Over the coming days, lawmakers will be tasked with taking a series of pivotal votes that will help define the path for our public schools.They’ll be faced with determining whether to adopt nearly 20 proposed administrative rules submitted by state Superintendent Ryan Walters and his Department of Education that could shake up the very foundation of our schools.As Nuria Martinez-Keel reported, the rules, which will have the force of law if adopted, range from creating “foundational values” centered on a Creator to new accreditation penalties for districts that perform poorly on standardized tests.The rules process is typically an obscure part of Oklahoma government where agencies draft suggested policies that impact their functions. The rules are then sent to lawmakers for consideration. Lawmakers can approve, reject or allow the governor to decide.Normally, the rules creation process generates little public interest.But this year, the State Department of Education rules have drawn a lot of eyes as debate rages over whether they’ll help herald a turnaround for our state’s academic outcomes or if they’ll be detrimental for Oklahoma schools.There are also considerable questions about whether the rules comply with state law or if the state Department of Education took liberties when crafting them.In 2023, Attorney General Gentner Drummond opined that administrative rules must be created in response to a related law.Some lawmakers tell me that they’ve received a lot of constituent feedback — most of it urging them to vote the education rules down.Last week, a state Senate committee held its first public vetting of the rules.Well, it sort of did. Curious about the raging debate, I turned on the hearing.I can honestly say I was left scratching my head, none the wiser about the merits of the rules and whether they’d be beneficial.That’s in part because the Senate committee limited lawmakers to how many questions they could ask and prohibited them from debating the merits of the provisions.After the committee meeting, chair Micheal Bergstrom, R-Adair, said in a statement that it was “disappointing” there was so little discussion of the rules’ merit.He said that he had to limit questions because the meeting was less than two hours and allowing unlimited questions “would result in few rules actually being reviewed.”It absolutely is disappointing, but not surprising, that the public likely learned little about the merits given the committee format.Here’s hoping Senate leaders will allow a much more transparent and robust discussion the next ...
