Mr. Sark, first name forgotten, was my junior-high shop teacher. Though I haven’t thought of him for a good 30 years, there he was standing before me the other day, in the figurative sense, just as I remembered him – crew cut, muscular, a demeanor as crisp as the starched plaid shirts he favored.

He was more than a good and dedicated teacher. To the boys of Robert A. Taft Junior High, he was an industrial arts god. After all, meeting Mr. Sark’s expectations, being a beneficiary of his munificence and an OK guy in his book meant the difference between spending the year with a hand saw or being an Authorized Power Tool User. And in those innocent times, using loud and powerful machines to turn a piece of lumber into a pile of sawdust was a favorite fantasy of 12-year-old boys.

Mr. Sark also, I believe, invented the credo of his profession: Measure twice, cut once. No mere variation of the insipid “haste makes waste,” his was an axiom of inscrutable subtlety, a Sphinx-like guardian of some universal truth. It was “look before you leap” wrapped in a riddle and trussed up with enigma and it was, I’m pretty sure, the reason Mr. Sark suddenly appeared from that place where dim memories of three decades lurk.

We are, of course, in a golden age of measuring. As a society, we measure twice just as a warm-up for further measuring. In public policy, especially, there is nothing so certain, so obvious, so self-evident, that it can’t be measured one more time. Or, since the appearance of action is really just as good as actual action and a lot safer, a hundred more times.

President Bush, for example, wants to test every American school kid as a way to measure every American school. Bless his heart for being interested in education, but aren’t our school kids already tested enough? And won’t a national test applied to the various state and local curricula have to be so general as to be almost pointless? While not all “good” schools are in affluent places, it has been pretty well established that ”bad” schools (rooting them out being the stated purpose of this exercise) are invariably found where there’s an overwhelming combination of poverty, hunger, crime, drugs and violence. Maybe not – better measure again.

Measuring’s in the news at the state level, too. Every two years, the Maxwell School of Government at Syracuse University and Governing magazine team up to measure the effectiveness and efficiency with which states operate. The measurements have been taken and the 2001 report cards are out.

The press release headline shouts, “Maine gets ‘B-‘ on report card!” Call me fussy, but a B-minus hardly warrants an exclamation mark. Beyond that, it’s good that Maine brought its grade up from the “C” of 1999 and the report makes note of some of the nuts-and-bolts improvements in how the state is running itself in a more businesslike and professional way. Maintenance of state buildings is better, bookkeeping’s improved, the attempt to improve management is being made.

But here’s an example of how measuring, no matter how carefully done, can still be without meaning. The report heaps particular praise on Maine for improving the process by which it hires state employees – fewer tests, more hiring discretion for managers, that sort of thing. No mention made of the fact that more than 300 state jobs are going begging because they simply don’t pay enough. Maine got kudos for new policies that, in theory, treat existing employees better. No mention made of the demeaning reality for thousands of teachers who’ve stood in line for hours on Saturdays to be fingerprinted. Still, we’ve been measured and that, apparently, is what counts.

Gov. King did some measuring during his State of the State address. Remember that part when he held one hand up to show what Maine workers get paid and the other up higher to show what workers in other states get paid? And how, if both hands go up, the Maine hand is still lower, still behind? Not terribly scientific, but at least it’s measuring. After six years in office, at least the governor has figured out the fundamental flaw in the ”rising tide” economic theory.

Another bit of measuring just out is the annual report of the Maine Economic Growth Council. Make that the Maine Economic Decline Council – the state is stuck at 37th nationally with a per-capita income that’s 30 percent lower than the rest of New England and 14 lower that the national average. The number of jobs paying a livable wage dropped, as did job growth among new businesses, as did the state’s capacity to create and sustain high-tech jobs – we’re now 46th in that category.

Maine has taken its own measure; what Maine’s doing about with it is another matter. We do, happily, have a plan. It’s called 30/1,000, a popular national yardstick based upon the concept that states that will prosper in the future will be those that will have 30 percent of adults with college educations and an investment in research and development equal to $1,000 per capita. Maine now stands at 19/238. Look through the irrelevant and pointless bills, all 2,000-plus of them, being considered by this Legislature and try to find anything that suggests we have anything more than some measurements and a piece of paper that says ”plan” across the top.

Some states do have more. Michigan is one of three states that got an “A” from Governing. It has, like Maine, an aging economy and a 30/1,000 plan to make the transition. It also has, like Maine, a newly revised state educational assessment test that measures academic achievement. Here’s the difference – in Michigan, measuring is used to further the plan; students who pass all four sections of the test get $2,500 a year for college or vocational school. Maine students who pass get to move to another state to get a decent job.

Which reveals another facet of Mr. Sark’s cryptic maxim, the Confucian-like distinction it hints at between proceeding with caution and being just plain paralyzed: Measure twice, by all means, but don’t forget the cutting part. At some point, you’ve got to fire up the machinery and make some sawdust.

Bruce Kyle is the assistant editorial page editor for the Bangor Daily News.