Another year, another study. After meeting for a year and conducting eight public meetings across the state, the governor’s Education Task Force has issued its final report.

A call to action it is not.

The public meetings drew more than 2,000 people across the state and produced some general consensus about educational issues. Kansans, the report said, understand the link between education and the state’s economic success and they know education is one of the most important investments the state can make.

So far, so good. But from there, the report goes on to explain only in broad terms how Kansas can make its education system — from pre-kindergarten through post-secondary — better. Many of the conclusions are pretty obvious:

• “Expand access to high-quality early learning programs particularly for high-risk children.”
• “Implement strategies to close the achievement gap.”
• “Provide incentives and special training to recruit and retain high quality teachers in at-risk and high-demand areas.”
• “Implement secondary and postsecondary programs aimed at ensuring student success and improving graduation rates.”

OK, we need to ensure student success and close the “achievement gap.” Sounds good. How do we do that?

Apparently a lot of it is tied up with money:

• “Fully fund the existing formula and add an annual cost of living adjustment to the formula.”
• “Increase funding for postsecondary education and not depend on tuition increases …”

What does it mean to “fully fund the existing formula”? It would mean more money, but how much more? Where would it come from? Last week’s ruling that the state’s funding formula is unconstitutional also raises questions about whether the “existing formula” is even a legal way to distribute funds to districts around the state.

Task force members defended the report’s lack of specifics by saying those items were the responsibility of the governor and Legislature. One member said, “We did a study, we expect the governor and the Legislature to follow through on that.”

Maybe that’s a valid viewpoint, but it seems it would be much easier for state officials to “follow through” if they were given some additional details on what strategies could be used to accomplish the task force’s goals. Retaining high quality teachers, raising student achievement and emphasizing early childhood education are good guiding principles, but they don’t provide the kind of detailed plan of action that legislators are looking for as they consider funding for the lion’s share of the state budget that is dedicated to education.

“Education First,” as the task force report is called, makes the point several times that additional funds are needed to improve the Kansas education system, but it provides no details on how much is needed or how it will be used. Nor does it set priorities to let lawmakers know which items should be addressed first or which are most important to Kansas students.

Although many of the report’s conclusions are pretty obvious, the task force’s vision is a good one. Translating that vision into a budget reality, however, will be a huge leap. That job apparently now falls to Sebelius and her staff. It’s a tall order and Kansans will be eager to see how it turns out.