|
LEGISLATIVE NEWSLETTER IV--FEBRUARY 5-11, 2011
Constituents:
Headlines concerning SB1068 and SB1069 were the talk of the day in Boise. The Headline in the Statesman read: "Vast Majority Oppose
the Luna Educational Reform Plan."
The big corporations including Albertson and private educational companies took out full page ads supporting the plan. Hundreds of people came to testify at three days of hearings at the Senate Education Committee in the Capitol.
There are some good points in parts of Mr. Luna's proposal it has the following problems:
1. Failure to identify quantifiable evidence from internal or external sources that the plan has a reasonable
chance to work.
2. Lack of a pilot that demonstrates tangible success
3. Lack of involvement of all of the principal stakeholders
4. Lack of multiple solutions to test and evaluate programs and concepts
5. Proposing approaches that have failed in other school systems
I find that the whole process
of stakeholder involvement as terribly flawed (well described in my Op piece). I would ask that Mike Rush, Executive Director of the Idaho Office of the State Board of Education (OSBE) be allowed to testify about the lack
of any involvement of the OSBE in the process of developing this proposal. Russ Westerberg, the OSBE President, reported to both education committees that the Board had no involvement in the development of the plan. This
seems very strange since the Board has the charge of oversight regarding K-12 education in the state. This is a big gap in a flawed involvement process.
Mr. Luna failed to involve the teachers, PTA, School Boards Association, School Administrators, and the State Board of Education.
Many of us are disturbed by taking away the 99 safety net from
primarily our rural districts.
Yesterday I talked to a representative from a rural district in N. Idaho with a budget of about $3.2 million per year. He estimated that the lifting of the 99 percent safety net would cost the district about $600,000. This will be devastating and further increase the disparity between the rich and poor districts. It is our students who will suffer. I would ask Mr. Luna to provide a specific list of the impact on all school districts if the 99 percent safety net is abolished.
There are many concerns regarding on-line courses.
I support quality on line courses, but the quality of courses to date has been variable. Requiring all 9th grade students to have laptops sounds good on the surface; however, in rural areas many students have no access to the internet. Our school tech people point out that computer technology changes at an ever increasing rate, and that most of the computers and software will be outdated within a four year period. Who provides for the pornography blocking on their Computers, for example? Does the one shoe fit all approach take into account that students have different learning styles and some simply don't learn well from on line courses? What about special needs students? Teachers that I talk to say that the majority of special needs students simply don't and can't effectively use on line courses? It is apparent that Mr. Luna has not thought through many of these questions and details.
There is also a bill before the House that would eliminate kindergarten which apparently has Mr. Luna's support as well. There are many other concerns as well, but I wanted to share these with you.
Rep. Tom Trail
The following is my Op. Ed. piece
HIS VIEW: The strange life, times of Tom Luna
By Tom Trail
Since Tom Luna won election as superintendent of public
instruction in 2006, he has championed the fact that Idaho students were making very good progress academically despite the state ranking 49th in the nation in per capita expenditure for students. In fact Idaho students were
above their peers in terms of science scores, reading and math. Luna claimed that much of this was due to his leadership, the inclusion of all stakeholders in the decision making process and several new initiatives. This
was certainly evidenced by the Math Initiative, Teacher Evaluation Program and some pioneering on-line education approaches. These initiatives were supported by the Legislature. He noted Idaho had many outstanding teachers
although the vast majority had not had any pay increase for three years. As one constituent wrote me, "While running for office this past fall Mr. Luna praised education in Idaho noting student test scores in science were
well above the national average, and he noted that under his leadership the educational system was moving ahead."
In early January, Luna unveiled his revolutionary education reform plan. He issued a
cry that the Idaho K-12 system was in shambles and only desperate measures could save the situation. Luna's new plan would increase class size (resulting in more than 700 teachers losing their jobs), require high school
students to take two on-line classes per year to graduate, provide every ninth-grader with a laptop, a pay-for-performance plan for teachers, eliminating tenure for teachers and several other changes.
Luna touted himself as an inclusionary leader during his 2006 campaign. He stressed during the campaign and during his first four years in office, that as head of the Idaho K-12 system he would involve all of the major stakeholders in key educational policy decisions. When we look at his performance in meeting the inclusionary standard in the development of his new plan we are sadly disappointed. Major stakeholders, including the Idaho Education Associaton (teachers), PTA, State School Boards Association, Idaho Association of School Administrators, and Idaho universities and colleges were not involved.
Russ Westerberg, president of the State Board of Education, was asked if the board had any input into the process. The answer was no. It seems odd that Luna, as a member of the board, didn't even
casually mention the plan to any of board members. This should raise all sorts of red flags because the state board oversees K-12 education in the state.
I asked UI President Duane Nellis if he or any
of his faculty has been consulted. The answer was no. Some of the components Luna overlooked are: lack of a pilot program that demonstrates tangible success; lack of wide-spread involvement of all the stakeholders; lack
of multiple solutions to test and evaluate; and using approaches that have failed for other school systems.
During this past week I received three calls from suppliers of laptop computers, software
and curriculum supplies urging me to support the new plan. I also noted that a number of the Albertson Foundation Board members came out in support of Luna. A local reporter noted these individuals all had ties to the private
educational company "K12" based in Virginia. If the plan is approved then millions of dollars will flow from the Idaho taxpayer to out-of-state educational companies.
Out of concern I checked Luna's
list of campaign contributions. A substantial number of donations came from the out-of-state private educational companies. Joe Kren, Potlatch School District superintendent reported, "It is public knowledge that K12 inc.
provided at least $25,000 to Luna's 2010 campaign."
Tom Trail, R-Moscow, is a member of the Idaho House of Representatives.
|
