Category Archives: School Board

So last night the Douglas County Board of Education hosted an hour of public comment on proposals made by the community’s School Choice Task Force. Of course, the testimony overwhelmingly was about the “Option Certificates,” or voucher, proposal. The Denver Post‘s Jeremy Meyer reports that public comments “were evenly split for and against the plan.” Ed News Colorado’s Nancy Mitchell says the comments were about 60/40 against the private school choice proposal, though their embedded five-minute video dedicates 80 percent of airtime to opponents. In addition to the Ed News video, you should watch the local 9News report, including a great comment from Douglas County resident and task force member Charcie Russell: “It’s not about private versus public, it’s really about more choice, and I see that great for kids, great for parents, and great for the district,” Russell said. It’s not surprising to see passion on both sides. The opposition, though, should consider the merits of their arguments. Drawing from resources at the Foundation for Educational Choice and the Institute for Justice, my Education Policy Center friends have compiled the following document to address concerns about effects on public school performance, fiscal impact and constitutionality:

Most of us know about public charter schools: publicly funded and publicly accountable schools with independent boards and waivers from certain state laws and regulations concerning personnel and program. Here in Colorado they’ve been around quite awhile and have become an important part of the education landscape. Right now, as the Colorado League of Charter Schools reports, there are about 170 charter schools serving 70,000 students in our state (or 176 schools serving 66,000-plus students, if you accept the Center for Education Reform’s new numbers). There’s been a long debate about charters that doesn’t need to be rehashed here. Some are truly top-flight, head and shoulders above most public schools, others operate at about the same level but offer something different or unique, while some are underperforming (one of the great things about charter schools is the poor ones can be shut down much more easily than other public schools). The myths about charters have been debunked over and over and over again.

Update, 11/9: Blogger Ben Boychuk at Somewhat Reasonable gives a plug to Douglas County and to little ol’ Eddie. He echoes our remarks and raises a great point: “Indeed, what if the public schools in Douglas County, Colorado served the interests of taxpayers and parents, and not those of the unions and ranking members of the establishment with a vested interest in preserving the status quo?” I love it when the Denver Post brings big attention to issues I’ve covered here weeks before. It tells me little Eddie is ahead of the curve. It was true of this summer’s Common Core standards debate, and today it’s true of the Douglas County school board looking to expand the boundaries of parental choice. I wrote on October 18 about the DCSD School Choice Task Force: The Task Force has looked at a range of changes for possible recommendation and adoption — everything from improving open enrollment policies to enhancing services available to home schoolers to ensuring equitable treatment of charter schools to considering a local private school choice program. I wrote that after the Board itself publicly reasserted in a public memo: We believe that informed parents, not Board members, are best […]

How often do you see a local school board proactively promoting school choice — including choices inside and outside the district, for the sake of satisfying the local education customers? Let’s be honest: It’s pretty rare. So maybe it’s time to introduce you to the Board of Education for the Douglas County School District, the third largest in Colorado. Last Thursday the DCSD board sent out a memo that included this interesting passage: We also want to address the perception that the Board of Education prefers one type of school over another. Nothing could be further from the truth. Simply put, your Board supports choice. We believe that informed parents, not Board members, are best suited to determine which schools will best serve the needs of their individual students. Under our Superintendent’s leadership, schools are making efforts to define themselves clearly. We strongly support these efforts so that parents have the best information to choose which school will meet the unique learning needs and goals of their children. This work will also provide choices for teachers to match their professional styles with the school’s learning environment. Our role will be properly limited to ensuring that all schools operate on a […]

Interesting new story out of northern Colorado… Sherrie Peif of the Greeley Tribune reported yesterday on some turmoil in the Weld County Re-1 School District as the local school board considers changing the process of addressing teacher policies: On Friday, Jo Barbie, the district superintendent, sent an e-mail to teachers telling them that the board was considering a policy change that would affect the Valley Education Association. Barbie attached a copy of the changes to the policy that struck all wording in the current policy and added two sentences that VEA members said essentially take away their right to choose their own union representation. The story goes on to explain that just over half (52 percent) of Weld Re-1 teachers belong to the union, and that a lot of teachers may feel left out of the representation: “In the past year, the board has been contacted that the views that are being expressed aren’t always the views of everybody,” board member Steve Reams said. “We want to make it where every teacher can come in here and engage in that.”

We’re getting closer to that Waiting for Superman Colorado premiere… less than two weeks! While we know that a school isn’t necessarily better because it’s a charter school, the coming of the movie reminds us there are some innovative charter operators attaining remarkable results. One of the charter networks deserving positive attention is Rocketship Education, the “hybrid” school network that launched a few years ago in San Jose, California. (To get up to speed, go back and listen to the iVoices podcast with Rocketship Education CEO John Danner.) The most recent results (PDF) show that Rocketship’s two elementary schools — both of which serve high-poverty stuent populations– are continuing on a high trajectory of academic performance:

Budget times are tougher than usual for school district coffers all over. I get that. So what’s the solution? For some interest groups entrenched in the status quo (read: teachers unions), laying off teachers with less seniority is preferred to all teachers giving up their lavish health care plan for a more reasonable one. At least that’s the case in Milwaukee. A long story in this week’s Journal-Sentinel (H/T Eduwonk) explains: “The reality is we cannot sustain the current system without major structural change,” [Milwaukee School Board President Michael] Bonds said. “We could literally save hundreds of jobs with the stroke of a pen if teachers switched to the lower-cost health-care plan.” The teachers union has countered that the board is bargaining in public by offering jobs in exchange for health-care concessions.

The Pueblo Chieftain reports that Pueblo County School District 70 has combined its two union bargaining agreements into one: The district’s board on Tuesday night approved a single contract with the Pueblo County Teachers Association and the Association of Classified Employees. In at least one respect the move makes sense, because the two contracts contain a similar unjust and burdensome requirement. Both the district’s non-union teachers and classified employees have to file a written form each year within a narrow time frame to opt out of paying a full year of union dues. As a 2008 Independence Institute op-ed points out, the onerous policy affects real people:

Not too long ago I wrote about my Education Policy Center friends’ visit to Adams School District 50 for the Standards-Based Education tour. Some seem to have taken the posting as an unqualified enthusiastic endorsement of the district’s SBS program, or maybe they thought I was being too one-sided and generous with praise. The intent was to provide a descriptive summary of what my friends saw from the official tour. Okay, though, I own up for not making it clearer, and maybe I gave the district too much benefit of the doubt. But that’s also what happens when my friends let a 5-year-old do their blogging for them. (Not that I don’t like doing it, I’m just saying….) Anyway, a few facts are plain: 1) Adams 50’s SBS system is new and untested. 2) Buy-in from schools and teachers certainly isn’t universal across the district, and implementation has been rough — at least at times. 3) Test results so far haven’t been encouraging.

A couple weeks ago I brought your attention to the fact that it was THE week for Senate Bill 191, the monumental effort to reform Colorado’s teacher evaluation and tenure system. Well, now that THE week is over and the bill passed the senate, this week really is THE week — as it goes up for a critical House Education Committee vote on Thursday. In the meantime, the heated debate over SB 191 has brought attention back to a locally-negotiated special perk for many teachers unions — tax-funded release time from the classroom for teachers to lobby against the bill. I have asked the question before: Where is the accountability for school employee union leave activities? In an op-ed published three (count ’em, three) places since Friday, my Education Policy Center friend Ben DeGrow says the latest experience with release time to rally against SB 191 makes the issue as relevant and as significant as ever. Take your pick: