The Kentucky legislature recently approved an extensive education package that has received significant national attention for its progressive approach to school reform. However, when viewed from the perspective of Rockcastle County, an impoverished rural area, the package looks somewhat different. While the 170 teachers and administrators of the Rockcastle County school system mostly welcome the changes in school governance and regulation brought about by the legislation, their primary concern lies in the practical implications of the law – specifically, the increase in funding for their district.
As a result of their involvement in a school-finance lawsuit that played a role in the passage of the bill, the Rockcastle County district expects a 23 percent increase in funding from the state next year. With an additional $1 million, the district hopes to provide new or expanded services that are commonly taken for granted in wealthier districts. In this district, the first signs of the reform law will translate into the addition of music teachers, art programs, and counselors.
Located in the Appalachian Mountains, Rockcastle County is known for its rich hill heritage but lacks economic resources. The county has only a few small industries, and many residents commute to neighboring towns for work. However, there are hopes for economic growth, as plans for a theme park based on a popular bluegrass-music show held in the county every Saturday night are in place. This expansion is expected to create around 400 jobs and will be the first significant source of new employment in the county in years. Many students in Rockcastle County schools come from economically disadvantaged backgrounds, with 65 percent qualifying for the federal free-lunch program, compared to the state average of approximately 35 percent. The district’s decision to join the lawsuit in 1985, challenging the state’s school-financing system as unconstitutional, was deeply rooted in the county’s endemic poverty. Superintendent Bige W. Towery explained, "We realized that poorer districts do have some disadvantages, and without some money, we couldn’t address those."
The case escalated to the state supreme court, which not only ruled against the school-financing method but also deemed the entire elementary and secondary education system in the state to be unconstitutional. Mr. Towery expressed surprise at the court’s recognition of the need for adequacy in addition to equity. The influx of new funding resulting from this ruling and subsequent legislation will increase the budget for the district’s five schools to over $7 million. Mr. Towery hopes that the funds will be allocated towards purchasing instructional materials and computers, hiring more music teachers, art teachers, and counselors, as well as securing the continued employment of the school psychologist, whose salary was previously subsidized by grant money. His ultimate goal is to ensure that each of the district’s four K-8 schools no longer has to share a single music teacher.
While educators here are optimistic about the additional resources, they also have concerns, shared by their colleagues across the state, regarding the significant changes that are about to take place. Superintendent James Young of Russellville, near the Tennessee border, described the upcoming changes as the most radical ones the state has ever witnessed. The primary concern among educators, including Mr. Towery and Mr. Young, revolves around the mandate for site-based management included in the new law. Starting next school year, one school in each district will be required to participate in site-based management, which will gradually expand to include all schools where a two-thirds majority of the faculty vote in favor of shared decision-making. The aim is to have the majority of schools operating under this approach within five years. The law dictates that schools establish councils composed of three teachers, two parents, and the principal. Many school administrators have criticized the specificity of this mandate, as it contradicts the concept of granting more freedom to local schools. In response, the Senate made amendments to allow schools to opt for alternative council structures and obtain waivers from the mandate.
Mr. Conwell expressed his concerns about the decision to transfer leadership and authority to committees, suggesting that it may be a mistake. Ronnie Cash, the principal of Rockcastle County High School, shared similar apprehensions and questioned the roles, duties, and authority of principals in this new system. To address these concerns and ensure educators are well-informed about the plan, those involved in its development believe that the first major task in implementing it will be answering these questions and providing clarification.
David W. Hornbeck, a former state superintendent in Maryland and one of the authors of the new system, explains that the state will need to dedicate significant time in the next year to help educators across the state fully comprehend and discuss all aspects of the plan. He acknowledges that the plan is comprehensive, complex, and requires major adjustments in the way people operate. Mr. Cash agrees, stating that he looks forward to studying the reform act and having the answers readily available instead of relying on newspaper reports.
In order to inform district administrators about the new law, the state department of education has organized six regional information sessions next month. However, it appears that some state leaders will face skepticism as they attempt to gain broad support for the plan. Some educators are angry about not being included in the negotiations for the new school system. Iris Young, an English teacher at Rockcastle High, expresses doubt about the plan’s feasibility and claims that legislators did not consult any schoolteachers despite promising that educators would have a greater voice in decision-making. Jim Cox, a biology teacher at the school, fears that this plan, like previous reform plans, will be discarded after a few years.
Understandably, Mr. Foster, the gubernatorial aide, acknowledges the legitimate cynicism among educators due to past efforts that failed to bring about lasting change. However, he reassures them that their fears and concerns will be addressed, and a strong institutional response to the law will be seen. Most educators, while skeptical, express eagerness to participate in the plan once they understand their roles. They are generally supportive of the new system’s approach to rewarding improving schools and imposing consequences on underperforming ones, as long as there is clear direction from the outset. Ms. Young, for example, emphasizes the importance of creating new performance measures, particularly a writing assessment, to effectively implement the plan.
Mr. Foster recognizes that establishing such an assessment system will be no small feat. He explains that as pioneers, it is unlikely to create the perfect model right away. The responsibility of developing the new assessments lies primarily with the department of education, which is also undergoing significant changes. Betty Steffy, the department’s deputy superintendent of instruction, acknowledges that the current organization of the department does not align directly with the functions outlined in the reform legislation.
Mr. Ingwerson from Jefferson County acknowledged that the most significant challenge lies in effectively translating the plan from a mere policy and law document into practical implementation within the classroom. Nevertheless, he expressed his unwavering belief that it will indeed succeed, stating confidently, "We will find a way to make it work." Echoing this sentiment, Mr. Cash from Rockcastle High emphasized the importance of official acknowledgment and adoption of the plan, emphasizing, "Once it is signed and officially delivered to us with clear instructions, we will wholeheartedly embrace it. As a result, our children will ultimately emerge as the victorious beneficiaries."
