Editor’s note: This opinion is by Fayneese Miller, the chair of the Vermont State Board of Education.
Three years ago the Vermont State Board of Education embarked on a very ambitious task—to develop a document that would serve as the basis for transforming the educational experience of K-12 learners in the state. In 2008, the Board appointed a policy commission and charged them with making recommendations about how education in Vermont might be transformed. The Policy Commission, in December of 2009, submitted to the Board the Opportunities to Learn report—a report that is grounded in extensive research, reflection, and experiential knowledge about education in Vermont . In January of 2010, the Board accepted the Opportunities to Learn report that was submitted by the Policy Commission (see http://education.vermont.gov/new/pdfdoc/dept/transformation/commission/transformation_policy_commission_report_1209.pdf).
The Board did not act immediately on the recommendations in the Opportunities to Learn report because many discussions were occurring around school redistricting. With the recent release of the Challenges to Change report, the Board is now ready to begin anew the work necessary to transform education and the learning experiences of our children and youth.
In order to move forward, I believe that the action items, outlined in the Challenges to Change report recently released by Commissioner of Education Armando Vilaseca and his commission, are necessary for true transformation to occur. I believe that the state needs to merge schools districts. This is one way of ensuring that all children and youth in Vermont have a quality educational experience that is highly effective in preparing them for higher education or some other post-secondary experience, the world of work, and full participation in and an understanding of what it means to be part of a civil society. I also believe that it is necessary to create reasonable student to staff ratios, establish reasonable class sizes, and provide school choice options for students. I suspect that the proposed actions might lead to substantial savings for all Vermonters.
While the above comments are mine alone, the Vermont State Board of Education, in January of 2010, adopted the following resolution:
“That the State Board of Education support the creation of fewer education districts, each governed by a single board, which are large enough to incorporate the following four principles:
· To expand choice and learning opportunities for learners;
· To expand capacity for critical functions, such as professional development, coordination of curriculum, instruction and assessment, and other administrative functions;
· To increase flexibility for use of staff and facilities;
· To strengthen coherent implementation of education transformation.
In addition, the state Board voted to appoint an education redistricting commission. The commission would solicit input from stakeholders. The charge to the Education Redistricting Commission, therefore, shall be to:
· Review existing school choice proposals,
· Discuss how to address current options for high school choice,
· Review voluntary consolidation models (H.782; similar Senate bill),
· Discuss school budgets adopted by April 1, 2010 .
It is expected that the Commission will provide recommendations for open learning opportunities, including school choice for high school aged learners and within-district choices for K-8 learners. It is also expected that that Commission will address cost savings due to redistricting.
The following people have agreed to serve on the Education Redistricting Commission:
Stephan Morse, State Board of Education Member
John Hall, State Board of Education Member
Alex Melville, Student State Board of Education Member
Laura Soares, Education Transformation Policy Commission Member
Chris Koliba, Education Transformation Policy Commission Member
Dan French, Superintendent, Bennington Rutland Supervisory Union
Sean-Marie Oller, Chair, Mountain Anthony Union High School District Board
Rick Hilton, Headmaster, Lyndon Institute
The members of the State Board are committed to ensuring that all children and youth in Vermont have a quality educational experience that allows them to generate new knowledge, think critically and creatively, and contribute to society. We believe that redistricting will open up opportunities to learn for all of our children and youth.
Permalink |
“I suspect that the proposed actions might lead to substantial savings for all Vermonters.”
Ms. Miller – My town’s economy has been dramatically impacted by Vermont’s current education funding laws. Every year we send 10 million dollars above and beyond our own school needs, primarily from our business and second homeowner community, to the state education fund.
We have a small school, consistently producing big results.
We really need you to be sure (have data) about the savings part, not just suspect it.
This may be challenging, as the current education funding mechanism does not require (or result in) savings from economies of scale.
Since the last legislated education funding mechanism has had such profound impacts on our local and state economy, it would seem appropriate to also study the economic impacts of any redistricting plans.
These things are connected. Working in a manner that does not acknowledge that will not serve Vermonters (young, old, entrepreneurs, workers, investors, farmers) well.
Permalink |
Yes, Miller uses the word “believe” more than once. In fact, the piece hinges on a non sequitur: “This is one way of ensuring that all children and youth in Vermont have a quality educational experience that is highly effective in preparing them for higher education or some other post-secondary experience, the world of work, and full participation in and an understanding of what it means to be part of a civil society.” Oh yeah? We need more proof than Miller’s belief.
In fact, the statement implies that these goals are not currently being achieved, which defenders of the public school system might have some quarrel with.
The recommendations Miller expects sound largely worthwhile, but “choice” can mean different things. Since here K-8 choice means within-district only, that also implies public schools only, and that would therefore seem to be the meaning of 9-12 choice.
In other words, for towns that currently have true choice — in which parents can decide what nonreligious school, public or private, best serves their childrens’ needs — that would be would be severely diminished.
And that would be a step backward from the purported goals that Miller outlines.
Permalink |
The School Choice (tuitioning) we have in Vermont goes way beyond selection of public secondary schools in a defined geographic region, it includes any approved independent school or public school of the PARENT’S choice at the secondary (7-12) level.
28 Districts in Vermont have no elementary schools. Communities have CHOSEN CHOICE for their families to varying degrees as allowed by VT law.
Be VERY wary of the path the Commission will push us toward. Vermont’s greatest educational success story is in danger.
http://www.SchoolChoiceVermont.com
Permalink |
After all the good stuff that’s been written about education “reform” in the last several months, it was really sad to read this statement from the Chair of the State Board of Education.
She seems to have missed several important facts about education in Vermont.
It is of fairly high quality.
Small schools are generally good schools.
One of the biggest drivers of increased education costs is the cost of health care.
No evidence has been submitted that shows that educational expenses will be reduced by eliminating local school boards or consolidating supervisory unions.
Most Vermonters are willing to pay for it.
All of the above points have been written about extensively in the recent months.
I don’t know where the concepts of reforming education to teach the “world of work”, and “what it means to be part of civil society”, came from. They are why we have public schools. But, in the context of “reforming” education, I haven’t read about those at all.
So, how increasing class size, and eliminating school boards improves on what Vermont has now, is beyond me.