December 6, 2016
Thanks in large
part to the flexibility of charter schools AND (surprise!) Common Core
Colorado education board hears about how to get out of
Common Core testing
(2015) “We are very pleased to have bi-partisan support from
the State Board of Education of our bill,” (Rep. Paul) Lundeen said ….. “We believe it shows broad concern with the top down, one-size-fits-all approach to public
education that is causing so much consternation today.”
Colorado
Springs' Durham pledges to work to 'empower parents' on state education board
(2016)
[Steve Durham, chair, Colorado State
Board of Education] “pledges to work to eliminate Common Core from
Colorado's curriculum. ‘We must empower parents
to maximize the potential of our youth rather than relying on one-size-fits-all, bureaucratic
mandates.’”
Three keys to education reform: Accountability,
Choice, and Standards
Eliminate Common Core? This question—the controversy over what we
expect our students to know and do in reading, writing, and math—is energized
by the false claim that Common Core hinders choice and imposes a one-size-fits-all education on Colorado’s
1,850 schools.
In AV#154 I looked back to our plan
of action (2009) on accountability: Senate Bill 163. An even longer look back here, to argue that
choice (charters, flexibility, freedom) and our Colorado Academic
Standards—which include the Common Core State Standards—are compatible.
Over 20 years ago, all of us
involved with Agenda 21 (1993-95), a “statewide education project aimed at
helping Coloradans make positive and productive changes in our public education
system,” heard this same charge about K-12. Agenda 21’s Reality Check – A Big-Picture Look at Public Education in Colorado,
listed three major “obstacles to reform,” including “a one-size-fits-all state policy approach that fails to recognize and
accommodate Colorado’s geographic, economic and social diversity” (December
1993). Agenda 21 brought together 300 citizens in 1994 for a Search
Conference. A chief “barrier to success”
for the K-12 system, they agreed, was that it “too often incorrectly assumes
that one size fits all and … fails
to celebrate differences.” Reviewing Agenda 21’s
documents, I see a consistent plea for greater flexibility.
That was then. The charter school
movement was still nascent; the first charter school law passed, in Minnesota, in
1991; California followed in 1992; Colorado in 1993. A new book, Charter Schools at the Crossroads: Predicaments, Paradoxes,
Possibilities, points to the wide range of options now available to
parents and educators across the country.
Charter schools
have considerable freedom to vary in philosophy, pedagogy, and organization.
Thus we find Montessori charters, Waldorf-style charters, STEM charters,
outdoor-education charters, virtual charters, language-immersion charters, and
special-education charters. There are teacher-governed schools,
business-operated schools, startup schools, and conversion schools. The variety
is impressive
. (From “Seven results of the
Charter School Revolution,” adapted from the book, in Philanthropy Magazine, fall issue. – http://www.philanthropyroundtable.org/topic/excellence_in_philanthropy/seven_results_of_the_charter_school_revolution)
A similar range of choice is found in our state’s 233
charters. Note the diversity of educational models welcomed and operating through
the charter school law. The Colorado
Department of Education’s 2016 report on charters lists 26 program models; here
are the most popular.
Educational Program Number of Charter Schools under each category
To see
CDE’s full list of the 233 charters operating in our state, see:
|
·
College Prep – 78
·
Core Knowledge – 73
·
Alternative Education Campus (AEC, includes
Credit Recovery programs) – 22
One-size-fits-all? In 233 schools granted
more freedom?
“A
charter school generally has more flexibility than traditional public schools
as regards curriculum, fiscal management, and overall school operations, and
may offer an education program that is more innovative than traditional
public schools.” www.cde.state.co.us/cdechart/faq
|
·
STEM / STEAM – 16
·
Classical - 14
·
Montessori – 12
·
Online - 11
·
Rural - 11
·
Experiential - 10
·
Expeditionary Learning (a Project based model) -
9
Has Common Core inhibited new charters, new models?
Blaming Common Core for a
one-size-fits-all education system is due to the misunderstanding that
standards equate to curriculum. But I
find no evidence that incorporating Common
Core into the Colorado Academic Standards–approved by the state board in August
2010—has stopped new and creative charter applicants from winning approval by
authorizers.
I reviewed many charter applications
for the Colorado League of Charter Schools before—and after—2010. Reviewers are tasked with studying the strengths
and weaknesses in applications, using the League’s Quality Standards for Developing Charter
Schools. Those guidelines invite a wide range of curriculum
models, depending on the school’s mission, target population, etc.; at the same
time, they require every charter applicant to show how their program will align
to the state standards. One size?
Hardly.
Note how the guidelines make a
clear distinction between standards and curriculum.
Education Program and Standards (Bold mine)
This critical
section of the application details an effective, well thought out,
research-based educational program. This
section should clearly align with the school’s mission, goals, and the student population
to be served and the Colorado Academic Standards (CAS).
Educational Program & Standards: Curriculum
There should be
a current research basis for
selecting a
particular curriculum for the target population. In addition to obtaining
information from publishers, research is available online at ERIC
(www.eric.ed.gov ) and the What Works Clearinghouse (www.whatworks.ed.gov ).
The narrative in this subsection should describe the critical aspects of each
component of the curriculum; lengthy research, full scope and sequence,
a full-curriculum alignment with state
standards, etc. should be included in the appendices rather than the
application.
The application should
address curriculum alignment to state standards. (See the 10 subjects in the
Colorado Academic Standards which can be found at: http://www.cde.state.co.us/standardsandinstruction/coloradostandards-academicstandards....)
If using an
established school-wide program (e.g. Expeditionary Learning/Outward Bound,
Core Knowledge, Montessori, etc.) or another successful school as a model (e.g.
High Tech High, Big Picture School, etc.), the application provides detailed
information and research about the program or model. When possible, this should
include research, experience, and objective evidence about the academic success
of the chosen program/model, and in particular why it was chosen for this specific population. …
When post-2010 applications showed a
poor understanding of the new standards, my fellow reviewers and I would fault
them for this. In approving charters the
past six years, authorizers, too, have surely demanded: show us how your curriculum—which
differs in so many ways from that of the district—will address the standards? But here in 2016 can we see any
evidence that these standards—to use CDE’s definition, the “broad goals
articulating what students should know, understand, and be able to do over a
given time period”—have been a roadblock for new charters? (Addendum
B: “Time line to challenge notion that including Common Core imposes a
one-size-fits-all.” Note especially the
14 charters that opened in 2015.)
Curriculum—thanks to charters in Colorado, more and
more a SCHOOL’s decision
State Statute 22-32-109(1)(t), C.R.S. Determine
educational program and prescribe textbooks
The
automatic waivers for charter schools, including 22-32-109, means that curriculum is no longer the district’s role
for 233 charter schools. To be specific, in Denver Public Schools, its 50 charters control their curriculum. I
believe the success of so many charters has encouraged DPS to enable all district schools to determine their curriculum
(see “Equity and Empowerment: The School as the Unit of Change,” Oct.
2016-DPS). Other districts, too, by welcoming innovation zones, show they, too,
see the wisdom of letting principals and teachers choose the curriculum.
Common Core
- Standards without standardization
Of
course state policy can find new ways to increase local control. We should always be willing to review those
laws that stymie flexibility and decision-making by the educators working in
our schools. And yes, I see why some
believe the PARCC tests are the real cause of standardization—that their tie to
Common Core leads some to say: get rid of both.
I have no doubt that we will continue to
struggle to find the right balance of accountability, choice, and standards. But Common Core as a straightjacket? As the cause of a one-size-fits-all education
in Colorado? Where’s the evidence of that?
Another
View is a newsletter by Peter Huidekoper.
Comments are welcome. 303-757-1225 - peterhdkpr@gmail.com
Addendum A
We all agree!!! No one wants a “one-size-fits-all”
system. (Bold mine)
April 2007 – Superintendent
Michael Bennett and the board responded to a critique of DPS from the Piton
Foundation and the Rocky Mountain News: “It is hard to admit,” they wrote, “but
it is abundantly clear that we will fail the vast majority of children in
Denver if we try to run our schools the same old way.” The district should “no
longer function as a one-size-fits-all,
centralized, industrial age enterprise making choices that schools,
principals, teachers, and most, most important, parents are in a much better
position to make for themselves.” Instead, it should “function more like a
partner, building capacity and leadership at the school level and serving as an
incubator for innovation.”
April 2009
- “We must move away from the monopoly model of education of the last century .
. . ,” (Superintendent Tom) Boasberg declared. “We must move away from a
centralized, top-down,
one-size-fits-all
model to a more flexible, decentralized approach that empowers our
educators, rewards them for driving student growth, and holds all of us
accountable for performance.”
http://www.denverpost.com/2009/04/30/carroll-focus-on-older-students/
March 2014
– “Students Hold ‘State Of The
Student’ Address For Education Reform”
DENVER (CBS4) – “Students on Monday took to the state Capitol to share
their frustrations with Colorado’s education system. ... They want big changes for Colorado
schools where they say a one size fits
all education is failing in classrooms.”
Oct.
2014 – Bob Beauprez: “Funding is only part of the equation, and we are
not maximizing our existing K-12 funding - i.e., school trust lands, and return
of federal tax dollars. In the meantime, the current governor has allowed
federal bureaucrats to impose a
one-size-fits-all
standard that reduces opportunity in education. As governor, I will improve
the quality of education by returning control to local boards and
ending Common Core.”
http://elbertcountynews.net/stories/Gubernatorial-candidate-Bob-Beauprez,170772?
Dec.
2014 – “In 2014, One Size Didn't Fit All - Kids were fed an alphabet soup of uniform standards and tests, and
no one was happy about it.”
“The resentment clearly isn’t limited to
teachers. And it essentially boils down to this premise: Education is suffering
because schools are becoming homogenized at the hands of policymakers who don’t
have a real clue about or genuine interest in the realities of classrooms, an
epidemic exacerbated by over-testing. Hence, the increased movement among parents for greater choice when it comes to their
kids’ schooling and this year’s across-the-board backlash against one-size-fits-all education.”
Oct. 2016 – “Durham
has been a critic of Colorado's participation in Common Core State Standards
for English and math curriculum and related testing under the Partnership for
Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers. …
“While states involved in the consortium
developed and adopted the academic standards, Durham believes the federal
government enforces them through unfair mandates, including testing
requirements. Durham pledges to work to eliminate
Common Core from Colorado's curriculum.
“‘We must empower
parents to maximize the potential of our youth rather than relying on one-size-fits-all, bureaucratic mandates,’
he said.”
Addendum B
Time line to
challenge notion that including Common Core imposes a one-size-fits-all
August 2010
– 170 charters are open in Colorado.
Between 2011
and 2016, over 10 new charter schools open each year.
August 2016
– 233 charters are open in Colorado.
**
The variety
of educational models among Colorado’s charter schools remains strong. See the 14 new charter public schools that
opened in 2015:
THE FOLLOWING 14 NEW CHARTER PUBLIC
SCHOOLS OPENED IN FALL 2015
CHARTER
PUBLIC SCHOOL CITY
Compass Academy Denver
Global Village Academy – Douglas
County Parker
Golden View Classical Academy Golden
KIPP Montbello Elementary Denver
KIPP Montbello Collegiate High
School Denver
New Legacy Charter School Aurora
REACH Charter School Denver
RiseUp Community School Denver
Rocky Mountain Prep: Southwest Denver
Roots Elementary Denver
Salida Montessori Charter School Salida
The Career Building Academy –
Peyton Peyton
Windsor Charter Academy – High
School Windsor
World Compass Academy Castle
Rock
TABLE 3
uses 2014-2015 self-reported data from charter schools collected by the
Colorado League of Charter Schools regarding elements of their educational
program to show the diversity of educational models in use across the charter
school sector. The number of charter schools reporting use of each of the 26
program models is identified in the table. www.cde.state.co.us/cdechart/faq
