Nature of the Legislation

During the week of January 20, 1997, in his State of the State address, Governor David Beasley announced that he had created a commission of business leaders and educators to investigate academic standards for the next seven months. The commission was called PASS, which stands for Performance, Accountability and Standards for Schools.

Only a few weeks into the 1997 legislative session, key leaders in the accountability effort said that they did not expect any legislation to pass during 1997. However, in August of 1997, the panel of businesspeople and school officials offered the ambitious plan to let parents judge the quality of their children's education.

On Friday, September 6, 1997, Gov. David Beasley, in an unusual appearance before the State Board of Education, urged members to adopt a new set of specific academic standards for public school students. "What we have today is not acceptable," the Republican governor said. "We need to strengthen the entire school system." (The State, 09/11/97)

On November 17, 1997, Senators Nikki Setzler and John Courson prefiled legislation to improve teaching and learning in the state's public schools. The two were ex-officio members of the PASS Commission, created by Governor David Beasley to study improving education. Their legislation is respectful of PASS Commission recommendations, adhering to its plan by defining accountability. What is new about it?

Legislators are always trying to promote their ideas and their constituent’s ideas not only for the community’s sake but also for personal gain. Re-election is a very important factor. The only new aspect about this legislation is that Governor Beasly made the initial suggestion by forming the PASS committee. South Carolina’s government will continue to concentrate on morals and values versus education. The bills will most likely become buried in paperwork and die in each committee. What kind of issues does it raise for local school districts in South Carolina?

Well, many exist but listed in the following excerpts appear to be the most influential:

1) A fiscal impact on the local school districts would result from the requirement to mail report cards to parents indicating the school's performance and advertise results in a local newspaper. 2) The State Department of Education, the State Board of Education, and the school districts and schools shall work collaboratively with the Office of Research and Development to provide information needed to carry out the responsibilities and duties of its office meaning more time being spent doing 'paperwork'. 3) The Department of Education is directed to provide longitudinally matched student data from the standards based assessments and disaggregated state assessment data to the schools and districts of the State. This data must be provided to the schools and districts annually and be sufficient to inform teachers fully of student performance and differences in performance among various subgroups. Data also must be presented in such a format that parents understand both school and individual student performance. Schools and districts shall be responsible for disseminating this information to parents which will be an additional burden of time on the districts because it will end up in their hands. 4) If a district has only one elementary, middle, or high school and it received an 'F' for its absolute grade or if all such elementary, middle, or high schools in the district received an 'F', the students at those schools may at their option transfer to a school in an adjoining school district and the adjoining district must accept these students as long as space is available which will create an incredible strain. Essentially, single-district counties could close. (From the proposed PASS Act)

The EXCEL Act will require all districts to establish local accountability systems to stimulate quality teaching and learning practices and to target assistance to low performing schools which will require more time and money. 2) The Department of Education, in consultation with the division, shall develop a program for selecting and training exceptional educators to serve as specialists on Site. Retired educators may be considered for specialists. School districts are asked to cooperate in releasing employees for full-time or part-time employment as a Specialist on Site. Therefore, the creme de la creme teachers will have to do even more work but will certainly help teacher training progress. 3) The State Board of Education, working with the Department of Education and the Select Committee, shall promulgate regulations to fund no more than forty-six alternative schools, one in each county. Districts are authorized and encouraged to cooperate in funding the alternative school which will certainly cost a great deal of money for an extra school, versus being used for improving the current schools in the district. (From the proposed EXCEL Act)

Essentially, the hopes implicit in the legislation are that quality controls and further accountabilities will improve the entire educational system throughout South Carolina. However, the fears appear to outweigh the hopes. More paperwork, more hours, increasing numbers of students to teacher ratio, fears of disappearing districts, parent-chosen resegregation, etc. More red herrings seem to be flopping on the Statehouse steps when the spotlight is placed on education

http://www.lpitr.state.sc.us/bills/4399.htm (link to EXCEL Act)

http://www.lpitr.state.sc.us/bills/850.htm (link to PASS Act)