Tom Coyne had an excellent guest commentary article in the Denver Post about the status of education in Jefferson County, Colorado. The only complaint I have about the article is that it dances around defining the problem until page two. Taxpayers spend an enormous amount of money for education. In 2012-2013 Jeffco spent $10, 420 per student or over $260,000 per 25 student classroom. Denver metro expenditures on education were in the billions of dollars. All this spending is not resulting in decent educations for many of the students. “In 2014, only 46 percent of Jeffco students met the college and career ready… (requirements) in reading, only 47 percent in math, and only 45 percent in science.”  Sadly that means more than half the students were not adequately prepared to attend college or start any kind of career when they graduate from high school.

The school administrators and teachers union has a standard response to complaints students aren’t meeting standards. They first say they know what they are doing. They then will say something such as, “If you want better achievement results, you have to give us more money and trust us to use it wisely.” Does that mean the administrators and teachers are admitting they can work harder and smarter, but are holding back because they want more money. Everyone would always appreciate higher pay, but I think it would go over very poorly in a private business if a manager or employee said they will improve substandard performance only if they receive a raise.

School districts are required to submit self-diagnosed improvement plans to the Colorado Department of Education every year. The samples of the root causes of shortfalls in achievement include inconsistent instruction practices, lack of systemic, K-12 articulated curriculum, inconsistent implementation of challenging and relevant instruction, not demanding high expectations, and lack of information on how to address the persistent achievement gaps. Since the explanations recur and performance remains lacking, administrators and teachers are admitting they refuse to change their behavior, unless, of course, someone gives them more money.

The author of the article finally gets to the point. He writes that allowing teachers to have their professional association be the bargaining unit for contracts reduces the authority of administrators to implement needed changes. It is virtually impossible to remove an incompetent teacher. The closing statement is that everyone needs “…to face the elephant in the classroom, recognizing teachers unions as bargaining units and start contracting with and evaluating teachers in the same manner as other professionals.” Perhaps future contract negotiations should base raises on performance. Pay for performance, what a concept!