2/23/2012: according to the Oregonian. Two weeks ago they were very optimistic. The bill would mean Oregon would have a Chief Education Officer with authority over Pernsteiner and it would give the governor authority to fire control Pernsteiner. Pernsteiner fired Lariviere, and now he seems to be stopping Kitzhaber. Legislative website for the higher ed bill is here:
Identifies positions that will be under direction and control
of Chief Education Officer for matters related to design and
organization of state's education system.
Requires { + governing bodies of + } education entities to
enter into achievement compact with Oregon Education Investment
Board. Describes terms that must be included in achievement
compact. { + Directs education entities to form achievement
compact advisory committees to develop and implement achievement
compact. + }
Declares emergency, effective on passage.
A BILL FOR AN ACT
Relating to education; creating new provisions; amending ORS
326.300, 326.375, 351.075 and 351.725 and sections 1, 2 and 4,
chapter 519, Oregon Laws 2011; and declaring an emergency.
Be It Enacted by the People of the State of Oregon:
SECTION 1. Section 2, chapter 519, Oregon Laws 2011, is amended
to read:
{ + Sec. 2. + } (1) The Oregon Education Investment Board
established by section 1 { - of this 2011 Act - } { + ,
chapter 519, Oregon Laws 2011, + } shall appoint a Chief
Education Officer who shall serve at the pleasure of the board.
(2) The Chief Education Officer shall be a person who, by
training and experience, is well qualified to:
(a) Perform the duties of the office, as determined by the
board; and
(b) Assist in carrying out the functions of the board, as
described in section 1 { - of this 2011 Act - } { + , chapter
519, Oregon Laws 2011 + }.
{ + (3)(a) For the purpose of furthering the mission of the
Oregon Education Investment Board to oversee a unified public
education system, the Chief Education Officer shall have
direction and control over the positions identified in paragraph
(b) of this subsection for matters related to the design and
organization of the state's education system, including early
childhood services provided by the state.
(b) The positions over which the Chief Education Officer shall
have direction and control are:
(A) The Commissioner for Community College Services.
(B) The Chancellor of the Oregon University System.
(C) The executive director of the Oregon Student Access
Commission.
(D) The Early Childhood System Director.
(E) The executive director of the Higher Education Coordinating
Commission.
(F) The Deputy Superintendent of Public Instruction.
(c) The authority of the Chief Education Officer granted under
paragraph (a) of this subsection does not include the authority
to appoint or remove a person from a position identified in
paragraph (b) of this subsection.
(d) If a person in a position identified in paragraph (b) of
this subsection is appointed by an entity other than the
Governor, the Governor shall resolve any dispute between the
Chief Education Officer and the appointing authority of the
person. The Governor's decision is final. + }
Well, we already knew that the February session wasn’t going to accomplish much anyway, so this isn’t the end of the world. What IS the end of the world, to me at least, is that with the Lariviere crisis now firmly behind us, we’ve gone back to attacking ourselves rather than keeping our eye on wresting UO free from a dysfunctional state system.
Unionization, the war on Johnson Hall, the ASUO’s stranglehold on the student voice…I could go on and on, but what we really need is a way to reunite against the real enemy: the state’s unflagging commitment to mediocrity in public higher education.
Good points, Anonymous! UO and PSU are on board. OSU and regionals not. We ( whoever that is at the moment) need to understand the opposition and enlist allies. OSU opposition is obvious. They get twice as much state support per student as the OUS average. To be fair, much of that has to do with statewide extension programs, but wouldn’t OSU and rest of OUS be better off forcing the legislators who represent parts of state those programs serve to argue for funding them directly if they merit the funding, rather than trying to squeeze it out of the dwindling OUS budget? This is the approach recommended for land grant U’s by the cornell center for higher ed studies headed by ron ehrenberg, who wrote a recent piece for AAUP’s academe. As for regionals, why not include a commitment that the ratio of their state support per student to the OUS average (would not decline, so that even if their fear that UO PSU would dominate them in the legislature for funding turns out to be true, they would still float with the average OUS funding. state funding for big ticket construction projects could still be screened and prioritized by OUS or its successor. I wonder if these kinds of reassurances have been proposed? Of course, DEAD DUCK thinks indepent boards would spur initiative on every campus, but the small (or ‘fat’)schools don’t believe UO or PSU, the small schools coiuld be reassured in a compact, but that still leaves OSU. enough quacking for now.