Overhauling the complex and decentralized operational system of California public education has emerged as a central administrative test for the next governor.
While legislation centralizing ultimate administrative responsibility for education under the governor has passed, experts point out that whether this translates into tangible classroom-level changes depends heavily on the next governor’s appointment abilities and political drive.
According to the nonpartisan media foundation CalMatters on the 27th, an education system reform bill (AB 181) proposed by Governor Gavin Newsom in January was passed by the state legislature with overwhelming support in July.
The core of the reform bill is the establishment of an ‘Education Commissioner’ position directly appointed by the governor. The newly appointed commissioner will oversee the California Department of Education, ensuring that state-formulated educational policies are implemented seamlessly in individual classrooms. Meanwhile, the state superintendent of public instruction, previously elected directly by voters, will hand over most operational authorities and focus primarily on education policy advocacy and coordination.
For over a century, California’s educational administration authority was fragmented among multiple entities, including the state superintendent, the State Board of Education, the Governor’s Office, the state legislature, and local school boards. PACE, an education policy research organization, analyzed that this decentralized structure led to inconsistent policies and a persistent vice where institutions passed the buck when problems arose in the field.
Michael Kirst, former president of the State Board of Education, evaluated, ‘In the past, if you asked who had ultimate responsibility, the answer was everyone and no one. Now, the subject of responsibilityโthe governorโhas become clear. This is a tremendous change.’
Challenges and Strategies for Real Educational Reform
However, educational experts diagnose that mere structural reorganization cannot solve the accumulated challenges facing public education. They stress that academic goals presented to each school must be clarified and supervision strengthened, while dramatically increasing direct and indirect support for underperforming schools.
Education policy consultant Heather Huff stated, ‘Currently, even if a specific school district continues to show declining performance, the criteria for what actions the state should take remain unclear. State-level active intervention authority must be guaranteed.’
She suggested that professional consultants and tutors should be preferentially deployed to schools where standardized test scores consistently remain at the bottom to remove barriers hindering academic achievement. If these improvement measures fail, she holds the stance that the commissioner should be granted powerful administrative authority, such as replacing the superintendent of the respective school district.
Timeline and Candidate Stances
The timeline given to the next governor and the new commissioner is tight. The next governor must carry out the commissioner appointments immediately after taking office on January 4 of next year. The appointed commissioner faces the task of submitting a draft of the system reorganization plan to the state legislature by early June and completing the final report by fall.
However, CalMatters reported that major gubernatorial candidates have yet to clearly present appointment criteria for the commissioner or concrete plans for public education reform.
Candidate Xavier Becerra stated in a recent TV debate that ‘school sites are bogged down by excessive bureaucracy’ and expressed his stance that students failing to meet academic standards should be held back. Steve Hilton pledged to introduce an ‘Education Savings Account (ESA)’ allowing parents to utilize public funds for private school tuition and other expenses. However, both candidate campaigns did not respond to additional reporting requests regarding detailed plans.
Administrative Burden and Stakeholder Cooperation
Within the education sector, strengthening the administrative organization capacity under the state Department of Education is also cited as an urgent task. Marshall Tuck, executive director of the education advocacy group ‘EdVoice,’ emphasized, ‘To expand effective supervision and support for frontline schools, the functions and professional staff of the state Department of Education must be substantially expanded.’
Drawing political compromises from powerful stakeholders such as teachers’ unions during the reorganization process is another key variable.
The California Teachers Association (CTA) initially expressed opposition to the reform bill, citing that voter control would weaken and power would concentrate excessively on the governor. However, CTA President David Goldberg stated, ‘We will actively cooperate with the new commissioner and hope an individual who faithfully represents the voices of teachers, parents, and students is appointed.’
Meanwhile, a sense of expectation lingers within local educational communities that this reorganization will alleviate excessive administrative burdens. Current frontline school personnel spend several hours each week on paperwork required for state submissions, leading to calculations that streamlining administrative procedures will allow them to immerse themselves more in core educational duties like student guidance.
In fact, financial and goal reports that each school district establishes every 36 months routinely exceed 100 pages even for small districts, while reports from the Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD) reach about 800 pages. Furthermore, these reports are subject to regular renewal obligations.
Michael Davies-Hughes, Humboldt County Superintendent of Schools, forecasted, ‘Educators are spending excessively too much energy processing bureaucratic administrative procedures. Removing these administrative barriers will benefit students entirely.’
He added, ‘The new commissioner must smoothly coordinate state-level policies with the realistic demands of local school districts while possessing the decisiveness to stand up proudly against powerful political interests when necessary.’
Executive Director Marshall Tuck urged, ‘This system overhaul is the springboard to achieve a practical qualitative improvement in California public education. Most importantly, the next governor must set this as a top state policy task and select the right person for the job.’
