Election 2018

It’s not just the governor’s race. Here’s what Tennessee’s big legislative turnover could mean for education.

PHOTO: TN.gov
Gov. Bill Haslam receives an ovation during his final State of the State address in January before a joint session of the 110th General Assembly, cabinet members, and guests.

The battle to replace term-limited Gov. Bill Haslam has consumed the spotlight for Tennessee’s education-minded voters, but more than a hundred legislative races will decide who the new governor will work with on school policy for the next few years.

In addition to either Democrat Karl Dean or Republican Bill Lee as the state’s new chief executive, at least a fourth of the General Assembly’s members will be new to Capitol Hill in January. That’s because of an unusually high number of legislative departures, due mostly to retirements or the pursuit of other government jobs.

Incumbents aren’t running to fill 25 out of 99 seats in the House of Representatives and six out of 33 seats in the Senate — setting the stage for the biggest turnover since at least 1995, according to legislative librarian Eddie Weeks.

Among those opting against re-election bids are the leaders of three of four House education panels — Harry Brooks, John Forgety, and Roger Kane — all East Tennessee Republicans who have wielded considerable power in controlling the flow of bills in their committees or subcommittee. The fourth chairman, Rep. Mark White of Memphis, has been in office since 2010 and faces Democrat Danielle Schonbaum on Election Day on Nov. 6.

“It’s like getting Jupiter, Mars, the Earth, and the sun all lined up at the same time. It’s a ton of change,” said Kane of getting a new governor, a new education commissioner, and a critical mass of freshman legislators, in addition to administrative staff turnover.

At stake is whether Tennessee will stay the course on a massive school improvement plan launched in 2010 under former Democratic Gov. Phil Bredesen and continued since 2011 by the current Republican governor. The overhaul, spurred by Tennessee’s $500 million federal Race to the Top award, is grounded in higher academic standards; a new test to measure student growth and proficiency based on those new standards; and policies that hold students, teachers, and schools accountable for results.

The years since the overhaul have coincided with student gains on national tests, but also major headaches in administering the state test known as TNReady, now entering its fourth year. Technical glitches disrupted two years of giving the new computerized assessment, while scoring and score delivery problems marred another year.

“I hope we don’t try to reinvent the wheel,” said Rep. John DeBerry, a Democrat and education committee member who is running unopposed in his Memphis district. “We’ve laid a very good foundation that’s been proven by a lot of measurable factors.”

Kane, who serves on the other side of the aisle, agrees.

“I worry that you could see a total change in philosophy and literally everything we have done the last 10 years could become unwound,” he said. “When you have people coming in who are totally against any kind of testing but the ACT, as well as people who want to test everything, that’s a wide disparity.”


Read why Haslam worries that TNReady problems could unravel Tennessee education policy


Both gubernatorial candidates want to take a closer look at testing, but the next General Assembly will have a lot to say about steps moving forward.

“We’re the ones who pass the laws,” said DeBerry. “The governor has tremendous influence, but he doesn’t cast votes either in committee or on the floor.”

Still, uncertainty about legislative turnover, especially in the House, was on the minds of members of the State Board of Education on Thursday as they discussed how to make TNReady work better this school year, as opposed to just gutting the test and starting over.

“That’s the big unknown at this point that quite honestly nobody has control over,” said Wayne Miller, the former state superintendents chief whom Haslam recruited to facilitate his recent statewide listening tour on testing.

 “If we start to slide off track, it will be important for this group and others to speak loudly that this is not where we want to go,” Miller told the board.

A lot will depend on new legislative leadership, especially in the House which, like the Senate, has a lopsided majority of Republicans that likely won’t change significantly.

The speaker of the House decides committee appointments, both for membership and leadership, but that job is up for grabs too due to the exit of Nashville Republican Beth Harwell after her unsuccessful bid for governor. The Republican caucus is scheduled to elect a new speaker on Nov. 20, and candidates thus far are Reps. Glen Casada of Franklin, David Hawk of Greeneville, and Curtis Johnson of Clarksville.

The next speaker is expected to maintain Harwell’s two-committee system for education legislation because of the large number of bills on K-12 and higher education. Kane said the system has worked well.

PHOTO: Grace Tatter/Chalkbeat
Rep. Roger Kane of Knoxville is the retiring chairman of the House Education Instruction and Programs subcommittee.

“Last year there were 400 education bills alone,” Kane said. “That number would be grueling for one committee in the House. We have more members than the Senate committee and therefore more discussion.”

The Senate is less likely to see any kind of fruit basket turnover, and Dolores Gresham is expected to continue chairing her chamber’s education committee. The Somerville Republican has served in the legislature since 2002 and is not up for reelection this year.

But the huge turnover in the House will mean a significant loss of institutional knowledge on education policy. At the same time, the handoff presents an opportunity to gain fresh and innovative ideas, according to Brooks, the powerful committee chairman who is retiring after 16 years in office.

“I’m not worried,” Brooks said. “This legislature has been around for over a hundred years, and it’s managed to pick up and go after huge shifts in the past. There’s a lot of quality people returning, and there will be a lot of good folks who are going to be elected.”

Follow the ratings

Illinois education officials laud their school ratings — but critics say they don’t go far enough

Illinois rolled out its new school accountability system in the Illinois Report Card late last month.

State education officials publicly lauded their new school rating system Friday, even as a new, nationwide analysis of school improvement plans criticized Illinois’ approach as too hands-off.  

While the state developed a clear rating system as the federal government requires, Illinois falls short in follow-through, according to the report from the Collaborative for Student Success, a non-profit advocacy group, and HCM Strategies, a policy analysis group.  

“The state is taking too limited a role in leading or supporting school improvement efforts,” said the report, which examined how 17 states are implementing school improvement plans under the federal Every Student Succeeds Act, which was passed in 2015 and replaced the No Child Left Behind Act.

Both those federal laws task states with identifying and helping improve underperforming schools and with creating criteria to judge which schools are doing well. Illinois rolled out its new school accountability system in the Illinois Report Card late last month.

State officials disagree with the criticism.

“Illinois is being held up as a model for other states to follow,” said Ralph Grimm, chief education officer of Illinois, speaking at the monthly state board of education meeting on Friday. “The entire (state) team has to be commended for providing useful information.”

Illinois’ rating system places every public school in the state into one of four categories based in part on scores on the annual PARCC standardized tests (click here to see how Chicago schools ranked).

Only about a third of Illinois students scored proficient or higher on PARCC tests administered last spring. In reading, 37 percent of students in grades 3 through 8 met that benchmark, while in math 31 percent did. Despite that, the state awarded 80 percent of its schools a “commendable” or “exemplary” rating. 

The state labeled 20 percent of schools “underperforming” or “low performing,” the only designations that could trigger state action. Intervention measures include improvement plans, visits from specialists, and additional funding.

The state released its ratings just days after Chicago released its own batch of school ratings, which take into account a different set of metrics and a different standardized test.

Grimm said the next step will be asking the state’s lowest-performing schools to draft improvement plans and then connecting them with experts to implement their changes.

The state ratings pay particular attention to how schools educate certain groups of students — such as children of color and English language learners. Improvement plans will focus on ways to raise their achievement levels.

Under the latest state rankings, nearly half of Chicago schools failed to meet the state’s threshold for performance, with a disproportionate number of high schools on the low-performance list. Nearly all of under- and low-performing Chicago high schools are on the South Side and sit in or border on the city’s poorest census tracts.

The state could grant underperforming schools $15,000, and  the lowest performers can apply for $100,000 under its IL-Empower program — which helped schools improve by funneling federal funds to them. Advocates have welcomed the change to a carrot to help schools pull themselves up, after years of sticks that overhauled and cut funding for low-performing schools.

Nationally, the Collaborative for Student Success report applauded Colorado for its streamlined application system, and Nevada for asking districts to directly address equity.

The collaborative criticized Illinois for failing to involve parents and community members in its plan. The group also said the state needs to give districts more guidance on putting together school improvement plans. 

carry on

These 16 Denver charter schools won renewal from the school board

PHOTO: AAron Ontiveroz/The Denver Post
Sebastian Cruz waves to Rev. Leon Kelly as he works with children in a classroom during his after-school program at Wyatt Academy in September 2018.

The Denver school board on Thursday night unanimously renewed agreements with 16 of the district’s charter schools. The lengths of those renewals, however, varied from one year to five years — and signaled the board’s confidence in the schools to deliver a quality education.

The board also accepted Roots Elementary’s decision to close and surrender its charter at the end of this school year. The Park Hill school is facing low enrollment and high costs.

Denver Public Schools is a charter-friendly school district that has for years shared tax revenue and school buildings with its 60 publicly funded, independently operated charter schools. The schools are controversial, though, with opponents viewing them as privatizing public education.

Every charter school in Denver has an agreement with the district that spells out how long it’s allowed to operate. To continue running after that time period, the charter school must seek renewal. The arrangement is part of the deal for charters: They get the flexibility to operate independently, but they must periodically prove to the district that they’re doing a good job.

The school board relies on one set of recommendations from Denver Public Schools staff and a second set of recommendations from a districtwide parent committee in deciding how long a leash to give each charter school. The district staff and the parents on the committee consider factors such as test scores, school culture, financial viability, and the strength of a school’s leaders when making their recommendations.

They also consider a school’s rating on Denver Public Schools’ color-coded scale based largely on academic factors. The School Performance Framework, or SPF, labels schools either blue, green, yellow, orange, or red. Blue means a school has a distinguished academic record, while red means a school is not meeting the district’s expectations.

The staff recommended the school board renew the charters of all 16 schools that applied. Two other charter schools — DSST: Cole Middle School and Compass Academy — are also up for renewal this year. But because they earned the district’s lowest rating, they must go through a separate process in which they will present a detailed improvement plan. Their renewals will depend on the strength of their plans, which is why they weren’t included in this batch.

The board approved the 16 renewals Thursday without discussion. All of the new terms begin next school year. Here’s the rundown:

STRIVE Prep Federal, a middle school in southwest Denver
Year opened: 2006
School rating: Green
Renewal: Five years

DSST: Green Valley Ranch High School, a high school in far northeast Denver
Year opened: 2011
School rating: Green
Renewal: Five years

Rocky Mountain Prep Creekside, an elementary school in southeast Denver
Year opened: 2012
School rating: Green
Renewal: Five years

DSST: College View High School, a high school in southwest Denver
Year opened: 2015
School rating: Green
Renewal: Three years, with a possible two-year extension

KIPP Northeast Denver Leadership Academy, a high school in far northeast Denver
Year opened: 2015
School rating: Blue
Renewal: Three years, with a possible two-year extension

KIPP Northeast Elementary School, an elementary school in far northeast Denver
Year opened: 2015
School rating: Yellow
Renewal: Two years, with a possible three-year extension

Rocky Mountain Prep Southwest, an elementary school in southwest Denver
Year opened: 2015
School rating: Yellow
Renewal: Two years, with a possible three-year extension

Wyatt Academy, an elementary school in northeast Denver
Year opened: 2003
School rating: Yellow
Renewal: Two years, with a possible two-year extension

KIPP Northeast Denver Middle School, a middle school in far northeast Denver
Year opened: 2011
School rating: Yellow
Renewal: Two years, with a possible two-year extension

Downtown Denver Expeditionary School, an elementary school in central Denver
Year opened: 2013
School rating: Yellow
Renewal: Two years, with a possible two-year extension

Denver Justice High School, an alternative high school for at-risk students in central Denver
Year opened: 2009
School rating: Yellow
Renewal: Two years, with a possible one-year extension

REACH Charter School, an elementary school in central Denver
Year opened: 2015
School rating: Yellow
Renewal: Two years, with a possible one-year extension

Monarch Montessori, an elementary school in far northeast Denver
Year opened: 2012
School rating: Orange
Renewal: One year, with a possible two-year extension

STRIVE Prep SMART, a high school in southwest Denver
Year opened: 2012
School rating: Orange
Renewal: One year, with a possible two-year extension

Academy of Urban Learning, an alternative high school for at-risk students in northwest Denver
Year opened: 2005
School rating: Red
Renewal: One year, with a possible one-year extension

Rise Up Community School, an alternative high school for at-risk students in northeast Denver
Year opened: 2015
School rating: Red
Renewal: One year