- Dr. W.N. "Bill" Kirby was named the new Commissioner of Education after a five-month search, having previously served as interim commissioner and deputy commissioner for finance and programs at the Texas Education Agency. - As commissioner, Kirby faces challenges in implementing recent education reforms while dealing with proposed budget cuts to the TEA, but believes his experience with developing and explaining the reforms will help his leadership of the agency. - Kirby plans to focus on accreditation standards, programs for disadvantaged students, reducing paperwork, and encouraging more community and parental responsibility in education.

1. Kirby assumes
reins of TEA
The State Board of Education ended its five-month
search for a commissioner of education April 13 when
it named Dr. W.N. "Bill" Kirby, a long-time Texas
Education Agency (TEA) staffer, to the position.
Kirby, who was deputy commissioner for finance and
programs and was interim commissioner of education
after Raymon Bynum retired in October, is an educator
who has worked his way up the educational ladder.
Starting literally at the ground floor as a school
janitor, Kirby later was a coach, bus driver, and high
school principal before joining TEA to oversee federal
programs in Texas schools.
While he was interim commissioner, Kirby often
joked that his janitorial duties and his work as a
volunteer fireman prepared him for the commis-
sioner's job better than his doctoral program at the
University of Texas "because now I spend all my time
putting out fires, and if anything ever hits the fan,
who has to clean it up?" While the remarks were
intended to be humorous, they are nonetheless appro-
priate. As commissioner, Kirby now occupies a position
where the heat from some Texas schools and educators
burning over the recently mandated education reforms
is readily felt, and where cleaning up the problems
caused by some of the reforms, as well as cleaning up
what some consider a subpar school system, are top
priorities.
Having reached the pinnacle of his career at TEA
after 20 years on the agency staff, Kirby now is ready
to bring Texas schools to an equally lofty position.
And as the man who is second only to the SBOE which
hired him in terms of authority over and responsibility
for the state's school system, he has a definite plan of
action.
The following interview was granted to ATPE News
Managing Editor Joey Lozano by Dr. Kirby April 17.
Q: What changes will you make at the agency in
terms of structure and personnel? A: One of the
things that we've got to wait and see about is what
happens in the legislative process. Right now the
markup bill that the Legislative Budget Board (LBB)
has recommended is better than a 10 percent cutback
in the agency's budget. They're hold-
The key to reform is in the classroom,
because that's where learning takes
place. The teachers need our help and
our support.
ing the line as far as funding for school districts, but
as far as the agency, they have proposed that we go
from about $40 million to about $36 million. So that
will considerably impair our ability to do the kinds of
things that we believe need to be done, if we don't get
some restoration of those funds. The funds that they
restored, though, were specifically earmarked for voca-
tional education and could not be spent for anything
except that. So that leaves us with a cutback in other
areas of the agency, really other areas which receive
maj or new responsibilities under House Bill 72 such as
accreditation, such as the kind of research and studies
we have to do in the area of compensatory education,
where we're so concerned about our disadvantaged
children, our minority children, and yet we're getting
cutbacks in those areas. And so that will give us a
considerable problem if that's the final decision of the
Legislature. We're working right now very diligently
with the Senate to try and see if through (the) Senate
Finance (Committee) we can't get some of those other
areas taken care of.
ATPE News

2. I also need to sit down with the board (SBOE) and
identify some goals and objectives for the commis-
sioner. They ought to evaluate my performance in
office based upon some agreed upon standards before
we start. They ought to know what they expect me to
do, and then my success or failure ought to be based on
whether or not I'm able to get that done. Once we reach
a higher understanding of what those things are, then
what I need to do is organize the agency in such a
manner as I can get those things accomplished, and I
ought to deploy resources in such a way that I have the
person-power to do what needs to be done. So those two
factors are very important factors in what the agency's
organization will look like, and that is what kind of
resources do we finally have from the Legislature to
work with and then secondly, what will be the priorities
of the State Board of Education?
One of those areas is in accreditation. House Bill 72
has given us a complete change in the accreditation
process, but they have completely redirected what
accreditation is to be in the state of Texas. And there's
a whole new set of standards in the bill that we have to
look at when we go to the public schools. And those
standards are now based primarily upon quality,
achievement, and what school districts are accom-
plishing in terms of students that can be measured.
Now when we visit schools, we'll be looking at dif-
ferent kinds of things, not so much seeing now if
there's paper out on the playground, or seeing if the
plumbing is leaking, but focusing much more carefully
now on what's happening to students and are students
learning?
Another area that we're going to be focusing on is
the area of compensatory education, and programs for
disadvantaged youngsters, minority youngsters,
limited English proficient youngsters.
The board also recently passed an additional resolu-
tion on paperwork, and we're very concerned about
paperwork. The board has previously made a com-
mitment to it and I have previously stated to them that
we need to do everything we can to reduce paperwork.
One of the things we're going to try to do is go into a
sort of long-range plan to develop a statewide informa-
tion system — a network — and that will allow a lot
more work to be done by computers and a lot less work
to be done by paper and pencil reports.
Another area that I'm concerned about — and I
don't have the solution for it, but I'm anxious to find a
solution — is to get to the point where communities
and parents take on their rightful share of responsi-
bility in the education of children. We simply cannot
expect schools and cannot expect teachers to do it all. I
can remember when I was a student, and I think most
of your readers will remember when they were students,
that there was a different attitude in many places
than exists today. And that was that at home, I was
expected in fact to do what the teachers wanted me to
do and my parents insisted that I behave and they
insisted that I get my work done. We didn't need a
no-pass, no-play provision that was insisted upon by
the schools when I was in school, because whether
they had that system or not, if I didn't get my
schoolwork done my parents would have not let me
play. And rather than a lot of furor from the parents
about their child that didn't pass and consequently is
not playing, I guarantee you that in that era, with that
kind of attitude, the parents would've been supportive
of the school and would've said to me and to other
children absolutely to 'get the work done and then
when you get the work done, you can do the playing.'
So we need to get back to some sort of point where the
parents take more responsibility and have more of a
cooperative attitude in working with the school. Q:
How do you feel about the fact that state law
allows the commissioner's salary to be supple-
mented by outside sources?
A: Not knowing that I would be commissioner, speak-
ing just from what I believe, I took a strong position
with Mr. Brumley and with other members of the
board that I felt that the board should not supplement
the salary of the commissioner from outside private
sources (the SBOE has asked the Legislature per-
mission to pay Kirby an annual salary of $106,000).
Whether or not it could be handled in such a way to
guarantee that there would be no conflicts, there was
always the potential for someone to think there were
conflicts. So my recommendation was that they seek
other means to raise the salary of the commissioner,
and that that be through the legislative process. I
recommended that, rather than using outside sources,
they ask permission from the Legislature to be able to
do that. The State Board has the authority right now to
supplement the salary of the commissioner. That was
passed by the last Legislature. The commissioner's
salary right now is $65,400 a year. I can tell you that
there are a large number of administrators, not only
superintendents but a lot of assistant superintendents,
as well as a lot of education service center directors
that make more money than the commissioner. That
authority that the State Board has asked for is not to
go out and get private sources, but to use funds already
within the agency.
Q: Why do you think the board chose you over
the other six finalists to be commissioner of
education?
A: In talking to the board members and some of the
people on the selection committee, I think that perhaps
one of the strongest things that played in my favor
was that I was involved in the legislative process
when House Bill 72 passed. Not only that, but I was
involved with the Select Committee (the Select Com-
mittee on Public Education chaired by Dallas billion-
aire H. Ross Perot which recommended many of the
changes mandated by HB 72) and testified before the
Select Committee and in addition to that, really in
many ways was a key staff person in the agency that
provided information to various outside consultants
that were assigned to work with the Select Committee.
Many of those people came to me for information and I
continued on next page
May/June 9

3. continued from previous page
worked quite closely with them, providing information,
so I had a very clear understanding of what the
recommendations of the Select Committee were, and
then was able to be a part of the legislative process. So
I was really a part of the history of 72 being made.
Then, when House Bill 72 was passed, again I
worked very much in a lead role within the agency to
develop all the briefings and briefing materials that
were taken to schools and briefings done around the
state. We set up several teams of people that went out
and conducted briefings. Each team had several staff
members on it and I was on Team 1, so I really was
very thoroughly acquainted with all aspects of House
Bill 72, and in getting it off the ground and getting
answers given. I was thoroughly familiar with it and
supportive of it all along. I felt I understood what the
Legislature was trying to do and I believe very
sincerely that what it tried to do was exactly what
teachers and other school people were telling them
needed to be done to improve education. It was not
that the Select Committee or the Legislature just came
off the wall with their own answers. They developed
reports and they developed the statute after receiving
statewide input, and much of it from teachers. So it
was that kind of background, and that kind of solid
support for the bill, that I think caused the board to
realize that that was a real advantage on my part,
because anyone coming in from the outside would
have to learn all of that. There are literally thousands
and thousands of technicalities in House Bill 72, and
interpretations I understand and have even made
most of. If someone had come in without that back-
ground, it would have been very difficult for them.
The other thing that helped is that the board felt
that we need to make a lot of changes and they knew
that I was committed to seeing changes made.
Q: What was the most difficult part about being
interim commissioner?
A: The biggest difficulty that I had? I used the
expression that the only person who limps more than
a lame duck is an interim commissioner.
In other words, you are really a placeholder and
you're really trying to protect the right of the incoming
commissioner and you're trying to hold off on lots of
decisions if they can be left unmade until the new
commissioner gets there so that person can make
those decisions. For example, there's key staff posi-
tions — a number of which have been left vacant
simply because we felt they should be left vacant until
the new organization was designed, and the new
commissioner was there to put those people in place.
So we're running along right now with more than 100
vacancies in the agency. We'll always run along with
some vacancies, but we have a large number of
vacancies which, had we had those people employed,
could have helped. So just the fact that you are interim
as opposed to being the commissioner, and trying to
protect the right of the commissioner to make as many
decisions as that person can make, tends to cause
some things to get put off — tends to cause some
decisions that could be made to be deferred.
In terms of implementation of House Bill 72, the
biggest difficulty here was that we had a brand new
board which was not familiar with the state education
agency, and not necessarily familiar with House Bill
72 or with the whole system of education from a
technical standpoint. So one of the things the board
had to do was to come together, and it had to build
itself into a cohesive group that was able to analyze
problems, and make decisions that were in the best
interest of education. It takes time to do that. This
board has been really a hard-working board. I really
cannot believe the dedication and the amount of time
that they have put in to the job. But it is very difficult
when you're starting brand new with almost all brand
new board members and a bill as complex as House
Bill 72 comes along, to get it understood and even more
important, get rules written that the schools can then
implement. It's been a massive task for the agency
staff and for the State Board. We're now able to see
that every month, they're turning out rules and regu-
lations. It takes three months to get a rule out at least
with the three-reading process. So now we're just
turning out all kinds of rules and regs and policy
statements, and we're beginning to see the results.
Q: Getting back to what you said earlier about
vacancies, you're currently operating with sev-
eral vacancies at the deputy commissioner level.
How will those be filled?
A: We have a vacancy in our general counsel, we have
my position, deputy commissioner of finance, where I
had half the agency, and we have a vacancy in deputy
commissioner of interagency policy development coor-
dination, and that position essentially helps the
commissioner in dealing with the Legislature. So we
have three major deputy vacancies. One thing we
have to decide is what the organization is going to look
like before we start filling positions. That is why we're
going to sit down with the board and see what kind of
things they want to accomplish and where their
priorities are going to be, and then we will recommend
organization to the board to see that we meet those
priorities. Consequently the kinds of positions that we
will be filling in the near future will be limited. We
might go ahead and employ a general counsel, because
regardless of the organization, we'll have to have a
general counsel. In the other two slots, we probably
will not fill both as we'd prefer to wait and see what the
organization will look like, and in fact we might end
up eliminating both of those and using some of the
savings to create some other kinds of slots. Q: Will
you make any major changes in the way things
are done at the agency? A: Yes, there will be some
major changes. One of the kinds of things we've
already implemented is that we've tried to make the
agency a much more open agency. We've tried to
involve people in the process of decision-making much
more than we have previously.
10 ATPENews

4. Before we make rules to recommend to the board, all
the outside teacher organizations have an opportunity
to see those rules and to make suggestions. My
attitude would be that I want to hear from as many
people as possible before I have to make a decision.
Q: What do you consider the biggest problem
that was caused by House Bill 72?
A: The biggest problem with 72 was the timing. It was
passed in the summer, and then we had to call in a new
board. As a result, there was a period there where we
couldn't give out information because we didn't have
any answers. We had to start school without any
answers. But we're beyond all that now.
Q: There was some concern that because you
have been with TEA for more than 20 years, you
were considered part of the old guard and would
resist the reforms. How do you think the state's
leadership, specifically Gov. Mark White, Lt.
Gov. Bill Hobby, and House Speaker Gib Lewis
view you today? What about Ross Perot?
My attitude would be that I want to
hear from as many people as possible
before I have to make a decision.
A: I received congratulations from the state leadership
when I was named commissioner. I was at a meeting
of the LEB (Legislative Education Board, a 10-member
body created by House Bill 72 to oversee implementa-
tion of HB 72 reforms and curriculum review) and the
Speaker congratulated me. I think that indicates a
friendly relationship between the state leaders and
the education agency.
Q: What do you think about Ross Perot? Have
you talked to him lately?
A: I really think that education owes a great deal of
gratitude to Ross Perot and his Select Committee. If it
hadn't been for him and his work in the Legislature, if
he hadn't taken the role that he did, then none of this
would have occurred. We wouldn't have had a bill. I
have a great deal of respect for what he accomplished.
That may not be very popular, but I think we need to
sit back and look at the facts. People blame him for a
lot of their bitterness. But he had a job to do and he did
it. Everybody expected that he would continue to have
a very big voice and extensive involvement after-
wards, but he has not done that. It's now time for us to
do our part.
Q: As you begin your career as commissioner of
education, what message do you have for the
state's teachers?
A: The key to reform is in the classroom, because
that's where learning takes place. The teachers need
our help and our support. They've got to have that
support. While teachers don't get the credit when
things go right, they always seem to be the first to get
the blame when things don't go right.
Whether or not education in this state succeeds will
depend on the teachers. The thing I would say is to
stay in there and to teach kids to read, write, and to
think. Our kids will continue to live in a more complex
society than we live in today. It's even more important
that we get them to develop critical thinking skills. We
don't know what the future will be, so we have to teach
our kids both the basic skills and the critical thinking
skills.
We have a rare opportunity to make education much
better. The greatest concern I have is low teacher
morale. To that I would ask teachers to hang in there,
to give us one to two more years, give us a chance to
improve the system. Let's see what kinds of things we
can do. If they'll just hang in there and let's see how —
together — we can make it better. Let's see if we can
improve the salaries of teachers and also improve the
public's perception of teachers.
By the year 2000, we will have one million more kids
to educate. If I didn't have anything else to say to
teachers, I would say that 'we need you — and the kids
need you.' We need to see if we can make things better
for the next generation.
The saddest thing I can think of for our kids is
empty classrooms because there is no one there to
teach them — no group of caring persons there to do it.
The kids need them. £*