Tag Archives: staffing

When I say “Top o’ the mornin” to you today, I really mean it. Good news! What is it, you say? Yesterday I hoped out loud that the Denver Public Schools board would make the right decision about the state’s first two “innovation school” proposals. Well, sometimes your hopes and dreams do come true. At least, so reports Rebecca Jones for Ed News Colorado: By a 4-3 vote, the board agreed to forward the proposals from Manual High School and Montclair School of Academics and Enrichment on to the state Board of Education, which will consider the requests on Thursday. If approved – and state officials have already indicated they feel the schools’ proposals are in order – Manual and Montclair will be given broad leeway to waive district policies and union contract provisions on everything from staffing to scheduling to teacher compensation. They will have many of the same freedoms as charter schools, but unlike charter schools, will still be directly accountable to the DPS board. On the fast track for the world of education, the waiver requests from Manual and Montclair are scheduled to go before the State Board of Education later this week. After (hopefully) receiving approval […]

On Tuesday, voters in Colorado’s largest school district rejected both a mill levy increase and bond proposal: “When you are a people intense organization those reductions will be people,” [superintendent Cindy] Stevenson said. “That’s teachers, counselors, librarians, um, special education staff. That’s where we’re going to have to look for cuts. And that’s going to be difficult because that will result in increased class size, fewer choices for our kids, less teacher training.” Stevenson said the money from the ballot issues would’ve gone toward teachers, books and significant structural improvements. The first reaction many may have is: Why doesn’t the district threaten to cut the number of administrators rather than classroom staffing? No doubt there are some additional efficiencies that could be found by rearranging these priorities. But no matter how good it makes some people feel to say so, just cutting the size of central administration isn’t the answer.