Another View #124 Peter Huidekoper, Jr.
Jan. 13, 2015
Governance of K-12 Public Education in
Colorado
What’s wrong with this picture?
In The Smartest Kids in the World, Amanda Ripley praises “the
clarity of purpose” for education in Finland, Korea, and Poland. “In many U.S.
schools, however, the priorities were muddled beyond recognition.”
|
Mark your
calendar! April 9—4:30-6:00 PM
UC-D’s School of
Public Affairs
Education Policy
Networking Series: TOPIC: Governance in K-12 education (state board,
commissioner, governor, etc.)
|
As the coordinator of the Colorado Education Policy Fellowship Program
the past three years, I have enjoyed the chance to explore some basic
questions. Such as: who
is the leading voice on K-12 education in our state? What individual or organization provides
leadership for Colorado and gives us clarity on our purpose and where we are
headed?
No obvious answers these days, agreed?
No governors like Roy Romer or Bill Owens, no commissioners like William
Maloney or Dwight Jones, using the bully pulpit of their office, taking a clear
stand.
Yes, thank God, we do not live in
North Korea. We know our “messy
democracy” asks us to hear and respond to many voices, multiple views about good
schools and effective laws and policies.
Checks and balances—yes, we know
the benefits. Still, clarity matters. Not
that we must all be “on the same page,” but it does help to unite around a
larger vision of what we want for students in our K-12 schools.
On seeing the
headline on education in a neighboring state this fall, “Rudderless in
Oklahoma” (http://www.teachersourcebook.org/ew/articles/2014/07/09/36hughes.h33.html), I emailed it to a friend and asked if the term didn’t apply to
Colorado as well. His response – he
spoke of “a huge problem now with all the bickering and no state leaders stepping
up”–assured me I was not alone. (See
p.4 for other comments on K-12 governance
in our state.)
The question might be: if we lack a clear direction, is it due to the individuals in
leadership roles today—their leadership styles (hesitant to be out front, eager
“to have that conversation,” skillful at working quietly and negotiating
differences)? Or is it due, to some
degree, to the structures we have in place in Colorado, structures that inhibit
leadership, that frustrate efforts for some kind of shared understanding of our top priorities, that even foster
conflict among the main institutions governing K-12 schools?
Let me ask: does this ring true?
We elect a governor who may (Romer, Owens) or may not (Ritter, Hickenlooper) make
K-12 education a top priority. The
governor might be fortunate to have a lieutenant governor who carries the ball
on K-12 education (Barbara O’Brien, Joe Garcia), but his/her voice lacks the
clout of a governor, so on key education issues, leadership is ill-defined. Our governor does not appoint and voters do
not elect the Commissioner of Education, who reports to the state board, which
is entirely independent of the governor’s office. (Only 8 states give the
governor such a modest role; see 50-State
Analysis, p. 5.) We vote for the board member in our
congressional district, then the board—especially when voting 4-3—gives the Colorado
Department of Education one message, while our legislators (we vote for them
too) passes laws that tell the state and districts something else. (Need a
recent example? Look no further than last week: http://co.chalkbeat.org/2015/01/08/state-board-votes-4-3-to-give-districts-waiver-option-on-testing/)
If fair, and if this is a cause
of an absence of clear leadership, is it not time to re-examine and revise?
The following page
is flawed and incomplete, but I hope accurate enough to invite useful
questions. Is this arrangement the best
we can do? Does it invite a lack of
alignment? Does it prevent Colorado from
pulling together around a clear purpose and set of objectives for K-12 education? Are there structures in other states (see six
examples, pages 6-8) worth considering?
I don’t know. I’m just asking.
Governance of K-12
Public Education in Colorado: What’s
wrong with this picture?
|
|
|
Governor/ Lt. Gov.
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Legislators
(House & Senate)
esp. influential
– Budget Committee and Education Committee
|
 |
Voters
|
 |
State board
Mission: “to provide all of Colorado’s
children equal access to quality, thorough, uniform, well-rounded educational
opportunities in a safe and civil learning environment.”
“charged by the
Colorado Constitution with the general supervision of the public schools”
|
|
Pass laws
 |
|
|
|
Hires, appoints
|
|
Laws that
impact state department of education, 178 school districts, 1,800 schools
|
|
Local school board
|
|
Commissioner
“the chief state school officer and executive
officer of the department of education" in Colorado
|
|
|
|
Hires, appoints
|
|
oversees
|
|
|
|
District
superintendent
|
|
Colorado Department of Education
Mission: “to
ensure that all students are prepared for success in society, work, and life
by providing excellent leadership, service, and support to schools,
districts, and communities across the state.
“As the
administrative arm of the State Board of Education, CDE is responsible for
implementing state and federal education laws, disbursing state and federal
funds, holding schools and districts accountable for performance, licensing
all educators, and providing public transparency of performance and financial
data.”
|
|
|
|
oversees
|
|
|
|
|
|
school
district
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
school
leaders
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
schools
|
|
|
End of era
of reform? A national snapshot – our story too?
Last month Andy Smarick of Bellwether Education Partners presented an
ominous look at three recent trends across the country, “Homeostasis and the
end of today’s era of reform?”
“At the very moment
reform-weary states elect governors unwed to Race to the Top-era reforms and
replace bold state chiefs with traditional chiefs, we’re about to change federal
policy such that reform is fully dependent on the reform convictions of state
leaders. Prior to this period of reform,
the K–12 equilibrium was marked by establishment-oriented chiefs, an
insufficient focus on student outcomes, state-level insularity, and no federal
accountability. Homeostasis may be bringing this heady era of reform
disequilibrium to an end.” http://edexcellence.net/articles/homeostasis-and-the-end-of-todays-era-of-reform
(See
also last week’s Wall Street Journal: “New York’s Partnership for the Education
Status Quo,” 1/8/15)
Lt. Gov. Joe Garcia
spoke of a similar concern here in his speech last month to the Colorado
Association of School Boards. He urged
us to “stay the course” on key components of the reform path we have committed
to—with a fair degree of consistency, I would add, over the past 20 years.
“Garcia:
Colorado ‘can’t back down’ on education reform” (Chalkbeat, Todd Engdahl, Dec.
5, 2014)
|
Truckin’, like the do-dah man
Once told me “You got to play your
hand
Sometimes the cards ain’t worth a damn
If you don’t lay’em down
|
Lt. Gov. Joe Garcia told an audience of
school board members and administrators Friday that they should
double down
on the state’s slate of education reforms.
“We know we can’t stray from the path of
high standards,
rigorous
assessments and educator effectiveness,” Garcia said. “We need to agree to stay
the course,” he added. “We know we’re making dramatic changes; we know it’s
hard. If we back off now we risk, quite frankly, creating vast ripples of
inequality and inequity in our education system.”
… He reminded the audience of nearly 1,000
that “We came together as a state in 2008” to pass the Colorado Achievement
Plan for Kids. “That didn’t come from the feds, that came from all of us.”
Known as CAP4K, the legislation set in motion new standards and tests plus
other requirements. “It’s scary, it’s tough, but we can’t back down six years
later,” Garcia said. “We know we can’t stray from the path of high standards,
rigorous assessments and educator effectiveness. … We can come up with
practical solutions to these conflicts. We have to, we must.”
A state leader puts his cards on the table! How refreshing! And yet the uneasy feeling remains: is this
what the Governor believes? Is this what the Commissioner of Education—or our
state board of education—would say? Given
the frustration around the state, I have to wonder if Garcia’s audience applauded.
Some will say it is a
fool’s errand to seek “clarity of purpose” for K-12 education. In a democratic, diverse society—on a matter
that feels so personal, what we want of our public schools—don’t even try; it
will only lead to a muddled vision that excites and motivates no one. Better, they would say, to affirm choice and
let a hundred flowers bloom. (Or die.
Over 220 charters have opened in Colorado; roughly 30 have closed.)
Wasn’t that my point,
you ask, in AV#123, placing authority at the school-level, rather than in a
“local board” (in quotes!) which “shall have control ...” over 150 schools
serving 86,000 students?
No, it wasn’t. Yes,
I would like to see every public school in Colorado develop its own mission and
have a clear statement of purpose that is NOT muddled, one that attracts and
motivates the families and teachers and community that takes ownership for their school. Meaningful
local control. But I do not believe that
greater autonomy and freedom, for 1,800 schools, should prevent us from having,
as a state, a clear vision of our
essential goals and where we are headed.
And right now,
I do not see our structures and our current leadership providing those clear
goals.
**
Another View, a newsletter by Peter Huidekoper,
represents his own opinion and is not intended to represent the
view of any organization he is associated with. Comments are welcome. 303-757-1225 / peterhdkpr@gmail.com
Comments
from several folks who have given this issue considerable thought
(I shared an early draft and asked for
comments; here are excerpts from what I heard back. Thank you!)
… I'd suggest that changing
governance structures, while possibly helpful, won't solve the crisis we have
in educating all of Colorado's children.
What you did identify that
resonates with me is the lack of leadership and vision we have for improving
education in our state. We've had it at
times (as you suggest, Romer, Owens) - regardless of governance structure - but
don't have it presently. There are many
of us trying to improve the current system, but without a unifying strategy or
theory of action that is more universally held. This is somewhat the fallout
from the structure as you suggest, but is also built into our state persona -
the rugged individualists Coloradans are.
(I suggest) a competing
alternative to the system we currently have (that) would be a more grassroots
(students, parents, educators) movement than one led trying to corral everyone
(I.e., political leadership) into one unified vision that might or might not
lead to improving education.
-----
.
. . but the complaints I hear in Colorado about the flaws of (elected state
board appointing commissioner) our system are to some extent just different
words inside the parentheses. Everybody seems to complain about their
arrangement for one reason or another. I do not see any absolute, always
successful, no brainer formula that fosters educational leadership and
continuity, and is adequately removed from politics (when desirable) but still
able to influence policy when needed.
-----
Structurally we might change the Lt. Governor’s
office to assume leadership for P-20 education on behalf of the Governor’s
office and use the Children cabinet* as an administrative board. This was a
structure we used for ECE when Barbara (O’Brien) was LG but it never got
legislated so lost any power it might have had.
*… other Governors use a children cabinet to
coordinate across agencies all children's services including the commissioner of
ed. I think the closest thing Hickenlooper has is the Colorado Education
Leadership Council housed in the L.G. office. It is a common practice in many
states to have children cabinets.
------
I
think that our statewide governance clearly sets up the potential disjointed
strategy. Sometimes that is good, and sometimes that is bad. I just
think it depends greatly on the quality of the leadership. Maybe that is
the problem: should our education system depend upon electing leaders who will
stick their necks out politically for K-12 transformation?
-----
Thankfully we have had fairly moderate Governors, but
they have so little control over education in this
state, that I do think more direct responsibility and accountability for
education under their helm could provide some positive results for students in
the long run. I do think we need more "systems" reform
for education from the local school board level, and certainly at the state
level.
-----
Yes, all the approaches have pluses and minuses. … The
bigger issue, it seems to me, is how under exploited state boards are as a
lever for reform. They're a wasteland right now. Also, your state, like
some others around the country, is especially complicated because of the
constitutional prerogatives afforded to school districts that allow them to veto
a lot of reform. Those are a huge barrier to cohesion.
Governors’ role in
Governance – 50-State Analysis
First 16 …. (bold
mine)
Alabama - The governor does not appoint any of the voting members of the state board of
education nor the chief state school officer.
Alaska - The
governor appoints all of the voting
members of the state board of education with the legislature's confirmation.
Arizona - The governor appoints 8 of the 9 voting members of the state board of education.
Arkansas - The governor appoints all of the voting members of the state board of education
with the senate's confirmation, and confirms the state board of education's
appointment of the commissioner of education.
California - The
governor appoints all of the voting
members of the state board of education with 2/3 of the senate's consent.
Colorado - The
governor does not appoint any of the
voting members of the state board of education nor the chief state school
officer.
Connecticut - The
governor appoints all of the voting
members of the state board of education with the legislature's consent.
Delaware - The governor appoints
all of the voting members of the state board of education with the senate's
confirmation, and appoints the secretary of education with the advice and
consent of the senate.
District of Columbia
- The mayor appoints the state
superintendent of education.
Florida - The governor appoints all of the voting members of the state board of education.
Georgia - The governor appoints all of the voting members of
the state board of education with the senate's confirmation.
Hawaii - The governor appoints all of the voting members of the state board of education.
Idaho - The
governor appoints 7 of the 8 voting
members of the state board of education.
Illinois - The governor appoints all of the voting members of the state board of education.
Indiana - The governor appoints 10 of the 11 voting members of the state board of
education.
Iowa - The governor appoints all of the voting members of
the state board of education and the director of the department of education.
(“What is the level of the governor’s influence?”
In 39 states the governor appoints all or some of the voting members of state
board. In several other
states—MN, NM, Texas—the governor appoints the commissioner/superintendent of
schools. From ECS 50-State K-12
Governance Structures Database: http://www.ecs.org/html/educationissues/governance/govk12db_intro.asp)
Six states: Arkansas,
Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Jersey, Tennessee, and Vermont
Arkansas
Arkansas Commissioner of
Education
The Arkansas Commissioner of Education is a state executive position in
the Arkansas state government. The commissioner is a cabinet-level executive
official that oversees the operations of the state Department of Education,
which runs Arkansas's public school system. He or she serves under the purview
of the Arkansas Board of Education, which appoints the commissioner subject to
the approval of the governor.
__
Massachusetts
“Charlie Baker Picks James Peyser as
Secretary of Education” (Dec. 23, 2014)
“Baker filled three more
positions today, naming a Secretary of Education as well as commissioners of
the state’s public health and agricultural resources departments. Two positions
in Baker’s cabinet are yet to be filled—those of Secretary of Transportation
and Secretary of Public Safety.
“James A. Peyser, former chairman
of the Massachusetts Board of Education, has been named Secretary of Education.
A former education advisor to Governors Weld and Romney, Peyser is currently
Executive Director of the Baker-Polito Transition Team. He recently worked at
NewSchools Venture Fund, described on its website as ‘a nonprofit venture
philanthropy firm working to transform public education for low-income
children.’
“‘I am proud to have Jim join our
bipartisan team of experienced professionals,’ Baker said in a statement. ‘I saw
firsthand Jim’s experience and leadership improving public education throughout
his career and during our time together on the state Board of Education.’”
“In the same statement, Peyser said, ‘I am committed to advancing the
Governor-elect’s ambitious priorities by producing more great schools
throughout the Commonwealth, expanding and strengthening career-technical
education programs, developing new partnerships with local school districts and
communities, and making higher education more affordable and responsive to the
needs of our diverse regions.’”
___
Minnesota
From the Office of the
Commissioner (who is appointed by the Governor)
MDE Mission: "Leading
for educational excellence and equity. Every day for every one."
MDE Vision: The Minnesota Department of Education provides an excellent
education for Minnesota students by implementing Governor Mark Dayton’s 7-Point
Plan for Better Schools for a Better Minnesota. We strive for excellence,
equity and opportunity by focusing on closing the achievement gap, supporting
high-quality teaching, using innovative strategies to improve educational
outcomes, and ensuring all students graduate from high school well-prepared for
college, career and life.
___
New Jersey
State Department of Education - David
C. Hespe - Commissioner
The Commissioner of Education is
the chief executive school officer of New Jersey and supervises all public
schools. He or she is also a member of
the Governor's cabinet, appointed by the Governor with the advice and consent
of the New Jersey Senate. As education leader of the state, the
Commissioner recommends legislative initiatives and changes, suggests rules and
regulations for state board consideration, produces educational research,
conducts initiatives to meet the state's educational needs, and serves as
liaison between the local school districts and the federal government. (bold mine)
State law grants the Commissioner
a broad range of powers and responsibilities, such as deciding legal
controversies and disputes that arise under school law or state board
regulations. The Commissioner's decisions have the force of law.
The Commissioner also has the
following responsibilities:
• serves as
secretary to the State Board of Education;
• develops
code proposals for state board discussion and consideration;
• apportions
state aid to local districts;
• administers
regulations for classifying students with disabilities;
• ensures that
local districts adhere to all legal and state board requirements relating to
school district operation; and
• conducts
statewide tests.
The Commissioner appoints members to and serves as chairman of the New
Jersey State Board of Examiners, a 14-member group of educators that issues,
suspends or revokes state certificates of elementary and secondary teachers and
other professionals. The board also determines whether alternative experiences
meet course of study requirements for certification and recommends
certification standards and requirements to the State Board of Education.
__
Tennessee
Candice McQueen named new Tennessee
education commissioner (Dec. 17, 2014)
“Lipscomb University Senior Vice
President Candice McQueen is named the new Tennessee education commissioner at
a news conference at the Capitol. Lipscomb University Senior Vice President
Candice McQueen is Gov. Bill Haslam's pick to fill Tennessee's high-profile
education commissioner position at a time when public schools have never been
more debated in the state.
“The selection, made Wednesday,
was met with widespread enthusiasm from leaders in education reform who had
backed Kevin Huffman, the polarizing education chief she will replace. Many of
Huffman's harshest critics, meanwhile, praised the pick as well.
“In her role as dean of Lipscomb's College of Education, she emerged as
an authority on Tennessee's two most-contested education policies — the state's
shift to more rigorous Common Core academic standards and a teacher evaluation
system that takes into account student test scores.”
__
Vermont
SHUMLIN:
CABINET-LEVEL POSITION “GIVES GOVERNORS A STAKE” IN EDUCATION
“Gov. Peter Shumlin signed a bill on Thursday that moves the education system directly under the governor’s
control. The bill, H. 440, created a new cabinet position for the secretary of
Education who will report to the governor. Under previous law, the
commissioner answered to the State Board of Education which also set policy for
the state agency. (bold mine)
“Similar bills have come up before, but never made it through the
legislative process, despite support from both parties. Former Gov. Jim Douglas
testified in favor of the bill last year. Shumlin said the legislation gives
governors a stake in the state’s education system, which is essentially run by
local school boards.
“‘I have long felt, as have many governors before me – both
Republican and Democrat – that it’s very
difficult as a governor to ultimately have a single voice that implements a
vision for quality education when the governor does not have direct
intervention or input on who the commissioner or secretary of Education might
be.’ (bold mine)
“Critics of the bill said the State Board of Education served as a
buffer for the political whims of elected officials. The bill reduces board
member terms from six years to three. Members are selected by the governor.
Shumlin said the new process would allow
for more effective educational policy and hold governors accountable for that
he said was the ‘most important obligation in a democratic society’ –
education. (bold mine) ‘There was tremendous skepticism, tremendous fear
that we were somehow politicizing a process that shouldn’t be politicized,’
Shumlin said. ‘I say what we’re doing today is ensuring that we have accountability
from the governor and the ability for the elected governor to care about
educational quality by having a secretary, a full member of the cabinet, to
ensure that that vision is being carried out.’
“Stefan Morse, chair of the state board, said he is not worried
about the politicization of the education system because the board retains its
authority on education policy under the new law. Commissioner of Education
Armando Vilaseca said the bill would be good for Vermont’s schools. ‘This is a
wonderful opportunity to have the governor have a very, very strong voice in
education, speaking with one voice,’ he said. ‘I think in the past, with a state board of education and a commissioner
that was not working under the governor may have led to some issues that may
not have been unified.’ (bold mine)
“Lisa
Ventriss, executive director of Vermont Business Roundtable, has been a
proponent of quality early childhood education. Her organization produced a
report in 2007 that showed the state needed strong leadership with a vision for
education. ‘This has been a long time coming,’ Ventriss said.”
No comments:
Post a Comment