What's the point of having new high standards for Delaware public school students when local districts are free to teach whatever they want?

When education reform began more than a decade ago, one barrier to implementation of high standards was the clamor for local control. The 19 districts didn't want to forfeit their right to establish the curricula for their students.

A compromise was reached that gave state officials the authority to establish statewide standards while local districts were permitted to develop the curricula that would enable students to meet those standards. The theory was that it was the standards that were important, how a student met or exceeded them was up to the local districts. It was supposed to have given districts as well as principals and individual teachers flexibility. But it didn't work.

State officials, who developed the new standards in cooperation with teachers, local district officials and experts from Delaware colleges and universities, also drew up model curricula.

It soon became clear that districts were all over the place with curriculum development. Some resented the statewide testing program and simply ignored the new standards. Others seem to have tried unsuccessfully to bring students to a level of skill and understanding that would enable them to meet or exceed the standards. Some, however, did employ state curricula that matched what students were supposed to know before taking the tests.

For example, earlier this year a report from a task force created by Gov. Minner found that only six of the 19 districts had middle school math curricula that were congruent with state standards. That's a disgrace.

Newark Republican Rep. Stephanie Ulbrich has sponsored a bill to make sure students are taught what they are supposed to be taught - sort of. Her substitute measure for H.B. 47, as amended passed the House last week 32-7. It does mandate development of statewide curricula, but it also allows local districts to create their own, which isn't all that much different than the way things are now. The difference, apparently, is that now state officials can check on local districts to make sure the curricula are in alignment with state standards.

Why fiddle around? Why add another watchdog burden to the Department of Education's duties? If we have a state standard, there should be a model state curriculum to accompany it. In some areas, local control makes sense, but in the area of curriculum it makes more sense to have a uniform statewide model, developed by Department of Education specialists in cooperation with local teachers and administrators.