Gov. Asa Hutchinson got his way last week with the state Board of Education.
The issue was standardized testing in the public schools and, for good or for bad, the governor proved he can get what he wants.
Granted, it took the addition of three new board members, one changed vote and a pair of abstentions to make it happen; but the state Board of Education voted 4-2 last week to follow a Hutchinson recommendation the board rejected in June.
His recommendation was that the state contract for ACT and ACT Aspire standardized tests.
The tests will replace the Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers, or PARCC.
PARCC tests were administered for the first time last year in Arkansas schools. They were supposed to measure progress of students toward learning Common Core-centered curriculum, for which the schools had been preparing students for several years.
Millions in state tax dollars went into the effort, only to be ditched after one year, a fact that has frustrated a lot of teachers and school administrators.
Others were frustrated with the PARCC tests, however, a response that proved to be the bigger influence in this latest decision.
Many of the complaints were about how long it took to give the tests and the required use of computers to take them. The requirement was waived in some instances but that didn't stem the complaints about PARCC.
Lawmakers heard those complaints, as did Gov. Hutchinson and a panel of people he has assigned to review the Common Core State Standards themselves.
All but a handful of states have adopted the standards in math and English with the idea that students all across the country ought to be learning the same information at about the same age. That's particularly valuable for families that move a lot, causing children to change schools frequently.
Anyway, it's all under review and the first thing that popped out of the panel was rejection of PARCC.
The governor agreed and, back in June, announced rather matter-of-factly that Arkansas would change its provider of standardized tests to ACT and ACT Aspire.
The state Board of Education had another idea and voted to keep PARCC, but Gov. Hutchinson had the option to unilaterally end the state's relationship with PARCC.
Choice of replacement testing was still up to the Board of Education, but the governor made sure the choice was not going to be PARCC.
The board Hutchinson was dealing with in June was made up totally of appointees by former Gov. Mike Beebe.
That changed this month, when Hutchinson got to replace three members of the board. Two of the former members' terms expired and a third resigned for business reasons.
Naturally, Hutchinson gained three votes for his preferred choice for standardized testing, the ACT and ACT Aspire tests.
One of his new appointees even came from the Governor's Council on Common Core Review, which first recommended that change.
But the old board had voted 7-1 against the change. So how did the vote swing so far as to adopt the ACT and ACT Aspire?
One Beebe appointee changed his vote. That wouldn't have been enough, had all the other Beebe appointees voted as they did in June.
But two of them chose to abstain from the vote, reducing the number of participating members to six and allowing a 4-2 majority of those voting to sway the outcome.
The abstentions were a means not to vote for the recommendation but to allow the issue to be resolved.
Notably, much of the concern from those board members wasn't so much against the ACT and ACT Aspire tests as it was against the process (or absence of a process) to select a new testing regimen.
The decision was, to them, a rush to judgment.
In time, they might have embraced the ACT and ACT Aspire; but they got no time to consider alternative bids.
What all of this means for the future relationship between the Board of Education and the governor is to be seen.
In time, if he stays in office as long as Beebe did, Hutchinson will have only his own appointees there.
But, for a while yet, he'll have to work with a mix of people he chose and did not choose to set education policy.
Commentary on 07/15/2015