The Cobb school board and administration have been sharply criticized from all quarters the past few years - and rightly so - for their consistent lack of transparency. Those critiques became even more pointed when it was revealed in July that the board had routinely voted behind closed doors in the past couple of years. An Open Records Act request that followed by the MDJ showed more than 50 times in which votes had taken place during executive sessions during the past two years; and showed as well at least 25 other instances in which the board illegally discussed (but did not vote on) matters in private. Such acts gave fuel to those who have argued that a culture of deceit and dishonesty is the order of the day at school headquarters.

The board, to its credit, in early August agreed to a number of steps meant to enhance transparency and make it easier for the public to keep track of board business.

The board unexpectedly took another significant step in that direction last week when it held its first-ever post-board meeting press conference. The event took place at the suggestion of new member David Morgan of Austell. The press conferences are expected to take place at the conclusion of future board meetings as well, according to Board Chairman Dr. John Abraham, who has been prodding the board toward greater openness.

"All in all, I was pleased with it," he said afterward. "I think it was scary for a lot of people. When you're under the microscope being criticized, rightly or wrongly, it makes you uncomfortable. But you can't be an expert sailor sailing in calm waters. We've got to be able to realize when we make a mistake, we correct it and move on."

The conference touched on such topics as the board's long-delayed strategic plan; the district's SAT scores for the year, which were up; and about the effect that shifting principals has on individual high schools' scores.

All in all, the press conference was a good forum in which to pitch substantive questions to the board and top administrators all at one time for on-the-record answers.

There long has been a "public comment" period during board meetings at which members of the public can let loose about whatever school issue strikes their fancy, but it's more of a "sound-off" period than a time for Q&A. Board members and staff do not typically respond to such comments, at least not during the meeting. And the press conference is for working media, not the public.

But perhaps, if the board wants to take its new "transparency" push to the next level, it should consider carving out a few minutes of each board meeting for a "question time" in which the public could ask questions - and get answers right then.

That, indeed, would be an even further step in the right direction.