What irks is not loss of Amdt. 66, but the lies around it
So,
it came as a shock – the results of the Amendment 66 vote back on Nov. 5
– when Colorado voters resoundingly said “no” to increasing funding for
the state’s schools. I guess I live in this dream world where I believe
people value my work, along with the roughly 50,000 other Colorado
teachers, and trust we try to make every school day better than the
last.
I understand the mistrust the
public has in me because I was so looking forward to splitting that
$950 million dollars among my fellow instructors, leading to a $19,000
pay hike per educator. Could you imagine the party? You would have been
invited, I promise.
But, I would be
willing to downsize that bash by adding the public education support
staff, too. Because schools play such an integral role in the
preservation and progress of our society, they require peripheral
support to carry out the charge of educating our youths. Schools tend to
the care of our children through the efforts of cafeteria staff,
principals, custodians, superintendents, coaches, human resource
directors, curriculum directors, bus drivers, classroom aides,
administrative assistants, counselors, librarians, computer technicians,
nurses and so on. I would provide a count of these important
individuals who contribute to the well-being and growth of our future,
but I can’t readily find one.
Lacking
this number, let’s just say 45,000 in order to make that total an odd
95,000 professionals who split the “jackpot.” Now we’re talking about a
$10,000 windfall, per annum, for that big party we’re planning. By the
way, that number fits the statistics presented by Kelly Maher, executive
director of Compass Colorado, an active opponent of Amendment 66. She
stipulates in her Oct. 11 Denver Post opinion piece that without the
“bloat” of support staff, Colorado teachers could realize a $10,000 pay
increase. But, with the passage of Amendment 66, we could have spread
the wealth to all. Oh, wait...what was that? It wasn’t meant to go to
salaries?
Well, alright. What if it
went to the state’s approximately 863,000 students? We could increase
money spent on them by nearly $1,100 per kid. According to Education
Week’s 2013 study, that would bring Colorado close to New Mexico’s
per-pupil spending. That state outpaces us by $1,664. I realize
mentioning our neighbors to the south flouts my argument, as it ranks
dead in the middle of all states in per pupil spending, while its
achievement places it near the bottom. So, if Colorado already
outperforms New Mexico with less money, who else might our children top
if we reduce our monetary commitment even more? Watch out, Finland.
But
Maher and other opponents, such as Amy Oliver Cooke of the Independence
Institute, reveled in 66’s defeat because, according to them, there
were no real reforms attached to the revenue; there was no way to make
sure the money went to instructional improvement instead of lining the
pockets of the fat-cat teachers and support staff. To them, Colorado’s
children are safe – for now – from the appetite of a greedy,
irresponsible and broken education system that could create real reform,
such as “higher expectations” and “real innovations,” without money if
they would just quit being lazy.
If
I sound a little bitter and snarky now, you should have heard me before
I gave it a month. I would have written something right then, voicing
my near depression, but I was busy working on a rubric, clarifying
criteria for a peer-observation process the teachers at my school chose
to add to their workload for improving instruction. This, in addition to
their work installing the new Common Core Standards recently adopted by
Colorado, such that students are more engaged while teachers design and
deliver an embedded assessment that gauges progress and then informing
instruction addressing student need.
All
District 9-R teachers, like all teachers throughout the state, are in
the midst of the first, full implementation of the new educator
evaluations mandated by Colorado voters through Senate Bill-191. This
process calls for, minimally, one annual formal evaluation based upon at
least four supporting observations, each requiring a pre- and
post-conference. This cycle can’t begin until the teacher has completed a
meticulous, criteria-based self-evaluation for goal setting in both
professional practice and student achievement. Truthfully, it is a
valuable and rigorous process – but it is only half of the evaluation,
with student achievement data comprising the other. You should know,
though, that these aren’t all of the state-directed reforms required
right now.
So, my bitterness over
the defeat isn’t aimed at the voters. I get it. I am a taxpayer, too.
Taxes are hard to impose on yourself. The bitterness comes from the lies
told. The reforms are already in place without funding, and now schools
must tackle them with less everything. Kelly Mayer pointed out that
Amendment 66 would have cost families $250 per year. If my math is
right, that is about $21 a month. What percentage is that of your
monthly family phone plan? Mayer and Cooke may have “won,” but who
loses? The students.
On Monday,
teachers (and next year, thanks to 66’s defeat, fewer of them) will keep
teaching – not for the money or prestige, but because they care about
the kids. Do Mayer and Cooke?
John Hise is an instructional coach at Escalante Middle School. Reach him at jhise2@durango.k12.co.us.