Category Archives: Education Politics

Late last week I chimed in on the results of the 2011 Education Next–PEPG Survey of Public Opinion on school reform issues, noting the significant uptick in support for private school vouchers. Super edublogger Joanne Jacobs drew out another finding, namely that the views of teachers and the general public on key reform issues seem to be diverging rather than coming together. But I think that perhaps the most insightful observation on the results came from Mike Petrilli at the Education Gadfly, who wrote about “the school–and the deficits–we deserve”: …particularly timely, in this era of fiscal austerity, are new insights about the public’s views on school budgets. And guess what: On education, like everything else, Americans don’t want to make tough choices. They want to keep taxes low while boosting school spending. Sound familiar? Petrilli notes that 65 percent of survey respondents don’t want to increase taxes to pay for education. That’s nationwide. The number should be at least as high in Colorado — which is bad news for the Rollie Heath education tax hike headed to our November ballot.

Earlier this year the Colorado legislature considered a bill by state representative Don Beezley that would have empowered parents of students in low-performing schools with new options to turn around those schools. Unfortunately, the “parent trigger” bill was shot down by the House Education Committee. Now, anyone in the know could tell you that the “parent trigger” is hardly an idea unique or original to Colorado. A major version of the idea has taken off in California, and a number of other states have weighed similar proposals. Like Connecticut — where Dropout Nation’s RiShawn Biddle this week exposed an internal American Federation of Teachers (AFT) document giving a transparent look at the union’s anti-parent power strategy and tactics. Biddle later posted a follow-up after the union’s initial reply, noting:

Judging by some of the grumbling I hear from my parents lately, there’s a big hubbub in Washington, D.C., about people in government borrowing bazillions of dollars and not paying it back — or something like that. Which reminds me… You really ought to watch this 2-minute video put together by my friends at the Independence Institute: Even though it stars yucky girls, it won seventh place in some big national competition. Guess I should be happy for all of them — so sue me, all right? But anyway, this is an education blog, and I did have a reason for bringing up D.C. and politicians. (Only so often, you know, don’t want to make it more than I can take.) Allison Sherry of our own Denver Post has an interesting write-up for Education Next on the education policies and platforms of leading Republican presidential contenders. While you should read through the whole thing, I picked out one section to highlight:

Update, 7/28: Writing at redefinED, Doug Tuthill and Adam Emerson highlight the rich irony behind the “Save Our Schools” phenomenon. So apparently there’s some big national march called “Save Our Schools” or something like that. I told you about it a month ago. While the good people at the National Council on Teacher Quality took a conciliatory approach to pointing out the flaws in the “SOS” program. But the award goes to Sara Mead, writing at Eduwonk, for this effective takedown: …This is not an agenda for accomplishing anything. It’s just a wish list. Half of it is a wishlist of things the organizers don’t want (performance-based pay, school closures). Half of it is a wishlist for things someone might want, without any clear theory of how to operationalize them or what that might actually look like in practice in the real world. (I, too, would like to see “Well-rounded education that develops every student’s intellectual, creative, and physical potential”–but in the absence of clear prescriptions and mechanisms about how to make that a reality, well, you might as well wish for a pony, too.)… I can’t help but think that a lot of people marching on the nation’s capital […]

Good thing my parents don’t have any kids enrolled in Brighton Public Schools. Nothing per se against the school district northeast of Denver. But I can only imagine my mom and dad’s reaction if they got one of those tax hike-supporting political flyers in this year’s school information packet. Probably something like what one mom told Channel 7 reporter Russell Haythorn (though maybe a bit more colorful): “Education specific funding being used to push a political agenda — that’s not appropriate,” said concerned parent Stacy Petty. Agreed. And credit goes to the hard-working folks at Complete Colorado for breaking this story first. They have posted a copy of the flyer sent home to Brighton parents.

Still trying to recover from the big fireworks last night, I couldn’t decide between two blogging ideas this morning. So instead I’m giving you a little bit of both. First, you just have to read today’s Wall Street Journal editorial proclaiming what I told you last week — that 2011 is indeed The Year of School Choice: No fewer than 13 states have enacted school choice legislation in 2011, and 28 states have legislation pending. Last month alone, Louisiana enhanced its state income tax break for private school tuition; Ohio tripled the number of students eligible for school vouchers; and North Carolina passed a law letting parents of students with special needs claim a tax credit for expenses related to private school tuition and other educational services. The Douglas County Choice Scholarship program gets a mention later on in the piece, making Colorado one of the 13 states. Isn’t that number ironic, coming right after the July 4th holiday, remembering the number of colonies that declared independence from the British crown? It could have been 14, if Pennsylvania hadn’t fumbled the ball, as the Journal points out. So make that Year of School Choice almost perfect.

Believe it or not, July is here and the Independence Day weekend is practically upon us. You know what that means. Lots of red, white and blue; cookouts; parades; and, of course, fireworks. But probably not the kind of fireworks you’re thinking of. One thing about fireworks is how they can provide a moment of brilliant light that illuminates the sky and sometimes the ground below, providing a candid glimpse of things otherwise concealed by a blanket of darkness. In that sense this frank declaration of union priorities delivered at the 2009 National Education Association Representative Assembly certainly would qualify as fireworks: Will there be similar fireworks — or maybe fireworks of another kind — at this year’s NEA event, which is now getting underway in Chicago? The big attention for 2011 is focused on NEA’s new teacher evaluation policy proposal, but the agenda also includes a proposed dues hike and a formal endorsement of President Obama for re-election. The best coverage of the NEA Representative Assembly (hands-down) can be found at two blogs: Mike Antonucci’s Intercepts and Stephen Sawchuk’s Education Week Teacher Beat. Light a sparkler or two for me while you’re at it.

Camping trips can be fun, but no one told me just how hard it would be to blog while out in the middle of nowhere in the great outdoors. No, seriously, it was fun to get away for awhile. But I hope none of you were left to wonder: If little Eddie isn’t watching the world of Colorado education, then who is? Probably not so much, especially since school is out for most students and people are focusing more on soaking up the summer rays. Anyway, while I’m trying to get my bearings a bit, maybe it’s time to take a look at a couple of good summer reads on the world of education:

About eight weeks ago I brought your attention to the fact that Colorado and Michigan taxpayers both are still underwriting teachers union release time. But not so much anymore in one of our neighboring states. This is one to chalk up in the “How did I miss that?” category. Anyway, way back in March, Utah enacted House Bill 183. According to the description from Parents for Choice in Education, a Utah grassroots group backing education reform, the legislation: Prohibits granting paid association leave and requires reimbursement to a school district of the costs for certain employees, including benefits, for the time that the employee is on unpaid association leave.

If you gave me a big box of crayons and asked me to write a manifesto, it’s probably not what I would have come up with. But I am glad to give it a big thumbs up, and hope that lots of big people sign on. What am I talking about? Closing the Door on Innovation: Why One National Curriculum is Bad for America: We, the undersigned, representing viewpoints from across the political and educational spectrum, oppose the call for a nationalized curriculum in the Albert Shanker Institute Manifesto “A Call for Common Content.” We also oppose the ongoing effort by the U.S. Department of Education to have two federally funded testing consortia develop national curriculum guidelines, national curriculum models, national instructional materials, and national assessments using Common Core’s national standards as a basis for these efforts. We agree that our expectations should be high and similar for all children whether they live in Mississippi or Massachusetts, Tennessee or Texas. We also think that curricula should be designed before assessments are developed, not the other way around. But we do not agree that a one-size-fits-all, centrally controlled curriculum for every K-12 subject makes sense for this country or for any […]