Future of Schools

State Board divisions pop to the surface

Simmering philosophical differences on the State Board of Education bubbled up Wednesday as members tried to work through a list of priorities for the 2013 legislative session.

State Board of Education meeting
State Board of Education member Elaine Gantz Berman (in lavender sweater at left) sits in the audience after leaving the board table because of a disagreement with other members over legislative goals.

At the peak of the discussion, member Elaine Gantz Berman got up from the board table and left the room. She returned a few minutes later but sat in the audience section for a time and then left the meeting for good before it concluded.

Before she left the board table, Berman said, “Let’s cut this off. This is such an unproductive conversation. We’re embarrassing ourselves. … I’m ashamed of this board. Nobody cares what this board thinks. … Why have legislative priorities? We’re completely ideologically opposed to each other. … I’m taking a break. I’m getting out of here.”

When Berman exited, the board was about 45 minutes into a discussion of its proposed priorities for next year’s legislative session. Most of the time was spent on goals related to school finance and teacher quality, issues on which board members have disagreed before.

The board has four Republican and three Democratic members, but member differences aren’t necessarily partisan. Rather, differing philosophies about education are what divide the group.

Berman and fellow Democrats Angelika Schroeder and Jane Goff are generally supportive of increased school funding and of education reforms such as the new educator evaluation system. They also support the greater state regulatory role that’s been created by recent reform legislation.

Three Republican members, Debora Scheffel, Paul Lundeen and chair Bob Schaffer, are by no means defenders of the educational status quo but are skeptical about whether more money and more state regulation are the way to improve schools. All three are strong advocates of parent choice as a free-market way to improve schools. The three also are skeptical about the active federal role in education under the Democratic Obama administration.

The board’s fourth Republican, Marcia Neal, often takes something of a middle ground.

All of the members are a bit sensitive about their role in education policymaking. Most of Colorado’s major education initiatives in recent years have come from the governor’s office or key legislators.

Board differences were on display last month during a discussion of teacher licensing. A report presented to the board recommended that license renewal be tied to teacher evaluation results. (See story.)

Wednesday, Lundeen talked extensively about school finance, saying that funding needs to be tied to schools’ ability to improve student achievement: “Money needs to follow success.”

Lundeen also referred to “shopworn language in the education space about more resources. … I don’t want to just keep talking about more resources.” He also indicated his preference for funneling money through parents – the word “vouchers” wasn’t used – rather than to schools.

When the conversation turned to educator quality, last month’s discussion about licensing picked back up, and Berman left during the middle of it. After she left, Schaffer said, “I frankly want a high bar” to entering teaching. “I prefer that it be at the hiring end … rather than at the state bureaucracy level.”

Despite their philosophical differences, state board members generally are cordial and at ease with each other during meetings, and discussions remain civil.

Berman returned to the room within five minutes, but she pointedly sat in the audience and didn’t participate. A few minutes after that, Scheffel asked, “Might we invite Elaine back to the table?” Berman didn’t move.

A short time later, after Schaffer called a break, Berman returned to the board table and began packing up her laptop. Scheffel came over to her, and the two talked for a moment before embracing. Then Berman left for good.

The board made some minor tweaks to the draft of the legislative priorities but left the rest of the discussion, and a vote, to its Nov. 14 meeting.

At the very end of the meeting, long after Berman had left, Scheffel raised another touchy subject – the Common Core Standards in English and math that the board adopted on a split vote in 2010. Scheffel, noting growing discussion in parts of the education world about whether those standards are a good thing, asked if the state board should have a full-blown discussion of the issue before the end of the year.

Members casually kicked the issue around for a while but made no decision.

Although the Common Core Standards were not developed by the federal government, the U.S. Department of Education has made state adoption of Common Core a requirement for waivers from the No Child Left Behind law. But some conservatives see the Common Core as one more example of federal intrusion into education.

About the State Board of Education

Board members are elected on a partisan basis from the state’s congressional districts. Here’s a list of member districts:

  • Elaine Gantz Berman – 1st District – Denver
  • Angelika Schroeder – 2nd District – Northern Colorado, centered on Boulder
  • Marcia Neal – 3rd District – Western Colorado plus Pueblo
  • Bob Schaffer – 4th District – Eastern Colorado plus Fort Collins area
  • Paul Lundeen – 5th District – Colorado Springs area
  • Debora Scheffel – 6th District – Southern Metro area
  • Jane Goff – 7th District – Northern, Western Metro area

Changing district lines

  • District lines are changing with the Nov. 6 election. Schroeder is running for reelection in a 2nd District that now includes Fort Collins. Schaffer is not running, and Republican Pamela Mazanec of Douglas County is unopposed in the new 4th District. So the state board will continue to have a GOP majority even if Schroeder is reelected.

IPS School Board Race 2018

Indiana teachers union spends big on Indianapolis Public Schools in election

PHOTO: Dylan Peers McCoy/Chalkbeat
IPS board candidate signs

The political arm of Indiana’s largest teachers union is spending big on the Indianapolis Public Schools board. The group donated $68,400 to three candidates vying for seats on the board this November, according to pre-election campaign finance disclosures released Friday.

The three candidates — Susan Collins, Michele Lorbieski, and Taria Slack — have all expressed criticism of the current board and the leadership of Superintendent Lewis Ferebee. Although that criticism touches on many issues, one particular bone of contention is the district’s embrace of innovation schools, independent campuses that are run by charter or nonprofit operators but remain under the district’s umbrella. Teachers at those schools are employed by the school operators, so they cannot join the union.

The trio was also endorsed by the IPS Community Coalition, a local group that has received funding from a national teachers union.

It’s not unusual for teachers unions to spend on school board elections. In 2016, the union contributed $15,000 to an unsuccessful at-large candidate for the Indianapolis Public Schools board. But $68,400 dwarfs that contribution. Those disclosures do not capture the full spending on the election. The three candidates endorsed by Stand for Children Indiana — Mary Ann Sullivan, Dorene Rodríguez Hoops, and Evan Hawkins — are likely getting significant unreported benefits.

Stand for Children, which supports innovation schools, typically sends mailers and hires campaign workers to support the candidates it endorses. But it is not required to disclose all of its political activity because it is an independent expenditure committee, also known as a 501(c)(4), for the tax code section that covers it. The group did not immediately respond to a request for information on how much it is spending on this race.

The candidates’ fundraising varied widely in the reporting period, which covered the period from April 14 to Oct. 12, with Taria Slack bringing in $28,950 and Joanna Krumel raising $200. In recent years, candidates have been raising significantly more money than had been common. But one recent candidate managed to win on a shoestring: Elizabeth Gore won an at-large seat in 2016 after raising about $1,200.

Read more: See candidates’ answers to a Chalkbeat survey

One part of Stand for Children’s spending became visible this year when it gave directly to tax campaigns. The group contributed $188,842 to the campaign for two tax referendums to raise money for Indianapolis Public Schools. That includes a $100,000 donation that was announced in August and about $88,842 worth of in-kind contributions such as mailers. The group has a team of campaign workers who have been going door-to-door for months.

The district is seeking to persuade voters to support two tax increases. One would raise $220 million for operating funds, such as teacher salaries, over eight years. A second measure would raise $52 million for building improvements. Donations from Stand for Children largely power the Vote Yes for IPS campaign, which raised a total of $201,717. The Indiana teachers union also contributed $5,000.

Here are the details on how much each candidate has raised and some of the notable contributions:

At large

Incumbent Mary Ann Sullivan, a former Democrat state lawmaker, raised $7,054. Her largest contribution came from the Indy Chamber Business Advocacy Committee, which donated $4,670. She also received $1,000 from Steel House, a metal warehouse run by businessman Reid Litwack. She also received several donations of $250 or less.

Retired Indianapolis Public Schools teacher Susan Collins, who is one of the candidates supported by the union, raised $16,422. The Indiana Political Action Committee for Education contributed $15,000. She also received several donations of $200 or less.

Ceramics studio owner and Indianapolis Public Schools parent Joanna Krumel raised $200. Her largest contribution, $100, came from James W. Hill.

District 3

Marian University Executive Director of Facilities and Procurement and Indianapolis Public Schools parent Evan Hawkins raised $22,037. His largest contributions from individuals were from businessmen Allan Hubbard, who donated $5,000, and Litwack, who donated $2,500. The Indy Chamber Business Advocacy Committee contributed $4,670 and web design valued at $330. He also received several donations of $1,000 or less. His donors included IPS board member Venita Moore, retiring IPS board member Kelly Bentley’s campaign, and the CEO of The Mind Trust, Brandon Brown.

Frost Brown Todd trial attorney and Indianapolis Public Schools parent Michele Lorbieski, who is one of the candidates supported by the union, raised $27,345. The Indiana Political Action Committee for Education contributed $24,900. She also received several contributions of $250 or less.

Pike Township schools Director of Information Services Sherry Shelton raised $1,763, primarily from money she contributed. David Green contributed $116.

District 5

Incumbent Dorene Rodríguez Hoops, an Indianapolis Public Schools parent, raised $16,006. Her largest contributors include Hubbard, who donated $5,000; the Indy Chamber Business Advocacy Committee, which gave $4,670 and web design valued at $330; and the MIBOR PAC, which contributed $1,000. She also received several contributions of $500 or less, including from Bentley.

Federal employee and Indianapolis Public Schools parent Taria Slack, who is one of the candidates supported by the union, raised $28,950. The Indiana Political Action Committee for Education contributed $28,500.

Innovation zone

Two more Denver schools win additional freedom from district rules

PHOTO: J. Zubrzycki/Chalkbeat
Alex Magaña, then principal at Grant Beacon Middle School, greeted students as they moved between classes in 2015.

Two more Denver schools this week won more flexibility in how they spend their money and time. The schools will create a new “innovation zone,” bringing the district’s number of quasi-autonomous zones to three.

The Denver school board on Thursday unanimously approved the schools’ application to operate more independently from district rules, starting in January.

The new zone will include Grant Beacon Middle School in south Denver and Kepner Beacon Middle School in southwest Denver. The two schools are high-performing by the district’s standards and follow a model that allows students to learn at their own pace.

With just two schools, the zone will be the district’s smallest, though Beacon leaders have signaled their intent to compete to open a third school in the growing Stapleton neighborhood, where the district has said it will need more capacity. The district’s other two innovation zones have four and five schools each.

Schools in zones are still district schools, but they can opt out of paying for certain district services and instead spend that money on things that meet their specific needs, such as additional teachers or aides. Zones can also form nonprofit organizations with their own boards of directors that provide academic and operational oversight, and help raise extra dollars to support the schools.

The new zone, called the Beacon Schools Network Innovation Zone, will have a five-member board of directors that includes one current parent, two former parents, and two community members whose professional work is related to education.

The zone will also have a teacher council and a parent council that will provide feedback to its board but whose members won’t be able to vote on decisions.

Some Denver school board members questioned the makeup of the zone’s board.

“I’m wondering about what kinds of steps you’re going to take to ensure there is a greater representation of people who live and reside in southwest Denver,” where Kepner Beacon is located, asked school board member Angela Cobián, who represents the region. She also asked about a greater representation of current parents on the board.

Alex Magaña, who serves as executive principal over the Beacon schools and will lead the new zone, said he expects the board to expand to seven members within a year. He also said the parent council will play a key role even if its members can’t vote.

“The parent council is a strong influence,” he said. “If the parent council is not happy, that’s going to be impacting both of the schools. I don’t want to undersell that.”

Other Denver school board members questioned the zone’s finances and how dependent it would be on fundraising. A district summary of the zone’s application notes that the zone’s budget relies on $1.68 million in foundation revenue over the next 5½ years.

Magaña said the zone would eventually seek to expand to four schools, which would make it more financially stable. As for philanthropic dollars, he said the zone would work to ensure any loss of revenue doesn’t hurt the schools’ unique programs or enrichment.

“I can’t emphasize enough that it won’t impact the schools,” he said.

Ultimately, Denver school board members said they have confidence in the Beacon model and look forward to seeing what its leaders do with their increased autonomy.