federally reimbursed educations?

A truly terrible proposal is to reduce the State Council of Higher Education to an advisory body, transfer its regulatory powers to the office of the governor's secretary of education, and have the governor appoint the council's director.

The current system - with the council coordinating but not controlling the state's colleges and universities, and reporting to both the administration and the legislature - has evolved as a balanced means of curtailing unneeded duplication while maintaining a degree of competitive, entrepreneurial autonomy for each institution.

The panel's proposal would concentrate power in the executive branch at the expense of the legislative. It would add a layer of gubernatorially controlled central bureaucracy. It would encourage micromanagement from Richmond of Virginia's colleges and universities, and a one-size-fits-all approach to those institutions' financial and educational challenges.

Unlike parole reform, we recall none of that as part of the mandate for which Allen was elected.

by CNB