It's got to be about a better education for kids

So I'm waiting for Patton. Heck, I might even settle for Bluto Blutarsky and his Germans at Pearl Harbor.

I'm waiting for that moment in the midst of this Cedar Rapids school closure/boundary change debate for Superintendent Dave Benson or someone to stand up and say something like this:

“Look, I know there will be sacrifices, even tears. The lives of parents and children in this school district will be thrown from the calm of routine into the tumult of change by the decisions we make. I don't blame you for raising hell.

“But your sacrifice will not be in vain. It will have meaning. On the other side of this mountain there will be a better, more innovative and richer educational experience for your children. This is not all about decline and obligation. It's about growth and opportunity. The passion and pain of this process will yield a school district determined to step up its educational game. And here's exactly how we're going to do it, and here are the measurable goals that will allow you to hold our feet to the fire ...”

Yeah, probably not going to happen. Benson might look silly in a shiny helmet anyway.

Instead of seizing this opportunity to improve, it seems like school leaders see this process as a gauntlet to simply survive. Take the heat, have some meetings, alter boundaries, close some schools and get back to business as usual. Phew.

I asked Benson this week what educational improvement goals are driving this process. He gave entirely reasonable answers about institutional efficiencies and class size consistency and “equitable outcomes.” But it was not, “Boy, I'm glad you asked. Here's my Benson blueprint for education transformation, and here's how the facilities process helps put it in motion.”

School Board President John Laverty explained that the board is in the midst of its visioning process on issues such as technology and quality of instruction. And as soon as they get this facilities thing settled, the board can really dig in and put some meaty policies on those bones. Just wait and see.

So reasonable. But not good enough.

If the goal of this facilities process is not a better education for students, why is it being done? And if it is about a better education for students, where is the plan? Where are the concrete, ambitious goals needed to drive the district toward that improvement? You can't expect this community to buy into any decision made without being told clearly how this will make its schools better.

Maybe it's coming. Maybe the big U.S. flag is on order and the great speech is being written. Maybe the school board is even now preparing its demands for hard evidence and big goals. I hope so.