AV #273 - State Board & Accountability - Limited options and less hope – can’t we imagine something better?

 

State Board hearing for a chronically low performing high school conveys a note of despair.

“He said the offensive in Flanders was going to the bad. If they killed men as they did this fall the Allies would be cooked in another year. He said they were all cooked but we were all right as long as we did not know it. We were all cooked. The thing was not to recognize it.”

From the World War I novel, A Farewell to Arms, by Ernest Hemingway.

 

   In AV #269 I criticized the February version of what Aurora Public Schools had prepared for the hearing before the State Board in April. Aurora Central High School has been on the accountability clock since 2010. (In 2012 I asked for “state intervention.”[i] Off-target then, and now.) The hearing before the State Board was postponed, but when it met in June, it approved the proposal from APS, 7-2.  

   I turn my attention now to what State Board members had to say. Their words, and what I sense to be their resignation – what more can we do? – is unsettling. It has huge implications for what we as a state believe is possible when we look at our lowest-performing schools.

   I will share quotes (next page) from several Board members in that hearing on June 12 for Aurora Central. I may be misreading what I felt was their message to the school and the district. I hope you will look at their words. (I apologize for any errors in my transcription.) This is what I heard from the Board:  

   “The challenges you face are overwhelming. No one has an answer. We’ll back your plan, even though we doubt it will make a real difference. It is upsetting that we cannot come up with anything better. But we have limited options. None allow us to spur significant improvement.

   “In public, the most courteous way to respond is to thank those of you willing to do this incredibly hard work, and to say: good luck.

  “But in our hearts, we are troubled. We see little hope. We know this is not good enough.”                    

  “We shape our buildings; thereafter they shape us.”  Winston Churchill 

   First, a larger point about our comprehensive high schools. We created these structures – years ago. We can see where they do not work. If we have the will and imagination, we can come up with a better design. My first job in Colorado over 30 years ago allowed me to follow restructuring efforts at six high schools around the state. Quixotic, some might say. But there was a willingness to challenge what clearly did not serve many of our students well. Principals and teachers were eager to try another way.

   I still hold fast to the ideas that motivated that effort back in the early 1990’s. Another View has often argued that we must rethink our high schools (Addendum A), especially those serving a high percentage of students on free or reduced lunch. Three examples: the schools for whom the State Board held hearings (not for the first time!) this spring: Aurora Central, Adams City High, and Abraham Lincoln High—all chronically low-performing. (Many others are also on the clock: Addendum B lists 20 of them.)

   I won’t say that comprehensive high schools never work. Cherry Creek High (3,800 students), Boulder High (2,000), and Cheyenne Mountain High (1,270) prove otherwise. But the ongoing woes for Aurora Central (1,860 students), Adams City (1,600), and Abraham Lincoln (1,000) compel us to question their structures, given their distinct settings. I believe we can reshape our buildings—and our schools.

We’re cooked. When will it end?

School Performance Framework – from CDE[ii]
	Abraham Lincoln H.S.		Aurora Central H.S.		Adams City H.S.
2010	IMP		PI	Year 1	TR	Year 1
2011	PI	Year 1	PI	Year 1	PI	Year 2
2012	IMP		PI	Year 3	PI	Year 3
2013	IMP		PI	Year 4	PI	Year 4
2014	PI	Year 1	TR	Year 5	PI	Year 5
2016	PI	Year 2	TR	Year 6	PI	Year 6
2017	PI	Year 3	PI	Year 7	TR	Year 7
2018	PI	Year 4	PI	Year 8	PI	Year 8
2019	PI	Year 5	PI	Year 9	PI	Year 9
2020	PI	Year 5	PI	Year 9	PI	Year 9
2021	PI	Year 5	PI	Year 9	PI	Year 9
2022	PI	Year 5	TR	Year 9	PI	Year 9
2023	PI	Year 6	PI		PI	Year 10
2023 % Rating		36.0		39.9		43.2

  It might have been useful for State Board members, especially those newer to the work, to have had a 2010-2023 summary in front of them this spring when conducting hearings for Abraham Lincoln (March 13), Adams City High (May 7), and Aurora Central. It would have added context: years on the accountability clock, Priority Improvement-PI, or Turnaround-TR. It might have made them skeptical of the (all too familiar) promise from each school that it was NOW ready to show stronger academic achievement. It might have instilled less patience, because, after 14 years … 

   The March session with DPS and Abraham Lincoln felt positive. Board Chair Rebecca McClellan’s final words to the school reflected what many board members had voiced: “I am very appreciative of the hard work that you're putting in, both to make sure that you're meeting the needs of your students and the new challenges that are coming your way….” The Board approved of Lincoln’s plan unanimously.

   In the May session with Adams 14 and its high school, the Board showed a new level of trust in the district’s direction. The Board maintained its “quasi-judicial role,” but moments even seemed friendly!

   In June with APS, though, I sensed real doubts—about the proposal itself, but on a more basic point, about finding any strong solutions. I heard a note of despair. Who are we to expect anything better? 

**

Background - Accountability Pathways, five options

“For district-run public schools that receive Priority Improvement or Turnaround ratings for five consecutive years as measured by the District Performance Frameworks, the state board can direct one of the following Accountability Pathways.” Partial or full management by a public or private entity; Innovation status; conversion to a charter school; conversion to a community school; school closure. https://www.cde.state.co.us/accountability/accountabilitypathwayshearingsfactsheet

**

Karla Esser:

The work is almost impossible - I hate to put it that way - but it’s really hard work to try to move that number of kids bringing those needs and those diverse backgrounds all in one direction to become this at the end… So I applaud your work; I couldn’t possibly offer a plan that would be better, so I will be supporting your plan. 

Kathy Plomer:

   I think you have all the keys, it’s just a lot of work … I know staff that teach at this type of school and the principal leadership, it’s such a commitment to put in that … above and beyond…  again, it’s really hard work, but it feels well thought out and I’ll be supporting your plan. 

Rhonda Solis:

  I haven’t been in a classroom, I haven’t been a teacher, and I find it very hard for people to be as critical   when they haven’t done the job …. I have been on a local board. (We heard of her experience as a school board member in Michigan.)

   Although I haven’t been in the classroom, I want you to know that I recognize how difficult that work is, and thank you for not giving up on these kids … these kids need us. This is a heavy lift and these kids are worth it, so I will be supporting your plan.

At present, the State Board has just five choices when determining how to address schools that remain on the accountability clock year after year. These constraints must vex board members (and school leaders) who can surely imagine other possibilities; these constraints must add to their lack of hope. By now, isn’t it clear that we need more options?                                                           See board member Schroeder’s idea.

   Steve Durham would vote No on the proposal, and yet he, too, showed sympathy for one of the school’s biggest problems, which it acknowledged in its presentation on June 12: in 2023, an attendance rate of 70.3%, and chronic absenteeism at 41%.[iii] (Its truancy rate, state data shows, was 18.3%.[iv])

    … I will say that I think it is unfair of me or anyone really to hold you fully accountable for the problem. I look at the attendance issues you have, which simply didn’t exist when I was a student … It’s unfortunate that you have to spend the amount of time you do just to fill the seats with people who are required by law to be there.

   

   Both Durham and Angelika Schroeder anticipated the next year or two in a way that was especially discouraging. These two have participated in hearings for this high school in 2017 and 2019 and a board order in 2020. They have few illusions. Today neither expects significant progress at Aurora Central.

   Durham: … I suspect that eventually you will get off the clock …  but … getting off the clock doesn’t mean you’ve solved any of the problems ... that you’ve dramatically increased outcomes … it means you’ve marginally increased outcomes … (adding) and that’s a positive.

   Schroeder voted Yes on the proposal, making her doubts about What Is Possible even more troubling. 

   I guess I’m a little confused about what some of us would define as what works …. We know that incremental work will get us there and that’s what you all I think are going to try to do – is incrementally improve outcomes for kids – you’ll get off the clock, have growth, probably not enough growth, we don’t get to keep the kids long enough if they’re three-years behind to get’em caught up, but it is incremental growth.

 "We can’t." Really?

    Given that modest hope, Schroeder went on to raise a bigger issue. “And then some of us dream about a dramatic way to change education.”  

    Her time on a local school board made her keenly aware of what a school district can’t do.

 She said:                                                                                                                                                               (Emphasis mine)   

   You can’t do that. A district can’t dramatically change the model because the expectations of the community are such that you can have some examples and you can do some programs - and some are tried - there aren’t very many that are significantly different anyway.                    

   So I agree with my colleagues that this is going to be really hard work. I have the faith that you’re going to do enough here to make progress, but I also realize it’s not the solution. We don’t – we nine don’t have the solution as yet. Help us out there. If you all want to experiment with something completely different, I think we would support you.                                              

   But it’s going to take a real dramatic change for us to be able to educate like 80% of our students to a very high level. Sorry.                                                                                                         

   Lisa Escárcega, Vice Chair of the State Board, recalled her time in 2016 as part of the leadership team in Aurora Public Schools. She said that the district had not been open to charter applicants who were only interested in a K-12 option. (Ironic. By adding the K-8 Charles Burrell Visual & Performing Arts program to the Aurora Central Campus, APS has created a K-12 plan of its own.) She added:

  

 Closure was on the table as well. The community said no to that. You can’t take 200 or 300 students and start plopping them into high schools surrounding that high school. It needs to be there, it services a neighborhood, and if those kids are going to get services …. (Emphasis mine.)

   As Addendum A - #2 shows, Superintendent Rico Munn favored innovation status over a fundamental change in the school’s structure. See Churchill: “thereafter they shape us.” Again, we can’t imagine a new way. (Note the declining performance of APS high schools over the past decade - Addendum C.)

   Like other Board members, Escárcega was eager to acknowledge the unusual circumstances for ACHS. For the entire campus, we learned, 93% were minority students, 87% on free and reduced lunch, and 44% multilanguage learners. Today no one designing a high school for that population would enroll more than 400 students. (Check that - DPS just did. Rather than think anew, it has recreated comprehensive high schools for Montbello and West.[v] 2023 results: déjà vu - back on the accountability clock.) 

We are not cooked – Colorado can create other options for school accountability

   Let’s recall what we say, at least, is our intent for this process. CDE’s “Fact Sheet” on the Clock reads:

 

  In 2009, Colorado’s legislature passed the Education Accountability Act that created a system to hold the state, school districts and schools accountable for student academic performance …. The state’s “Accountability Clock” only allows schools and districts to receive these low ratings for five years in a row. After that, they must come before the State Board of Education, which is required to direct a course of action designed to dramatically increase student achievement.[vi] (Bold mine.)

    In June, did one Board member sound convinced the APS/Aurora Central plan would achieve that?

    My conclusion: the State Board is constrained by the Accountability Pathways. To be both creative and bold, it needs new options. I say: let’s reassess the five in statute. Do they make sense? Three points:

     1) ACHS had already chosen two: on innovation status since 2016; it adopted the community school model in 2019.[vii] And yet they have not led to better student outcomes.

     2) Reports on innovation status and on community schools raise doubts about these strategies for improving student achievement. Neither focus on better teaching and learning. (See Addendum D.)

     3) The Board has NEVER applied the “charter conversion” option. Let’s admit that this idea is contrary to how charters are formed. In truth, it is not an option. (Gov. Bill Owens and the legislature tried this over 20-years ago at Cole Middle School. A sad story. See AV #37: “Oxymoron: Mandatory Charters.”[viii])   

    

   The State Board needs new options. So do our districts. The June 12 hearing suggests that after the Adams 14 intervention, districts can expect a passing grade if they construct 60-page proposals and demonstrate that they are committed to do better. And the Board’s main message? Thank you for trying.

    No one can be proud of this.

    We are responsible for creating what is not working – in this case, tragically, what is not working for our most vulnerable students. And I would say this is the case in over 20 high schools in our state.

    We say this process is about accountability. Is it? Aurora Central is one of those high schools. One where we have seen chronic low performance continue for 14 years. What have we accomplished?

    Let’s think anew. Enough of “we can’t.” We can create better options. 

    

Addendum A

 1.)             Another View #92 – “Regional economic development works. Why not a regional recovery school district?” Jan. 1, 2013.

2.)              Another View #129 – “Evidence of success from the charter world–smaller high schools,” April 8, 2015.                                                                                      

              "With the exception of DSST, we have had little success in creating high schools that are mission-driven toward a specific outcome (like college) for most or all students, serve a mixed or low-income student body and are academically high performing." (From "Denver and Aurora High Schools; Crisis and Opportunity," A Plus Colorado, April 2013.)

   Stop saying that if we built these schools for 1,800 students (40 years ago or more), that’s what we’re stuck with, the size of the building determines the size of the school.  Recognize that nearly every successful new school in Colorado serving a large percentage of low-income students has chosen to keep its size under 600 students.  Design schools around that maximum number, and figure out the building issues from there.  To foster the culture and community, to give a school leader and faculty a fighting chance to create an environment where students are known well, stop tinkering with chronically low-performing high schools “serving” over 1,500 students—when size is one of their biggest obstacles.

 Several pages follow, including a closer look at both Abrahm Lincoln and Aurora Central high schools.

 NOTE: I commented there on Superintendent Munn’s plans for Aurora Central: 

    Aurora Central in APS – 2,188 students (592 freshmen).  The state’s other large high school entering year 5 on the accountability clock. At the February school board meeting, an informative presentation by CDE’s Turnaround Office stated what could be severe consequences if current trends continue.  The news appeared to startle some board members: “I think this is a lot to take in,” said board president JulieMarie Shepherd (http://co.chalkbeat.org/2015/02/18/aurora-chief-will-propose-changes-for-struggling-central-high-school/#.VRw-s_nF9qU). Mary Lewis—a member of the school board since 2007, and former board president—grew defensive, as well she might. “It’s — scary isn’t the right word — I’m still looking for the partnership piece,” she said, eyeing the state officials. “I’m looking for [you to say] we’re here to help.”

   Classic. Blame the messenger.  Chronic low-performance, for five years—and now you’re paying attention?

   But does the district leadership even explore the issue of school size?  Little evidence in that Chalkbeat article, or in its story a month later on Superintendent Rico Munn’s proposal to “save” the school from state intervention.

Aurora Public Schools and Aurora Central High

   Aurora’s recent proposal—“Aurora chief pitches broad reform plan to save Central high from state sanction,” fails to recognize this central issue of school size (http://co.chalkbeat.org/2015/03/18/aurora-chief-pitches-broad-reform-plan-to-save-central-high-from-state-sanctions/#.VRw4vvnF9qU). Creating an innovation zone for Aurora Central and its feeder schools might have benefits, but Superintendent Rico Munn speaks as if the 2,000 student high school is a given.  It shows little imagination of how much “restructuring” will be needed.

From APS School Board Minutes – March 17, 2015

   Munn noted that the five state options are structural in nature and highlighted school design and framework options. He indicated that innovation status is the best option for a comprehensive high school of 2,000 students….

3.)        Another View #167 – “Even LESS evidence now to grant innovation status to low-performing schools,” Sept. 6, 2017.

4.)          Another View #180 – “Mission statements from 10 high-performing schools – education for LIFE,” June 12, 2018.

5.)          Another View #198 – “School safety: School size and class size are factors too - Of the 2,000 students in this building, do you know all of them well?  Can you?” Aug. 20, 2019.

6.)          Another View #200 – “FACTS FOR THE STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION on six urban high schools, all on the clock for (too many) years,” Oct. 21, 2019.

7.)          Another View #233 - Analysis of one school’s 2020-21 Unified Improvement Plan – Aurora Central High,” June 22, 2021. 

In this newsletter, Addendum B included notes from the State Board hearing for Aurora Central High School, Nov. 13-14, 2019, and the hearing on Feb. 10, 2021. 

 

Addendum B

 

20 Colorado high schools/6-12 schools on Priority Improvement/Turnaround[ix] (2023)

1.    Adams City High School

    In DPS

2.    Abraham Lincoln H.S.

3.    John F. Kennedy H.S.

4.    KIPP Northeast Denver Leadership Academy

5.    MLK Jr. Early College                                           

6.    Montbello H.S.                                                

7.    North H.S.

8.    West H.S.

    In APS

9.     Aurora Central H.S.

10. Aurora West College Prep Academy

11. Gateway H.S.

12. Hinkley H.S.

    In Mapleton

13. Global Leadership Academy

14. Mapleton Early Career Program

    In Jeffco

15. Alameda International Jr./Sr. High

16. Jefferson Jr./Sr. High

    In Colorado Springs

17. Mitchell H.S.

18. Palmer H.S.

    In Adams 12

19. Thornton H.S.

    In Harrison 2

20. Harrison H.S. 

 

Addendum C

 

The Number of APS High Schools/Secondary Schools

on the Accountability Clock Grows Over Past Decade[x]

 

	Super-intendent	Aurora Central H.S.	Gateway H.S.	Hinkley   H.S.	Aurora West College Prep - 6-12
2010	John Barry	PI - Year 1
2011	John Barry	PI - Year 1		When Rico Munn became superintendent APS had one high school/6-12 school on the Accountability Clock. A second was added in 2014, a third in 2018. Soon after Michael Giles took over in 2023, a fourth school went on the clock.
2012	John Barry	PI - Year 3
2013	John Barry/  Rico Munn	PI - Year 4
2014	Rico Munn	TR - Year 5	PI – Year 1
2016	Rico Munn	TR - Year 6	PI – Year 2
2017	Rico Munn	PI - Year 7	PI – Year 3
2018	Rico Munn	PI - Year 8	PI – Year 4	PI – Year 1
2019	Rico Munn	PI - Year 9	TR–Year 5	TR – Year 2
2020	Rico Munn	PI - Year 9	TR–Year 5	TR – Year 2
2021	Rico Munn	PI - Year 9	TR–Year 5	TR – Year 2
2022	Rico Munn	TR - Year 9	TR- Year 5	PI – Year 2
2023	Rico Munn/ Michael Giles	PI	TR- Year 6	TR – Year 3	PI – Year 1

 

PI = Priority Improvement Plan

TR = Turnaround Plan

  

Addendum D

 

Doubts raised about the impact on academics in schools

using innovation status or the community school model

 

From Fact Sheet on the purpose of the accountability act:
 “a course of action designed to dramatically increase student achievement”

 

Innovation status

                                                        Bold mine

1.)    “15 years after Colorado paved way for a new kind of school, students are falling short,”  by Erica Breunlin, The Colorado Sun, Dec. 6, 2023.       

   “Innovation schools are designed to give flailing public schools more flexibility in how they teach kids. But experts say that without strong leadership and committed teachers, flexibility alone will not fix a struggling school.”

   “Students in many innovation schools are trailing behind their peers at traditional public schools and charter schools. Meanwhile, long-standing achievement gaps between students of color and white students as well as between students living in poverty and their affluent classmates appear to be widening. The data raises questions about whether the innovation school model is a promising way to help kids reach their potential in the classroom.” https://coloradosun.com/2023/12/06/colorado-innovation-schools-innovation-school-zones/#:~:text                                                                                                                                   

 

2.)    “‘A Decidedly Mixed Bag’ - Academic Outcomes in Colorado’s Innovation and Innovation Zone Schools” – Innovation Schools Report, Keystone Policy Center, Dec. 15, 2023.

 

   "A smaller proportion of innovation schools met growth expectations (Median Growth Percentile, or ‘MGP’ over 50) than other governance types in ELA and math…

   “Innovation and innovation zone schools had lower proportions of high school students meeting expectations than both charter and district-managed schools.

   “The large majority of innovation and innovation zone high schools did not meet growth expectations in 2023 (MGP of 50).  Over 90% of innovation schools fell short of this benchmark in ELA and over 80% in math.”  https://www.keystone.org/our-work/education/mixed-bag/

 

3.)    “Freeing failing schools from bureaucracy hasn’t worked as hoped. So why is Colorado still doing it?” by Nic Garcia, Chalkbeat, May 17, 2016.

      “Because so few chronically low-performing schools with innovation status have made meaningful improvement, some education reform activists, state officials and State Board of Education members are concerned the state is about to do more harm than good.”

      “‘This is not OK,’ said Angelika Schroeder, a state board member and Boulder Democrat who has raised questions for several months now about innovation status as a turnaround effort.” https://www.chalkbeat.org/colorado/2016/5/17/21098241/freeing-failing-schools-from-bureaucracy-hasn-t-worked-as-hoped-so-why-is-colorado-still-doing-it/

 

Community school model

1.) From “More than academics: Aurora community schools exemplify the growing concept,” by Yesenia Robles, Chalkbeat Colorado, April 24, 2024.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  Bold mine    

      “In the metro area, Adams 14 has had national support in trying to start using the model at Central Elementary, one of the district’s lowest-performing schools, which is under a state-ordered improvement plan of its own. The hope is that the model will eventually help improve student achievement.

“The model has helped improve family and community engagement and enabled parents such as Rai to feel empowered to help their children’s learning. But, based on state ratings, the schools in the zone haven’t seen much improvement in students’ academic achievement. Aurora Central High School, the district’s longest-struggling school is part of the zone and has continued to have low state ratings.” https://sentinelcolorado.com/metro/more-than-academics-aurora-community-schools-exemplify-the-growing-concept/

My question: should the headline for this article have read, not “More than academics,” but, instead, “Other than academics”? As for the hope that it will eventually help improve results, is that soon enough?

2.)    A long-time advocate for the community school model told me that it is not designed to produce improved academic outcomes, certainly not in the short term. Successfully implemented, the model can improve several key areas for a school—such as social services, school-family ties, and parent engagement. And yet it is possible to do this without touching classroom instruction and student achievement. 

3.)    The research on the impact of the community school model looks impressive for a school’s culture and, perhaps, for overall school improvement. However, any review of the community school model will want to find out what direct impact it has on improving student achievement. Again, adopting the model can lead to lots of time and resources devoted to what are important matters, to be sure, but not on what will improve the quality of teaching and learning in the building. It is telling that in 2019 the State Board required ACHS to find an external partner to address the school's academic performance (PEBC was selected then), and that in the 2024 plan ACHS seeks a new partner (this time it is The New Teacher Project) to address this same concern. Academics are not the focus of the community school model.  

 

 

Endnotes

[i] Another View #88 – “Aurora Central High – The Case for State Intervention,” Sept. 18, 2012.

I see now that I was wrong to think that SB 163 and the Accountability Act would allow the state to act so soon. Perhaps I have always overestimated what authority the Accountability Act gives to the state. But was I wrong to raise the alarm – in 2012?

[ii] “Performance Framework Flat Files from Prior Years,” 2010-2022, https://www.cde.state.co.us/accountability/performance-framework-flat-files-from-prior-years;

“Performance Framework Reports and Improvement Plans,” 2023, https://www.cde.state.co.us/schoolview/frameworks/welcome, Colorado Department of Education. 

[iii] Aurora Central Campus, Rehearing Presentation for CDE, page 10,  https://go.boarddocs.com/co/cde/Board.nsf/files/D5RUHN7C27E5/$file/Aurora%20Central%20Campus_Rehearing%20Presentation_for%20CDE.pdf 

[iv] Colorado and Attendance Rates by Schools and District,” for 2022-23, Colorado Department of Education, https://www.cde.state.co.us/cdereval/truancystatistics.

NOTE that the truancy rates at the four APS secondary schools on the accountability clock exceeded those at both Abraham Lincoln H.S. in DPS and Adams City H. S. in Adams 14:

Aurora Central Campus – 18.3%  (the state’s figures did not break down for grades)

Aurora West College Prep -14.7%

Gateway H.S. – 14.1%

Hinkley H.S. - 13.6%

Adams City H.S. (Adams 14) - 13.2%

Abraham Lincoln (DPS) - 11.5%

For STATE of COLORADO  - 3.5% 

[v] AV #225- “Recreate Montbello” – Nostalgia? Amnesia? A few reminders (Feb. 9, 2022) and  AV #226 – Doublespeak from DPS – Unification is Closure (Feb. 17, 2022).

[vi] Colorado Department of Education, https://www.cde.state.co.us/communications/accountabilityclockfactsheet#:~:text=

[vii] Confirmed in an email from Jessica Brown (Director, Charles Burrell Visual and Performing Arts Campus) to me, March 18, 2024: “It was in 2019 when the Community Schools model was adopted by ACHS. Again, there was much success at Crawford and so it was adopted by many schools in the Zone.”

[viii] Another View #37 – “Oxymoron: Mandatory Charters,” Dec. 30, 2004.

Opening paragraph of this newsletter: 

   “Gov. Owens, the Colorado legislature, and the Colorado State Board of Education made a mistake a few years ago when addressing the issue of failing schools. They were right, in my view, to say: start over. Stop tinkering and start fresh. Come up with a new mission, bring in new leadership, and hire a faculty committed to this new purpose. They were right to say the new schools should have charter-like freedom from unnecessary rules and regulations. But the mistake was to say these new schools would be charter schools. After watching what has taken place with Cole Middle School, policymakers must realize the error they made. Having one school ‘forced’ to be a charter-when charter schools are about choice and freedom-has been a useful demonstration of an oxymoron. Before other failing schools must be so misnamed, change the rules. Call these reconstituted schools anything; just don't call them charter schools.”

[ix] “Performance Framework Reports and Improvement Plans,” 2023, https://www.cde.state.co.us/schoolview/frameworks/welcome, Colorado Department of Education.

[x] “Performance Framework Flat Files from Prior Years,” 2010-2022, https://www.cde.state.co.us/accountability/performance-framework-flat-files-from-prior-years;

“Performance Framework Reports and Improvement Plans,” 2023, https://www.cde.state.co.us/schoolview/frameworks/welcome, Colorado Department of Education.