Category Archives: Innovation and Reform

I’m still recovering from all the election excitement. Rather than try to rehash all the interesting results for the world of education reform, I’m going to do the lazy, little kid thing and point you to a few pieces to digest the information and analysis for yourself:

Apparently, today is some kind of big day, with a lot of big people here in Colorado and in other states making some important decision about the future of the country or something. It sounds like some sort of big deal. But as elections go, I’m more tuned in to some key education reform races around the country — compliments of Mike Petrilli at Education Next. (In addition to the local education tax issues on the ballot in many Colorado school districts.) I’m watching a few of them, too. Indiana Superintendent of Public Instruction Tony Bennett has been one of the nation’s boldest education reform leaders. Choice? Accountability? Labor reforms? Check marks on all three. How will he fare seeking re-election? That’s for Hoosiers to decide. Even more interesting to me is a trio of Idaho ballot initiatives the teachers union is backing in an attempt to toss out some yummy tater tot reforms. Petrilli points out that New York City mayor Michael Bloomberg of all people has thrown some tangible support behind the reforms and against the union. Why can I almost imagine some bemused Pocatello denizen proclaiming: “New York City?”

My parents are convinced — well, maybe just one of them — that I’m going to be some kind of musical virtuoso. They signed me up for piano lessons. I’m not even ready to start working on “Mary Had a Little Lamb” yet, but don’t tell my mom a prodigy isn’t in the making. The reason I bring this up is because of the catchy title of a provocative Education Next posting by Dr. John Chubb: “Do Piano Teachers Need to Know How to Play the Piano?” I’d like to ask that of my piano teacher, but I’m pretty sure she’d just shake her head and laugh. But Chubb is making a point about the deep-seated systemic flaws in our nation’s K-12 teacher policies:

If you’ve read this blog for any length of time, you probably are well aware of the numerous flaws in the way our K-12 education system pays teachers. Most of the flaws emanate from the single salary schedule, which the vast majority of school districts use. Pay is differentiated almost exclusively by seniority and academic credentials, factors that have very little or no impact on meeting student learning needs. Why can’t we differentiate pay based on instructional specialty, how hard it is to find someone qualified to teach in a particular area? A new report by James Shuls of the Show-Me Institute sheds some interesting light on the need for that commonsense approach. Missouri has far more STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math) jobs available than non-STEM jobs, so shouldn’t there be a premium for people who are qualified in those areas?

In a lot of the debates Colorado has had about school funding (and more are sure to be had), the question lurking in the back of my mind is: What do we want our education system to be? What do we want it to do? Well, a new study from the Friedman Foundation for Educational Choice sends a blunt message about one key thing the education system in at least 47 states has been: a jobs program. The School Staffing Surge highlights a couple facts that would probably stun the average parent or other taxpayer: Between FY 1992 and FY 2009, the number of K-12 public school students nationwide grew 17 percent while the number of full-time equivalent school employees increased 39 percent, 2.3 times greater than the increase in students over that 18-year period. Among school personnel, teachers’ staffing numbers rose 32 percent while administrators and other staff experienced growth of 46 percent; the growth in the number of administrators and other staff was 2.7 times that of students.

Our friends at Education Next pose an interesting chicken-or-egg question about digital learning and the case for major education reforms: Will the transformative technology unleash itself, or does major work need to be done overhauling K-12 policies and institutions first? To hash out the details, Education Next has unleashed a couple of the leading lights in education reform to give a point-counterpoint online debate. In the end, though, any disparities between the arguments advanced by the Fordham Institute’s Checker Finn and the Innosight Institute’s Michael Horn appear to me more differences of degree than differences of kind. Finn says we need to overhaul the school finance system — allowing us to fund students, rather than bureaucratic programs and institutions — and traditional “local control” governance “when students assemble their education from multiple providers based in many locations, some likely on the other side of the planet.”

Far too often the world of K-12 education seems like a venture into the ridiculous. Forget the sublime. Some of us would be happy with a handful of common sense. But there’s also a good practical lesson for school reformers in a new from Michigan Capitol Confidential story highlighting a couple school districts’ sarcastic approach to implementing a 2010 teacher compensation law: Some Michigan school districts think their best teachers are worth $1 more than their worst. That’s the amount the Davison Community Schools in Genessee County, and the Stephenson Area Public Schools in Menominee County, pay to be in compliance with the state’s merit pay law, which was put in place when Jennifer Granholm was governor. The Gladstone Area Public Schools in Delta County pays its top-notch teachers $3 more than the worst. As Joanne Jacobs also highlights, a peek at these districts merely scratches the surface, as an estimated 80 percent of Michigan school districts essentially have resisted implementing the pay reform. Four out of five have ignored the law!

A quick Friday hit, thanks to Ed News Colorado, as the local Douglas County paper highlights the reform-minded school board’s progress in implementing performance pay and related upgrades to teacher policies: While pay for performance isn’t new in Douglas County, the program still under development pushes aside the traditional pay system based on years of experience and higher education coursework and degrees. “We’ve pretty much replaced the old step-and-lane structure (of) experience on the left, education on top,” said the district’s chief human resources officer, Brian Cesare. “We’re saying now it’s going to be performance on the top and market value on the left.”

I’ve shared with you before my concerns about the work of Colorado’s School Finance Partnership — too weighted down by established interests, too vague and unambitious thus far, etc. The Partnership put out a report in August, but now is transitioning to a series of technical discussions on how to make effective changes to school funding formulas and the like. State senator Michael Johnston, a key leader in the partnership, has stated his goal of striving to achieve both “bold” reforms to the School Finance Act and a “bold” request for additional tax revenue from voters (making such a tough request from cash-strapped voters in one sense would have to be bold). Just exactly how “bold” the respective proposals end up could make all the difference. You likely will hear more from me on that at a later point. But for now it’s interesting to note that Colorado isn’t alone in discussing this sort of “grand bargain.” Once more, our state may end up at the center of a national movement — at least according to an account from the Fordham Institute’s’ Michael Petrilli.

Last week my Education Policy Center friend Ben DeGrow came out with a short, fun, and kid-friendly paper called “Colorado K-12 Tax Hikes Challenged.” The paper looked at five large school districts asking voters for more tax funds on this fall’s ballot: Jefferson County, Denver, Cherry Creek, Aurora, and St. Vrain Valley. DeGrow acknowledged that these school budgets have faced more pressure than they are used to — mostly because per-pupil revenue growth has slowed down, but not actually dropped. Yet the household budgets of citizens in these communities have been hit even harder during the recent economic downturn. The paper concludes by offering “a different approach” that focuses on more productive spending. Looking at one of the five districts, Denver Public Schools, a new report by EAG News makes some specific suggestions for spending reductions to inefficient salary structures and union perks. The total estimated annual savings would be $37.5 million, including the following proposals: