“If the Legislature had the kind of record education advocates could support, a mix of those proposals might be a fair way to navigate through the economic downturn. Class-size reductions were never the perfect way to improve education. Some flexibility in applying them, along with other reforms (better pay, more focus on low-achieving schools) would likely result in improved student achievement. But the Legislature doesn't have that kind of record. Its motives toward public education, from high-stakes testing to vouchers to poor funding, have been more undermining than constructive. Opinion polls show Floridians far more supportive of class-size reductions six years after its initial passage. A 2008 St. Petersburg Times poll found 74 percent of Floridians favoring the amendment, and only 30 percent favoring using averages instead of strict limits. Even in emergencies, just 44 percent of respondents approved exceeding amendment limits. The numbers reflect justified suspicion. Voters passed the amendment to force legislators to give education the attention (and funding) it requires. Voters aren't likely to trust that tinkering with the amendment wouldn't result in its dilution. In fact, legislators, who are still not proposing the kind of tax increases that would make massaging the amendment unnecessary, are framing their debate over class-size only in financial terms. There's no larger vision that, once the crisis passes, would recommit the state not only to small class sizes but to an education system never again made so vulnerable to economic shocks. The suspicion over legislators' motives is justified. It's a simple message. Do what's necessary to commit to class-size reductions as voters intended them. Then talk flexibility.”
__________

Read the editorial and post a comment on news-journalonline.com.
http://www.news-journalonline.com/NewsJour...OPN26031609.htm
__________

Thanks to Mark Pudlow for the clip and the lead.