Assemblyman Sam Hoyt’s call for a complete overhaul of education is, on the face of it, a worthwhile idea. But that’s exactly what his reform bill will remain without a realistic chance of getting out of committee in the Assembly or of finding of a sponsor in the Senate.

As unlikely as that seems, someone needs to sign on to this worthwhile effort. And at the very least, the education ideas Hoyt has assembled deserve serious debate.

The Buffalo Democrat, in a non-election year, has melded into his bill some of the best ideas to have been kicked around for years, and has added a few new ones. His omnibus education reform bill is designed to put the state within reach of some of the $4.3 billion available in federal “Race to the Top” education money.

And what the assemblyman proposes make sense. In fact, it has always made sense—even when others suggested it years ago.

Such initiatives as lengthening the school year by at least 20 days would have an obvious impact in the time students have to reach educational goals.

This is an important point, because American society has long since moved away from an agrarian culture that necessitated a shorter school year. We’re now in a technological age that has drawn us into global competition with China and India. Education is key to that competition.

Eliminating Albany’s cap on charter schools is another measure this page has supported in the past, believing that competition will spark the best results from both traditional and charter schools. Of course, education officials must use caution in measuring impacts on traditional public schools and their financial resources, but charters are intended as the experimental centers for best practices and educational excellence as well as for competition.

Moreover, Obama administration education aides have made it clear that charter caps could disqualify states from the federal funding competition.

Another area the president’s aides may not look favorably upon—and one that is eliminated in the Hoyt proposal—is a New York law that bars schools from using student test scores to determine teacher tenure. The Hoyt bill would use non-government groups such as Teach for America to certify teachers, and offer schools letter grades based on academic performance and other factors. That would have to be carefully considered, but does deserve that consideration.

This bill would cost up to $75 million, Hoyt says, but that cost may not come all at once. He believes it could be cheaper initially and then grow gradually, depending upon the amount the State Legislature would set for district and teacher grants.

Hoyt’s main point, though, is that the status quo is not working. It’s hard to argue that. New York’s test scores and educational outcomes are proof that reform is needed.