The Commissioner of Education

It was clear to me in our BOE meeting on May 8, 2006 that Mr. Norman, the Private School Representative, is dead set on making the commissioner of the Public School System the commissioner over private schools, too. I respect Mr. Norman’s desire for the COE to “govern” the private schools because it is a noble gesture but it totally violates the separation between the public and private sector. The commissioner should not and cannot be mandated to monitor the private schools beyond the existing requirements under Federal laws that are associated with the distribution and accountability of federal funds.

There is nothing wrong with the COE helping the private schools out but when it comes to “mandating” policy or law to empower the COE over private school matters there are serious questions and consequences of “governance” that must be considered. More important, if the private schools are in such a direr need of the commissioner’s help, what does that say about the quality of the private school(s)? If the private schools need professional help or governance, they should create and hire their own commissioner or ask PREL for help like we do at PSS.

If we try to extend the functions of the commissioner to that of private school matters such as programs and compliance with BOE policy and state laws, it will open a potential can of snakes. How can the commissioner monitor the private schools without taking valuable time away from the public schools? How can the commissioner “enforce” policy and law upon the private schools? Can the commissioner close the private school that is not complying with policy or law? What about the private schools that don’t want the commissioner involved in their operation? Some private schools are religious, so what happens to separation of church and state? Who can or will even authorize the commissioner to take actions against a private school? The board or the governor? All these are serious questions and the only solution to these questions lies in the Executive Office, which is charged with carrying out the state laws and policies.

Most states have created a Secretary of Education to make sure all public and private schools are in compliance with all federal laws, state laws and state board policies. We don’t have a Secretary of Education and we should but we do have a Governor’s Special Assistant to Education that can perform in the same capacity, which is why I propose that the board defer or collaborate with the Governor’s Office regarding Mr. Norman’s request.

It is also important to understand the source that is driving Norman’s request for the COE to exercise more governance over the private schools. He alerted the board to the fact that “a private school was not in compliance with the state education laws.” But he wanted the Commissioner to go after the school and do the dirty work of putting pressure on the school to comply with state law. Mr. Norman should have advised the school to report the noncompliance to the Governor’s Office and or the Attorney General’s Office. If the error is not corrected he should turn the matter over to the appropriate government official under the executive office because the COE is an “employee” of the public school system, not a state official.

Neither the Commissioner nor the board can do anything to the private schools other than refer their violations to the AG’s office for violating state law or policy. But what happens after that? Who knows. Which should give the board an idea about how behind we are on educational laws, policies and the creation of a Secretary of Education post. If the private schools want to admit they need the Commissioner’s help, that’s fine with me—if the COE has the “extra” time to help, but we should not try to mandate through policy or law for the Commissioner to have power over private schools beyond the existing accountability of Federal funds given to the private schools by PSS, which the Feds will prosecute for violations.

Finally, the board must consider how parents, teachers and the community feel about the COE spending time helping and monitoring the private schools, given the condition of our school system. We know the COE needs to spend as much time as possible on the public school because the system is getting bigger and so is the job and the challenges facing the COE. Personally, I would like to have my classroom get “one” visit from the COE over the past 15 years, especially when I was runner up to Teacher of the Year twice but it is obvious the COE doesn’t have enough time to fulfill all the nuances of running the public schools, so the idea of the COE spending time at private schools is truly an “insult” to me as a teacher when the COE has never entered my classroom in 15 years just to see how I’m doing as a teacher. There are many other teachers that feel the same way. I will gladly agree to the COE spending time helping the private schools ONLY when our public school students are equal to their counterparts in the mainland and when the COE has the time to fulfill all the nuances of leadership, such as the “humanistic practitioner component” I just mentioned.

I hope the board will drop the idea of the COE monitoring private schools and seriously consider the COE being more of a humanistic practitioner when interviewing the next COE. The board should even require the next COE to visit all 21 CNMI Schools, classrooms and attend one staff meeting at least “once” a year, which equates to 2.3 visits to school per month over the course of a school year. I don’t think this is unreasonable when these visits will provide the COE with a more direct and accurate “insight with feedback” on what is actually taking place at the school and in the classrooms. These visits will also serve as a motivational tool to address the morale of the teaching workforce from a more humanistic perspective.

Ambrose M. Bennett
Kagman High School