Well, tagging on at the end of an Ed News Colorado story about Jeffco school district employees pleading with the Board to stop budget cuts was this little nugget about last night’s meeting:

Shortly before public comment began Thursday, board members voted 4-1 to close employee negotiations to the public. Board member Laura Boggs was the only “no” vote.

Defenders of the status quo learned their lesson from last year. Since the teachers union bargaining agreement in the state’s largest school district says negotiations are supposed to be open, they needed to act early and decisively to keep the prying eyes of taxpayers away from important discussions. Sad. But thankfully, it’s not the only Colorado front in the fight to open union negotiations and bring the public into public education.

You have to go no farther than Douglas County, Colorado’s third-largest school district, where union leaders have lashed out against the reform-minded school board. Rather than sit back and let contentious negotiations fester behind closed doors, or allow the unseemly tactics to continue outside them, a group of local citizens is urging the board to open negotiations and shine the light on the real disputed issues. You can read (and sign, if you support) their petition here. It reads in part:

Negotiated union policies greatly impact how our tax dollars are spent and how our schools and classrooms function. In tight budget times, when we rightly demand greater accountability of our elected school board to make tough decisions, these decisions should be made in full view!

Meanwhile, at the State Capitol, Representative Kathleen Conti has introduced House Bill 1118 with the goal of “ensuring transparency in collective bargaining negotiations.” As my Education Policy Center friend Ben DeGrow explained in a 2010 issue backgrounder, a similar bill was introduced, and very nearly passed, eight years ago (back in the dark ages…).

HB 1118 is slated for a committee hearing later this month, so you can expect to hear more soon about this important issue of public transparency and accountability. As I’ve pointed out before, open negotiations not only would remind union officials who they’re bargaining against (you: the taxpayer), but it also would help clarify who really is in charge of public education.

Guess what! Just over a week ago I banged on a drum that may have started to hurt some of your ears by now. The drum is the madness of taxpayer-funded release time for Colorado teachers unions. And then (out of the blue?) yesterday the front page of the Denver Post shouts about “Colorado teachers unions under fire for taxpayer subsidies from school districts.” Thanks so much to reporter Karen Crummy not only for taking note of this issue my Education Policy Center friends have highlighted for years but also for doing lots of her own digging to tell a pretty disturbing story.

The Post’s findings about the number of districts paying tax dollars for union officers and other teachers to leave the classroom, and the lack of accountability for the practice, track very closely with the findings in Independence Institute papers from 2004 and 2010. That’s probably why Crummy saw fit to interview and quote one of my Education Policy Center friends:

“It’s bad enough that they pay for union release time at all, but to not even have a basic level of accountability, especially in these tighter budget times?” said Ben DeGrow, an education policy analyst at the Independence Institute who has advocated that schools change union leave policies. “It’s kind of appalling.”

Yes, you could say that, especially when the article identified more than $5.8 million in taxpayer subsidies to teachers unions over the past five years. But don’t worry, the state’s largest teachers union gave the Post an answer for that:

“This impacts student achievement. People don’t understand the value of our role in helping the district function,” said Beverly Ingle, president of the Colorado Education Association.

Wow. Taking days to go the CEA Assembly and elect officers and conduct business for a private organization impacts student achievement? Lobbying against educator effectiveness legislation impacts student achievement? Negotiating a new union contract with taxpayer-paid employees on the other side of the table impacts student achievement? Enlisting volunteers for partisan political campaigns impacts student achievement? I could go on….

But strangely enough, it’s the comment only paragraphs later in Crummy’s story by a local CEA official — from the only one of Colorado’s largest 20 school districts identified as not having any taxpayer-subsidized union leave — that sends the most stinging rebuke:

“The way we look at it is, ‘Why would the district pay us not to be in the classroom?’ ” said Jim Smyth, president of the Mesa Valley Education Association.

I am told that way back in 2003 a bill to outlaw taxpayer-subsidized union release time almost passed the legislature. Too bad it was almost. In these tough budget times, it might make a difference for a few teachers who are being laid off. If publicly-funded union perks aren’t on the chopping block now, then how can the cries of abject poverty be taken seriously?

Maybe, just maybe, the attention this time will make a difference for fiscal sanity and educational accountability.

Being of a decidedly reform-minded bent, the group has offered up some expected developments in their five choices for each of the “Best” and “Worst” categories. Most of the items I’ve covered at one time or another during 2011. Naturally I can’t make you vote for any particular events (or even vote at all), but I am making some strong suggestions that fans could select on my behalf as one of the most inexpensive Christmas gifts you’ve ever purchased. This is my blog, and I like to save the best for last. So which of the five choices should you recognize as the worst education event of 2011?

Worst: As time goes on, I have less and less patience for the big people in Washington, D.C., so the bungled re-authorization of No Child Left Behind (#2) mostly makes me shrug. The magical money tree hasn’t done much for real education reform in many of the Race to the Top-winning states (#3), either. Maybe California’s new governor further messing things up (#4) just seems too far away for me to get too worked up. And as tempting a choice as it is, the chief reasons for the repeal of Ohio’s Senate Bill 5 (#5) are little connected to education reform and teachers unions.

So by default, I am casting my vote for #1: the Atlanta cheating scandal. As I wrote months ago when the story first emerged, the problem here is the predictable overreaction from reform opponents. If the scandal led to better testing security and/or greater use of online adaptive assessments, I would have to vote for something else as the worst development of the year. But the Koret Task Force page explains what really has transpired:

…[W]hat the public has “learned” is that testing is bad because it creates so much stress that well-meaning educators are pushed to the limit and eventually succumb (for the children’s sake, of course!) to the temptation to cheat, lie, and break the law.

Best: My Education Policy Center friend Ben DeGrow wrote an op-ed explaining the sensible rationale for rolling back government employee collective bargaining privileges in states like Wisconsin (#2). expressed my admiration for the sweeping range or reforms legislated in Indiana (#5). While California made some progress in establishing working rules for its “Parent Trigger” (#3), here in Colorado the idea faltered. And my edu-crush on Michelle Rhee is no secret, so I had to give some consideration to her teacher evaluation system surviving her tenure in DC Public Schools (#4).

But in the end, we can’t do any better than recognizing 2011 as the Year of School Choice (#1). Especially when the “reinvigoration of school choice via opportunity scholarships and vouchers” hit so close to home with the passage of the groundbreaking Douglas County Choice Scholarship Program. Forget the injunction for now. Cast your vote for the accelerating national trend toward educational freedom.

Vote for the #1s, and I’ll say: Thank you very much! Of course, I could point out that there are still nearly four weeks left in 2011, and maybe we haven’t yet experienced the “best” or “worst” education event of the year. But that’s just the pesky little provocateur in me speaking….

Am I surprised? No. Let me repeat what I’ve said many times: Full-time online education is by no means the best option for all students, or even most students. But it works very well for many families who have chosen the learning option. Which some might have a hard time understanding if you believe the straw man presented by an opponent in the Post story:

“Kindergarten kids learning in front of a monitor — that’s just wrong,” said Maryelen Calderwood, an elected school committee member in Greenfield, Mass., who unsuccessfully tried to stop K12 from contracting with her community to create New England’s first virtual public school last year. “It’s absolutely astounding how people can accept this so easily.”

Well, if the idea people carry around in their head is of a 5-year-old sitting in front of a computer screen all day, then it would be astounding for people to be so accepting of online education. But simply put, that’s a caricature. For a better picture of what an online student’s day looks like, listen to this 10-minute iVoices podcast interview with three students from the Colorado Virtual Academy. While some lessons (though less for younger students) as well as the assessments and teacher interactions are on the computer, cyberschool also includes real textbooks, science kits, art supplies, and even field trips!

I’m not sure if the person quoted in this story really believes in the caricature or not. The way her quote is worded makes it oh so unclear. She could read later on in the Post story and also get a good idea. But I’m guessing she might disapprove of a 5-year-old blogging. (Note: I don’t spend anywhere near the whole day in front of the computer, though sometimes that’s the case for some of my Education Policy Center friends.)

Instead of rushing to implement harsh responses rooted in oversimplified misunderstandings of what online education is and is not, let’s look at making smart policy changes that bring education into the 21st century. There needs to be room for families to choose a quality full-time online option, as well as room for students to blend their education with customized online course opportunities.

Some knotty (not naughty) questions remain as the innovative online sector experiences some growing pains, but some really have gone overboard in seeking to use blunt instruments to bash virtual learning opportunities — or at least their straw-woven facsimiles. While I may be perpetually young, I wasn’t born yesterday.

Pretty much nobody is in school today, as we all gear up for the big turkey feast tomorrow. As my parents constantly remind me, the fourth Thursday in November is about more than food and football. Yes, Thanksgiving is about giving thanks. While I could gratefully mention the standard fare — family, friends (like those big people in the Education Policy Center), freedom, our big screen TV, and my growing (ahem!) Legos collection — more fitting for the blog are seven things to be thankful for in Colorado K-12 education:

1. While nobody asked Colorado teacher union members before taking political contributions from their paychecks, at least they can ask for the money back by December 15;
2. While the state senate president hasn’t given up his attacks on the online education option for parents, at least his attempt to push a selective audit was defeated;
3. While a number of pro-reform school board candidates lost and many inside the “education bubble” were distraught at the crushing defeat of the Prop 103 tax hike, at least the opportunity for truly creative innovation lies ahead with a number of new pro-reform board members ready to step up;
4. While a Denver judge went out of his way to shut down the Douglas County Choice Scholarship Program, at least the rays of hope for a successful appeal on behalf of students and parents are growing brighter;
5. While a lot of hard work remains to be done, at least the State Board of Education has continued to push for a top-notch educator evaluation system through the rule-making process;
6. While the open enrollment process is less than perfect and opportunities could be expanded, at least Colorado still has one of the strongest laws and Denver Public Schools is making it easier for parents to exercise their options; and
7. While we still have a long way to go in ensuring the best in public school financial transparency, at least some more districts and other K-12 agencies are making progress to comply with the 2010 law.

Have a Happy Thanksgiving, everyone! I will be back on Monday, with my turkey sandwich and leftovers.

If that’s the case, then the timing couldn’t be better for the release of my Education Policy Center friends’ new issue paper Time to Show the Money: Complying with Colorado’s Public School Financial Transparency Act. Research associate Devan Crean was the lead author, and senior policy analyst Ben DeGrow was the co-author.

In 2010 our state legislature passed HB 1036, a bipartisan measure requiring local K-12 agencies to post budgets, financial audits, financial statements, salary schedules, and as of July 2011, expenditures in the form of check registers and purchase card statements. So how well are they doing?:

During the summer of 2011 the Independence Institute examined the extent to which local education providers have complied with the financial transparency law by observing the substance and presentation of online financial information for each of 178 school districts, 16 BOCES and the Charter School Institute. Each website was evaluated on the requirements of the law, as well as other criteria. The findings were unsettling, as there were only eight school districts fully in compliance as of the law’s July 1, 2011, deadline, and 24 school districts fully in compliance 90 days later. (Extra time was allowed due to an ambiguity in the law that allows for diverse interpretations.)

Ouch. The remarkable thing is that many agencies are doing a truly bang-up job, some even exceeding the basic requirements of the law — with searchable expenditure databases. Most of them are larger districts, like Jefferson County and Cherry Creek and Colorado Springs 11, but smaller districts can find true inspiration in the transparency efforts of tiny Silverton School District in southwestern Colorado’s gorgeous mountain country.

While one could respond in disgust or despondency at the less-than-stellar results statewide, I prefer to look at the bright side. For one thing, 69 other school districts and BOCES are “almost compliant,” meaning they could easily fall in line with the full requirements of HB 1036 with just a little more effort.

And what about the other half of agencies? Well, fiscally-conscious citizens should take heart and take notice. While local K-12 agencies basically depend on the honor system to report whether they are in compliance with the transparency law, it’s Joe Q. Public who now has the leverage of the law to make sure districts are sharing the required information, and go beyond and make the information user-friendly. The consequences for failing to comply are a downgrade in the accreditation rating.

As for the law itself, it could stand some small improvements to tighten up a few loopholes. State lawmakers would be advised especially to take a look at this case from the new issue paper:

In July 2011 a Colorado citizen activist emailed Aurora’s director of finance asking why she was unable to find the transactions of withholdings for dues to the teachers union, the Aurora Education Association (AEA). The director responded that those withholdings are not listed within the check registers because they are done by wire transfer and in her “understanding of HB 1036 that wire transfers were not included.” This potential loophole is very troubling, because it opens the door for districts to use wire transfers in order to guard against transparency.

In the end, government spending transparency should continue to improve as technology becomes more enhanced, citizens kindly but firmly exert their rights, and public school agencies realize it’s in their best interest to post financial information online in the clearest, most comprehensive manner possible. One of my Education Policy Center friends stated it well in a media release that accompanied the new publication:

“Transparency helps to encourage productive spending of tax funds, and builds good faith between citizens and their local school systems,” said DeGrow.

Productive spending indeed — strong transparency is one ingredient to help effective innovation forge ahead as budgets have stagnated. It’s Time to Show the Money!

In the video, you may also recognize Highlands ranch mom Diana Oakley, whose son Nate received a Choice Scholarship and was featured in a July Independence Institute video. Also, interestingly, Dougco school board director Justin Williams — one of two board members who won re-election this week (the third race was an open seat won by pro-voucher Kevin Larsen) — was interviewed in the Choice Media TV piece.

Choice Media TV, you may ask, where have I heard that before? Wasn’t that famous filmmaker Bob Bowdon? You got it. Six weeks ago I told you how this venture fills a valuable niche in the education reform world. Now maybe you have seen some living proof of it.

The timing to share the important, groundbreaking news out of Douglas County is as important now as ever. The anti-choice injunction has been appealed, and school board president John Carson confidently states in the video that he likes the choice program’s chances of prevailing with the higher courts. You may remember at almost the exact same time as the Dougco injunction that an Indiana judge denied a similar request against that state’s new statewide Choice Scholarship Program.

Well, now today we learn that nearly 4,000 students have signed on for private school choice in Indiana, making it the largest-ever first-year voucher success. So even though it will take longer, keep up the faith. Sharing a theme DeGrow put forth in his Ed News Colorado analysis of Tuesday’s election results, one of Dougco’s school board winners stated an excellent point about the future with a local newspaper:

“(The school board is) going to have to pursue expanding choices for parents and a pay-for-performance system for our terrific teachers in our district … in a way that doesn’t require additional revenue,” [Craig] Richardson said. “I think we’re up to the task. I think this is the best board in the county that is able to innovate with scarce resources.”

Indeed. Challenging times lie ahead, but for the sake of educational opportunity and productivity, they can be exciting times, too.

I’m talking about yesterday’s release of the latest results for math and reading from the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), better known as the Nation’s Report Card, the gold-standard test to measure what 4th grade and 8th grade students in different states are learning about important subjects. Without further ado, here are some good reads:

• Linking to a Colorado Department of Education news release, Ed News Colorado reports that our state’s 8th graders showed improvements in both math and reading, but 4th graders made “no significant change”
• Fordham’s Mike Petrilli speculates that the now-defunct national Reading First initiative may account for the better national showing in reading by 8th graders than 4th graders
• Kevin Carey of Education Sector notes continuing national progress in math scores, observes the stubbornness of the achievement gap, and raises the specter of how the results filter into national debates over reauthorizing ESEA and adopting Common Core standards
• Speaking of the achievement gap, Matt Ladner lays out how poor students and (more specifically) poor, African-American students did state-by-state on 4th grade reading; interestingly, Colorado — which continues to remain above the national average on overall NAEP scores — was below the mark in the former category
• Education Week blogger Michele McNeil takes a look at the results through the lens of states that won Race to the Top, and finds unexpected positive gains from Hawaii and Maryland, while also observing remarkable math gains among Washington, D.C., students — which would be a credit to the bold reform program of now-former Chancellor Michelle Rhee

That’s certainly a lot easier than diving into the data and coming up with original observations myself, at least for now. More time to ruminate later. But I thought you might find these initial insights interesting, at least as much as you can while reveling in last night’s election results.

Among the many topics covered at the September school board candidate briefings were examples of Colorado local K-12 innovation. Since 2005 the Education Policy Center has released a series of six papers in the “Innovative School District” series — including homages to Douglas County for its “home-grown teachers” waiver program, and to Delta County for its student-centered VISION program.

Well, believe it or not, school district-level innovation is by no means isolated to our own Centennial State. An article by my Education Policy Center friend Ben DeGrow published in the new November issue of School Reform News highlights the initiative of Michigan’s Oscoda Area Schools, which created its own performance-based teacher evaluation system without waiting for state agencies and officials to guide them along:

The district partnered with an in-state software company to tailor a computer program that manages and processes the essential evaluation data quickly. This helps administrators spend more time mentoring teachers and less time filling out and duplicating paperwork, [then-Oscoda superintendent Christine] Beardsley said.

Other districts have shown interest in the customizable software, for which Oscoda owns the copyright. This could generate a stream of new revenue for the district.

Yes, a Michigan state legislature hungry for federal Race to the Top dollars passed a 2010 law requiring all school districts to incorporate student academic growth into professional teacher evaluations. Rather than wait until the last-minute deadline to comply, Oscoda seized the idea by meeting during the summer to craft its own locally-suitable program that incorporates the legislated state requirements. And now as other districts scramble to comply, Oscoda has the rights to a customizable data management software tool that it can share for a fee to generate revenue. Sounds kind of entrepreneurial, doesn’t it?

Hey, whether it’s Colorado or Michigan, good K-12 innovation is good K-12 innovation. News like the story from Oscoda is encouraging to see. If you want to learn more about what exactly the district did, I encourage you to check out a video created by my friends’ sister think tank, the Mackinac Center for Public Policy.

Exit thought: Here in Colorado, our state senate president is pushing ahead with an audit of “for-profit” online schools. Have to demonize anyone who happens to make money, you know. Setting aside for a moment the larger debate that could take place, should school districts that make money off innovative software tools be subject to audit, too?

Making effective and meaningful changes to the K-12 system are far more likely to happen when parents are engaged and empowered and (at least somewhat) organized. In an interesting and informative Education Next article, the Walton Foundation’s Bruno Manno highlights the successes of three influential parent groups that are “NOT your mother’s PTA”:

• Parent Revolution (California)
• Education Reform Now
• Stand for Children

Colorado has one of the nine state affiliates of Stand for Children. Not only were they a leading force behind 2010’s Great Teachers and Leaders law (aka SB 191), they also are active in school board races in Denver and Westminster. (That’s right… you do have less than a week ’till Election Day!)

Before listing some important and provocative questions, Manno closes out his Education Next piece with a salient point:

Insurgent organizations like the ones described here seem to hold significant promise for mobilizing parents to advance an agenda that goes far beyond today’s PTA, whose critics, in the words of William Cutler, describe it “as a company union—part of the problem, not the solution. [It gives]…the illusion of parental influence, while discouraging the formation of community groups that might be more aggressive about the need for change.”

Not all parent groups are created equal. And none, of course, is perfect. Some are fighting for meaningful changes in the education system, though, and others are defenders of the status quo. A good distinction to know, in case you hadn’t picked it up before.