Democrats and Educational Equity

0 Flares Twitter 0 Facebook 0 Filament.io 0 Flares ×

by Ed Augden, Retired DPS Teacher and Community Activist

Alexander Ooms may be right in his viewpoint expressed in the Denver Post on July 25, that elected Democrats may now favor so-called “education reform.” At least, Democratic politicians in Colorado’s state legislature appear to favor a conservative approach to education or acquiesce to it. SB 191, for example, was sponsored by State Sen. Michael Johnston and supported by former State Sen. Chris Romer. This is the face of the Colorado Democrats on educational issues, one that adheres to amateur educators and ignores teachers and verifiable research. Johnston represents the leadership of the Colorado Democratic Party. While most middle class and poor families with school age children seek a neighborhood school that offers a comprehensive education, corporate Democratic legislators such as Johnston, often favor replacing neighborhood schools with charter schools that many students won’t be eligible to attend because they fail to gain entrance through a lottery system that is, by its nature, discriminatory. Further, they ignore studies concluding that, while the teacher may be the most important factor in a child’s life at school, the effects of poverty diminish that influence. For example, a malnourished child who starts school at age five, lags behind peers in vocabulary development andwithout extra help will never catch up.

Ooms further accentuates this growing gap between privileged and struggling or impoverishedDemocrats in his comments regarding the 2010 Colorado primary Democratic campaign betweenAndrew Romanoff and Sen. Michael Bennet. Romanoff was likely the candidate of those folks who work for a living while Bennet represented those who apparently believe that the best candidate is thewealthiest candidate. Perhaps Bennet won because he accepted contributions from PACs and wealthycontributors. Romanoff rejected PAC money.

Ooms also represents the dubious view that “reforms” are succeeding. He uses Lake Middle School as an example of this success. In reality, it is the International Baccalaureate program that is succeeding with approximately 400 students while West Denver Prep, a charter school appears to be struggling to reach 100 enrolled students. By the district’s standards, West Denver Prep at Lake is a failing school.

Most notably, Ooms ignores the failure of the “redesign” of North High School. With great enthusiasm and little study, the principal, who had instituted reforms that were succeeding, was reassigned and the faculty forced to reapply for their positions. Most did not and were reassigned.Within two years, student achievement declined, the dropout rate increased and the school population declined. Most importantly, students lost trusted teachers who were replaced by inexperienced andoften indifferent teachers. Not since, has the district acknowledged the results and, instead, will launch a similar effort in Montbello and Green Valley Ranch this fall.

Certainly, Mr. Ooms represents the prevailing viewpoint of “reformers” – high stakes, standardized testing (that causes increased stress among poor students), charter schools that enroll the privileged and the lucky and ignore those left behind in regular schools, and teacher evaluations that link teacher appraisal, retention and promotion to student test scores despite evidence that such an approach is flawed. This viewpoint appears to be based on personal opinion and anecdotal information and rejects any evidence that contradicts the false paradigm. Educational reform in other countries such as Finland contradicts that paradigm. Teachers are highly respected and their appraisals, retention or promotion are NOT linked to student test scores.

2 thoughts on “Democrats and Educational Equity

  1. Dr. Curt Schmidt

    Kudos to Ed Augden for this incisive commentary. A great many people view the ‘reforms’ championed by those who passed SB 191 as irretrievably flawed, if for no other reason than their determination to evaluate teachers on the basis of test scores — assessments so deficient that csap is being discarded, and a new version will not arrive until 2014.

    In the meantime we will be treated to a ‘transitional’ version, known, you guessed it, as ‘tsap.’ To evaluate teachers on this hodgepodge of tests is simply grotesque. Even more misguided is the prevailing corporate view that teachers are to be stripped of all semblance of autonomy, thereby becoming ‘widgets’ incapable of inspiring anyone. No wonder the dropout rate remains intractably high, and the need for remediation, for those who do attend college, an embarrassment — even for those who have no shame.

    Reply
    1. Ed Augden

      Kudos also to Dr. Schmidt for his usual and acute perception of testing and its relationship to teachers’ performance and evaluation. Professional educators know by studying pertinent research that testing is limited in evaluating students and even more so for evaluating teachers. Amateur educators (Alexander Ooms?) appear to disregard such research in favor of personal observation and anecdotal information. Where these amateurs administer school districts, the results are obvious to those who wish to examine them – inequity and declining student achievement.

      Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *