Drawing on widespread dissatisfation with the declining standards of American schools, Republican senatorial hopeful James W. Rappaport has been pitching a plan to revamp the department of Education, by stripping of it its financial clout and shifting authority to the local level.

And while glitzier campaign issues have cast a long shadow in Rappaport's fight to unseat Democratic Sen. John F. Kerry, the reform plan has caught the eyes of education experts, who remain deeply divided on its prospects for success.

Like the high-profile Citizens for Limited Taxation petition to roll back Massachusetts taxes to their 1988 level, the Rappaport plan--calling on the Education Department to hand 60 percent of its budget directly to local school districts--has a lot of sparkle. But its critics worry that the plan is simply a repeat of irresponsible Reagan-era tactics that spurred serious fiscal problems in Massachusetts and other states.

"It sounds like he's got a way to go to become familiar with the Department of Education," said David Merkowitz of the American Council on Education. "The experience we had with that in the 1980s is that it's the reason so many states are in fiscal trouble."

The concept of deregulation, or "new federalism," has been a central tenet of Republican dogma since the early 1980s. Under the Reagan Administration, spending at the local level began to take precedence over "top-down" allocation of resources from the federal level.

The policy's rationale is that it sends the money directly where it is needed, bypassing unnecessary bureaucracy. After last fall's much-heralded education summit in Charlottesville, a number of politicians were quick to jump on the deregulatory bandwagon--including Rappaport, a 34-year old Concord business magnate who has never run for public office.

The latest proposed budget for the Education Department is $24.6 billion; the Rappaport plan would send $14.8 billion of this to local schools "with no strings and no bureaucrats attached," said Gary McMillan, a Rappaport spokesperson.

By reducing the size of the federal programs, the government would save at least $500 million, which could also be earmarked for local use, Rappaport claims.

"Effectively, there would be more money available for the schools," said McMillan.

Such proposals have a definite appeal for education officials dismayed by the declining standards of American education, said one Education Department official, who asked not to be identified.

"The thrust of his program we support," said the official, adding that Rappaport's estimates of the savings under his plan were substantially correct. "I think we're generally working towards what he's calling for."

However, the official added, the savings would force the government to neglect its development and evaluation of new school curriculums, and require cuts in many other programs.

And the dividend from such bureaucratic cuts, to be sent to individual school districts, may not necessarily aid public education. Several studies have indicated that educational performance doesn't always improve as more money is spent on each pupil.

"They're not necessarily related," the official said.

And by converting funds once earmarked for particular educational purposes into general "block funds," the Education Department could set itself up for a major cut in funding, said Merkowitz.