Indiana lawmakers seek decentralized school choices

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Two Republican state senators announced Wednesday they will push measures to decentralize school leadership in Indiana and pull the state out of a national education initiative.

Some high-performing schools would be allowed to choose their own curriculum under a plan from Sen. Mike Delph of Carmel. A separate proposal from Sen. Scott Schneider of Indianapolis calls for ending Indiana's participation in the national Common Core Standards, a set of uniform benchmarks for math and reading.

If successful, Schneider's measure would mark another rebuttal of the sweeping education changes pushed by departing state schools superintendent Tony Bennett and outgoing Gov. Mitch Daniels — this time from the right.

Incoming School Superintendent Glenda Ritz, a Democrat, capitalized during the November elections on many conservatives' angst over losing local control under the national standards. She beat Bennett, a Republican, after promising to return more power to local school administrators.

Bennett and the state's education board signed off on Common Core Standards in 2010.

"I am worried that Common Core was pushed on Indiana without proper review of what it will mean for students and teachers," Schneider said in a press statement Wednesday. His bill is scheduled for a committee hearing Jan. 16.

Delph's proposal calls for giving high-performing schools more control over their curriculum and builds on an education package he unsuccessfully pushed in the last legislative session.

Under his plan, certain school systems would be allowed to build their own curriculum, establish their own teacher evaluations, set their own class schedules and create independent plans for career and technical training.

School districts would have to meet a series of requirements before winning autonomy from the state: At least 25 percent of students would have to score above a 2 on at least one Advanced Placement Exam or graduate with a technical honors diploma. At least 90 percent of students must graduate across the district, and the average SAT scores would need to be greater than the statewide average.

"Districts with proven track records could create environments that better fit their students' academic needs and capabilities," Delph said. "This would allow these students to reach their fullest potential."

Lawmakers return for a lengthy 2013 session on Monday.


  • Roy
    Roy, why are you copying and pasting talking points?
  • Well Spake
    I fully adopt your position as my own.
  • Inform yourself
    Rick, you must have not set foot in a school for a long time. The ridculous requirements imposed on teachers to document toward unrealistic goals have cripled our teachers. Tony Bennett's ill-advised approach has caused teachers and adminstrators to focus on documentation instead of the Students. The students are suffering to benefit some arm-chair quarterbacks who know nothing of the chaos caused by Bennett and his minions. Wake up and realize that Bennett was beaten and sent packing for good reasons. At least in Florida where he seems to be heading, things could not get much worse.
    • No win
      As long as there are administrators and teacher unions our children's education will suffer. Takeaway a structure and allow local administrators to manage things again and you'll get fiefdoms of power. Takeaway structure and allow local administrators to manage things and unions will see this as a sign of weakness and pounce on the opportunity to hold school systems hostage. Not enough people care and its a MAJOR struggle for parents, who typically both work, to get both sides to give a crap.
      • BRAVO
        Good to hear this. Both very good proposals. The further we are from commie corp, the better.

      Post a comment to this story

      We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
      You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
      Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
      No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
      We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.

      Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

      Sponsored by

      facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

      Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
      Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
      Subscribe to IBJ
      1. The $104K to CRC would go toward debts service on $486M of existing debt they already have from other things outside this project. Keystone buys the bonds for 3.8M from CRC, and CRC in turn pays for the parking and site work, and some time later CRC buys them back (with interest) from the projected annual property tax revenue from the entire TIF district (est. $415K / yr. from just this property, plus more from all the other property in the TIF district), which in theory would be about a 10-year term, give-or-take. CRC is basically betting on the future, that property values will increase, driving up the tax revenue to the limit of the annual increase cap on commercial property (I think that's 3%). It should be noted that Keystone can't print money (unlike the Federal Treasury) so commercial property tax can only come from consumers, in this case the apartment renters and consumers of the goods and services offered by the ground floor retailers, and employees in the form of lower non-mandatory compensation items, such as bonuses, benefits, 401K match, etc.

      2. $3B would hurt Lilly's bottom line if there were no insurance or Indemnity Agreement, but there is no way that large an award will be upheld on appeal. What's surprising is that the trial judge refused to reduce it. She must have thought there was evidence of a flagrant, unconscionable coverup and wanted to send a message.

      3. As a self-employed individual, I always saw outrageous price increases every year in a health insurance plan with preexisting condition costs -- something most employed groups never had to worry about. With spouse, I saw ALL Indiana "free market answer" plans' premiums raise 25%-45% each year.

      4. It's not who you chose to build it's how they build it. Architects and engineers decide how and what to use to build. builders just do the work. Architects & engineers still think the tarp over the escalators out at airport will hold for third time when it snows, ice storms.

      5. http://www.abcactionnews.com/news/duke-energy-customers-angry-about-money-for-nothing