So will the school reforming be done soon?

A fine question. But, no:

Lawmakers will leave for the weekend without agreement on an education reform package, forcing school districts across the state to certify budgets without knowing how much state aid is coming for next school year.

Statute requires districts to certify their budgets by Monday, but lawmakers tied an increase in education funding to the education reform package which is currently held up in a conference committee.

On Wednesday, Republicans said they would agree to a 4 percent increase in allowable growth if the Democrats agreed to all the language in the Republican-backed version of the bill.

On Thursday, Sen. Herman Quirmbach, D-Ames, panned the idea on the Senate floor.

Like so many dumb things at the Statehouse, this was unnecessary and avoidable. They could have settled funding for the next school year many moons ago, and spent the balance of the session haggling over reform measures and future funding. None of the reforms floated by Gov. Terry Branstad take effect this fall, so there really was no good reason to leave school districts sitting in limbo. Branstad said reforms and money must be locked into a death-grip, and that it would be no problemo. Oops. Wrong. Sorry schools.

Now, our legislating heroes can't agree whether a surprising compromise offered by House Republicans is really a compromise.

So what's the deal?

In their Wednesday proposal, Republicans offered 2 percent allowable growth to go into the base and an additional one-time 2 percent extra in allowable growth for the 2014 fiscal year. Additionally, they offered 4 percent allowable growth in the base for fiscal year 2015.

It's a key figure because it meets the allowable growth percentage called for in the Senate bill, which is 2 percent higher than the amount put in the House bill. It's those two bills that the 10-member conference committee is charged with coming together on.

Quirmbach has repeatedly said “the price of education reform is 4 percent” as the Senate bill moved through conference. On Thursday, he called the Republican proposal a “bait-and-swtich.”

Sounds like a path to agreement. But Democrats say 4 percent is really 1 percent:

Quirmbach contended that by offering only a permanent 2 percent increase in school aid the first year, plus the one-time 2 percent bonus, House Republicans were asking school districts to pay for ongoing expenditures with one-time money.

He claimed that would be a violation of Republicans' financial principles.

In addition, he said the GOP plan would allow the sunset of early intervention class-size-reduction money, taking back the equivalent of 1 percent.

“So the bottom line of the Republicans' 4 percent proposal is really only 1 percent in increased ongoing resources for our K-12 schools,” Quirmbach said.

Actually, from my perch 127 miles away, I think the bottom line is that the House now looks like it's seeking a deal and Quirmbach's side looks like it doesn't want one. Maybe the true scope of that GOP overture is disappointing, as Quirmbach contends, but it's a step in the right direction. Why wad it up and toss it in the trash bin so quickly? Especially when there's a pretty decent chance, based on past performance, that the deal you ultimately get will look a lot like that.

Yeah, that thing we said was utterly unacceptable last month? We took it. Don't ask.

The Iowa Association of School Boards says it supports the House's offer.

Bleeding Heartland points to another interesting question. If Democrats do reach a deal with the House, can they trust the governor to refrain from using his line-item veto power to strike the parts they like? Branstad twice vetoed Earned Income Tax Credit increases that were part of bipartisan tax deals.

And speaking of ultimately, I'm afraid I have to be the one to remind everyone that, ultimately, we'll be disappointed with whatever reforms we get. The Gazette's editorial board reminded us of that about a week ago:

Legislators should waste no time finding common ground in the bills before them, if only to allow school districts some certainty about what's coming down the pike.

But there is a much bigger picture here that is being left out of the discussion: How much educational “business as usual” has become obsolete in this modern learning environment? How do we truly transform our public K-12 schools to prepare our students for 21st Century life and work?

Missing from both chambers' education reform proposals are the types of bold ideas that could transform our old, Industrial Age school system into vibrant, efficient centers of learning. Schools where involved teachers lead engaged students to develop contemporary skills and solve problems in meaningful ways.

Iowans for a Future that Doesn't Suck, where you will find a very good summary of the proposals at play, is on a similar page:

At the end of the day though, whatever education “reform” passes this year will be pretty half-assed. Here's a look at what high school students themselves are asking for: better teachers, better tests, better technology, better career-training, and service learning. This year's education reform focuses mostly on the better teachers part and maybe the career-training, so hey 1.5 out of 5 isn't bad right? That's an All-Star batting average!

A lot of legislative time and energy has been put into education reform, and at the end of the day it would probably be more effective to pass a law that says: “Tell high school kids that most of them could replace their college prep with a few welding classes and be better off.”

Jennifer Hemingsen says we'd be better off if lawmakers would get out of the way and let schools try new ideas and approaches. So true.

By the way, if you'd like to weigh in, here are links to contact information for

House Education Committee Chairman Ron Jorgensen and

Senate Education Chairman Herman Quirmbach