|
Sunday's Denver Post was overflowing with stories and commentary about the overlapping issues of school funding and education reform. The fact that the School Finance bill wending its way through the legislature currently funds schools at $150 million below the constitutional requirements of Amendment 23, provides an interesting context for these three Post articles:
-- Dan Haley lauds DPS' move toward fostering autonomy and innovation, calling on Denver voters to support candidates for the DPS school board who will maintain that direction. Notably, ensuring the continuing vitality of successful innovative programs (many of which receive significant additional private funding), and scaling up those successes to benefit larger numbers of DPS and Colorado students will require sustainable resources.
-- At a time when many, including the President, are calling for increased instruction time as a critical component of education reform, Colorado school finance is pushing districts in the opposite direction. Several school districts are considering going to four-day weeks to deal with shrinking budgets. In Elizabeth, the move is also designed to help retain teachers who otherwise go to districts where they are paid better. Moving to a four-day week may well be the best way for some school districts to cut costs without reducing services to kids -- but it doesn't leave much room for increased instruction time. Moreover, many parents and district officials are concerned that the move will shift the cost to working parents who will have to pay for child care on the fifth day.
-- And, finally, the editorial board wrote thoughtfully and hopefully about Colorado's chances of getting a $500 million "Race to the Top" education reform grant from the federal government, wisely warning:
[S]ignificant thought needs to go into creating reforms that will have a lasting effect when the federal money goes away. Either they must be one-time expenses that lead to enduring change or new funding sources must be devised to support them. It would be unacceptably wasteful to see reforms get off to a good start only to wither for lack of money. [Emphasis added]
Exactly so. |
