It looks

like the education bill is a done deal, pretty much.

The

governor has shown he can play hard ball, and it looks

like he'll get most of what he wants in the bill. It was

approved by the Senate Thursday with 40-odd changes from

the House version, so compromises will have to be worked

out. The debate is not completely over.

I have

mixed emotions. If I were a legislator, I would have to

vote against the bill, but I would do it with a tear in

my eye. I'll explain why in a minute.

Meanwhile,

I imagine the teachers' unions also have mixed emotions.

Barnes has cleverly given a little here and taken a

little there.

Take

tenure, for instance. I know, I know. Georgia teachers do

not have tenure, technically speaking. It would be almost

impossible to get rid of a bad teacher under true tenure.

Under the dictionary definition, tenure suggests that a

job is permanent.

But Georgia

teachers do have more or less automatic contract renewal,

starting after they've taught for three years. Renewal

time comes every three years after that, and if a

teacher's contract is not renewed, there is a right of

appeal and the school system must prove that the teacher

has done something awful enough to be terminated.

The bill

reduces the effects of this semi-tenure, replacing the

right of appeal with the right to receive a written

explanation of the reason for the dismissal. I'm sure

this has the teachers' unions boiling.

Evaluations

and testing also are required, and all manner of hoops to

jump through for teachers who don't do well on either

- more training, things like that. And any year a

teacher doesn't do well doesn't count toward years of

service used to determine salaries.

Sound good

so far? It does to me, too.

I hope you

understand me. Teachers, by and large, are not the

problem. I have the utmost admiration for 90 percent of

the teachers I know or have known. It's that other 10

percent that need a good kick in the pants... maybe even

less than 10 percent.

Those who

aren't capable should be fired. Those who are capable but

under-performing should get a chance to shape up or be

fired. Those who are doing their jobs should get more

money.

Which

brings me to pupil-teacher ratio. If anyone out there in

Reader Land knows of any empirical scientific evidence

that reducing class size improves the quality of

education, please send me information on it. I've never

heard of any, and I've looked for it.

The

teachers' unions must love this provision. It means less

work and easier work for each teacher. That's not a bad

thing in itself, but it also means more members and

therefore more power for the teachers' unions.

And there

are better ways to spend the money. Like increasing

salaries for the teachers we have, and rewarding

excellence with bonuses.

Give me 30

students in a class with a good teacher over 20 students

in a class with a bad teacher any day.

One other

provision, though, is the one that would bring a tear to

my eye if I were to have to vote against this bill -

early intervention.

I've

preached for almost 30 years that the time to save the

"at-risk" students is in kindergarten through

third grade. Let them into fourth grade without a good

basis, and you've lost them, except in a few cases of

miraculous turnarounds.

There are

actually provisions in this bill to find those who are

under-performing - not learning disabled, just

struggling - and give them extra help. It would be

even better if we could assure that the most experienced,

highest-paid teachers worked in the lower levels as well.

But alas,

Gov. Barnes has muddied this bill up with so much

confusion, ambiguity and naked power-grabbing that I

would still have to vote against it.

In a

hundred different ways, the bill would increase the power

of the state government over local school boards, parents

and students.

Talk to the

legislators. They don't fully grasp the funding formulae.

I don't think many school officials fully understand

them.

The bill

needs another year to percolate. Barnes and his super

committee need to take a hard look at it and give up some

of their lust for control.

Will it

happen? I doubt it. We can only hope for some common

sense amendments in future sessions.