COLUMBUS: Ted Strickland wants to roll down the drawbridge and cross the moat into the Ohio Department of Education. The governor plans to appoint, with Senate approval, his own director of education, marginalizing the state superintendent.

Obviously, he's convinced he needs more control to make necessary changes in the state's educational system. He should be careful about what he wishes for. As one wag observed: ''Trying to reform education is like moving a graveyard.''

Even so, if the governor is willing to start digging, the legislature should provide the shovel.

Some claim that giving the governor more control would politicize education, but it's already controlled by politicians.

The legislature passes education bills and approves any Department of Education recommendations. Legislators alone wrote Senate Bill 140, an early education reform bill. Ohio's first effort at a state standard — a model language arts curriculum — was recommended by an Ohio Senate Commission, mandated by the legislature, resisted and then totally botched by the education department.

The department's first ''academic'' standards were so pathetic that the legislature tossed them and announced it would approve any further such efforts. Guidelines set by a previous State Board of Education — 16 years ago — requiring that standards be as rigorous as international standards have been ignored because they lacked the force of law.

Bob Taft moved to improve the standards and then convened the Commission on Higher Education and the Economy, laying the groundwork for wide-ranging changes that newly appointed Chancellor Eric Fingerhut is now effectively making.

And, now, the nation's governors are insisting that at long last we get an accurate count of dropouts.

So education is already politicized. What's more, it is ''educatorized'' as lobbying by organized educational interest groups greatly influences politicians.

Frankly, what concerns many folks is that the governor will favor some interest groups over others. Let us hope and expect that he realizes schools exist for students who attend them, not adults who control them while recognizing that by effectively supporting the superintendents, teachers and principals, student achievement can and must be improved.

The governor's ''Seniors to Sophomore'' program and his emphasis on preschool education are good signs. His move to end Education Choice vouchers and his reticence regarding autistic children give pause. Worth noting is that voters quickly reacted to all these stands, demonstrating that the governor is much more visible than the Department of Education. Thus, his decisions are more likely to be scrutinized, giving the ''public'' more voice in public education.

More, the governor is in a better position to overhaul the whole educational system to make it more streamlined and cost-effective. A major overhaul could fund schools without reducing other services or relying so heavily on property taxes — what the governor campaigned on.

Perhaps we can't do ''more with less'' but with a little more we can do much more.

The governor could:

• Make pre-K-12 and post-secondary education into one cohesive system. Students could advance when they master required skills as Arizona is proposing —not after they've warmed seats for a year.

Educators have long advocated ''holding content steady and varying the time,'' but they do just the opposite resulting in grade inflation, dumbed-down curriculum, students passing along without getting the help they need. Others are denied opportunities to earn college credits and save tuition costs.

• Institute a statewide salary scale and facilitate teacher movement among districts.

• Coordinate and improve the myriad programs and services some youth need to be successful in school as all youth-related state agencies, except the education department, report to him.

• Convince the School Facilities Commission to save millions by using pre-engineered structures that can accommodate increasingly fluctuating school populations.

Gov. Strickland's move is not all that unusual. In 36 states, the state superintendent is not appointed by the state board of education. Governors in many states have already expanded their authority over education and others are seeking to do so.

The Massachusetts governor just named his appointed state board president to be secretary of education overseeing both K-12 and higher education. The trend is for elected officials to take more control as they are exasperated with the lack of progress despite 25 years of additional resources. They are increasingly aware that educated citizens are crucial to a successful economy and an enhanced quality of life.

Heretofore, there's been little clarity about expectations and governors have not been held all that accountable for educational results. The legislature should grant this governor his wish, set clear expectations and hold him accountable.

If he falls short, they can always take back the shovel.