Many people feel that if Senate bill 191 is passed that Colorado will have created a great milestone in reforming education. Maybe the tenure of Colorado teachers does need to be evaluated and changes made.
But at least one half of the evaluation based upon the scores of the students on the CSAP? How many skills other than academic can you name that a child ought to acquire as a result of being a student? In addition to those being tested on the CSAP how many technical/employability skills can you name? What about the student who is not intellectually above average? Special talents? Who is athletically inclined and very well may be a professional athlete someday? (This could go on and on).
Just what is the intent of SB191? The Denver Post has called it the “reform bill.” If this bill passes does that mean that we have reformed education in Colorado? I didn’t realize that there were that many bad teachers in Colorado who have over the years brought education to the low level that it now is thought to be. And the CEA gets the blame for the low level and the Post says “the CEA is attempting to torpedo Race to the Top funding”.
If the evaluation of teachers is so heavily geared to the scores of the CSAP then the CEA is only fulfilling it responsibility to the teachers to protect them from such a flawed approach. Okay. Let’s change the teacher tenure law, but let’s find a better way to evaluate the teacher.
Now let’s get on with trying to reform education in Colorado. I propose the following ideas:
*Eliminate the State Board of Education (SBE). Laws affecting education are passed by the legislature, not the SBE. The functions of the SBE could be carried out effectively by the Colorado Department of Education (CDE).
*Consolidate the 178 school districts in the state to between 35 and 50. This move would eliminate approximately 125 school superintendents. This would eliminate most if not all the “not the best” superintendents. It would also result in significant financial savings, which could be applied to such specialists as curriculum, reading, science, etc.
*A Superintendent’s Certificate would require a doctors degree, with one year internship. While standards cannot be set for members of the local district board of education, these elected officials should be encouraged to engage in an extensive inservice education program which would be maintained by the CDE.
*Performance evaluations for superintendents, principals and teachers. These evaluation would become a part of the permanent performance record.
*Preschool programs. The child would enroll on the first ‘enrollment’ date after its fourth birth date. The child would remain in the preschool program until he/she met certain performance standards, at which time the child would be admitted to the third grade. Minimum and maximum ages would be set for entering the third grade.
*Individualize education to suit the needs of each individual child. All districts, singly or multiple, would provide vocational education programs. All districts would provide on-line education courses. The home base for this program would be the CDE. The State should reimburse the local districts for at least 60 percent of the costs of special education. This would loosen moneys at the local level to provide for improved and innovative programs.
John A. Ogden, Ed.D., lives in Centennial. EDITOR’S NOTE: This is an online-only column and has not been edited.
