The Kansas Board of Education and its actions concerning science standards once again have brought attention – what many people consider unwanted attention – on the state of Kansas and its schools.

Yet, for all the discussion and news coverage, it seems that the board’s vote earlier this week may have almost no effect on what is taught in most Kansas schools.

Although the inclusion of arguments against the scientific theory of evolution will have some impact on state assessment tests, many teachers and school districts say they have no intention of changing what they teach in science classes.

And, because the new science standards aren’t scheduled to go into effect until 2007, a philosophical change on the board as a result of the November 2006 election of five seats on the nine-member board could cancel the standards before they are even implemented.

That doesn’t, however, mean that the board’s decision will have no impact on schools or state politics.

The fact that many local school boards and teachers will ignore, if not overtly defy, the state board’s decision on evolution may be the first wedge in a growing chasm between local districts and the Kansas Department of Education.

Local districts had a good working relationship with the department during the tenure of former Commissioner Andy Tompkins, who had been a teacher, principal and superintendent before taking his state post. By contrast, superintendents already have expressed concern over the selection of Bob Corkins, who has no educational job experience, to the state’s top education job.

Local districts in Kansas retain a significant level of autonomy in running their schools, and if superintendents and local board members don’t gain respect in the state leadership, they are likely to exercise that control and distance themselves from state policies. That doesn’t seem like positive development as the state works to raise achievement and set a new direction for public school funding.

Speaking of rifts, the political rift between the two factions of the state school board obviously is deeper than ever. The six-member majority, with the aid of its hand-picked commissioner, seems poised to run roughshod over the board, setting a controversial agenda that includes approval of school vouchers and expansion of charter schools in the state. So united are the six members who voted to change the science standards, that the rest of the board is unlikely to have any influence over that agenda.

Which brings us to the question of who has the last word in the state’s education policy. The answer, of course, is the voters who put members of the state Board of Education into office. It’s certain voters will have some choices to make. Three members of the six-member majority voting block already have announced opponents for their seats.

A recent poll conducted by the Journal-World and 6News implied broad statewide support for the teaching of intelligent design, but a closer examination of the figures tempers that appraisal. About half of the people who said they knew what intelligent design was all about said they would favor teaching it in the schools. However, only about half of those polled even pretended to know what intelligent design is.

The challenge leading up to next year’s election is to make sure voters know enough about intelligent design and other key education issues to be able to carefully evaluate candidates and cast informed votes for their state school board representatives. An election changed the course of the state board in 2000 after the state’s first foray into the evolution controversy. It could, and should, happen again.