CO-04 (Special Election)
See Full Big Line
(R) Greg Lopez
(R) Trisha Calvarese
90%
10%
President (To Win Colorado)
See Full Big Line
(D) Joe Biden*
(R) Donald Trump
80%
20%↓
CO-01 (Denver)
See Full Big Line
(D) Diana DeGette*
90%
CO-02 (Boulder-ish)
See Full Big Line
(D) Joe Neguse*
90%
CO-03 (West & Southern CO)
See Full Big Line
(D) Adam Frisch
(R) Jeff Hurd
(R) Ron Hanks
40%
30%
20%
CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado)
See Full Big Line
(R) Lauren Boebert
(R) Deborah Flora
(R) J. Sonnenberg
30%↑
15%↑
10%↓
CO-05 (Colorado Springs)
See Full Big Line
(R) Dave Williams
(R) Jeff Crank
50%↓
50%↑
CO-06 (Aurora)
See Full Big Line
(D) Jason Crow*
90%
CO-07 (Jefferson County)
See Full Big Line
(D) Brittany Pettersen
85%↑
CO-08 (Northern Colo.)
See Full Big Line
(D) Yadira Caraveo
(R) Gabe Evans
(R) Janak Joshi
60%↑
35%↓
30%↑
State Senate Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
80%
20%
State House Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
95%
5%
June 20, 2014 03:21 PM UTC
23 Comments~p1_200.jpg)
You nailed it, SALIS.
There are mega big bucks in education reform – for charter schools, for curricula, for testing, and also for weakening the teacher and employee unions of the public schools. Being able to not teach real science or a diverse social studies curriculum is just a bonues.
Kudos for researching the connections to Taggert Hansen's candidacy.
I think, at bottom, the corporate agenda is to break public education. Democrats and Republicans are often unlikely allies in this.
I had a chance to spend some time with Dr. Henry Roman, who is also running for the state board. What do you know of him?
I've only been in Pueblo for three years, and didn't work in PCS60 when Dr. Roman was Superintendant. However, I've never heard less than positive and respectful reports about his commitment to kids and willingness and ability to work with teachers, parents, and other stakeholders.
His website has some decent positions – don't over-test, respect the contracts and working agreements. He's overseen some good charter/public partnerships like the Chavez/Huerta academy.
I have had the opportunity to meet both candidates. What I came away with is this. Taggert is able to speak articulately and explain complex issues. Val is unable to do this. She is also acutely ignorant of how the state budget works, seems unaware of what TABOR is or how it affects the state budget. She is also convinced that the legislature can easily raise fees in oil and gas and take that money to give to education.
For me, this is not about traditional vs. reform but having a smart Democrat working with a largely Republican Board of Ed. I can only see the R's laughing at Val Flores. And not much will be done.
Looks like a nice try by an annonmyous bloger(flores paid staff) to trick the voters.Interesting that they focus on DFER and LEE, who combined have given Taggarts campaign 1/7 the amount Flores got from teachers unions. I suppose some money is good money(as long as you get it), while all other money is bad if you don't. And its intersting you pick that quote from Taggarts website. About how he is a big bad tfa teacher and reformer. Theres another quote a paragraph or so down. "I will fight back attacks from those who want to push Douglas County style private school voucher programs that hurt our public schools. I will steadfastly oppose any attempts to turn a public school system into a for-profit model as you see in some communities around the country – our children are not commodities on which profit should be made. "
It is interesting that you make assumptions and try to attack who you believe I may be. My attempt was to show that when someone stands strongly against privatization, corporations like Walmart use soft side money to fund campaigns under the guise of Democrats for Education Reform.
I do find it disengenuous that Taggert meantions his time as a teacher, but he doesn't mention that he was only a teacher for two years. As it takes time to be a quality teacher, I strongly doubt he was able to acquire the knowledge and skills that it takes to be an effective teacher. The fact that his is TFA is part of the political connect. Walton Family Foundation also funds TFA, where college grads typically (not always) from priveleged backgrounds and with noformal training and experience in teaching are recruited for a Peace Corps style tour of duty to pay off student loans by working for 2 years in disadvantaged schools full of children of color. You will find the Far NE schools full of TFA teachers who are turning over and often struggle to connect with poor students and students of color. TFA also teaches/indoctrinates its participants with a very specific philosphy on education that fits its funders like the Walton Family Foundation.
If you look at other Denver DFERs as well, you will see strong connection to the Waltons, Gates, hedge fund managers, CEOs, oil & gas, and GOP contributors like Bruce Benson and Phil Anschutz. I will see if I can dig a little deeper to show this, but the research takes time. Not to mention that this is something I am doing in my spare time.
First, let me say I am thrilled this race is between two people of color. For two long, white Denverites have filled all kinds of Boards and Commissions in disproportionate numbers. I applaud both candidates for entering the race. For the record, I have met Mr. Taggart but I do not know him. The demonization of any school board candidates by their opponent's supporters is disturbing to say the least. We all care about the future of our state, and the children who will craft that future.
That said, Val Flores is a delightful person — she is wickedly smart, has tremendous wisdom from decades of public service as an educator, and is well-respected among her peers. Her policy platform is well thought out, and is consistent with years of research in the field of public education. She is a hero to many people. If I lived withn DPS boundaries, I would be very excited to have the opportunity to vote for someone like Val! Pol's readers should throw her some donations. You can do so here: http://www.valflores.com
This is why we should be wary of big money influence in education: There is a movement going on around the country to privatize education. Philanthropists such as Bill and Melinda Gates, Mark and Priscilla Zuckerberg, and the Walton Family are doing more than financially supporting nationalized standards. They are funding education research centers at universities that outwardly appear as public entities, but are actually political “think tanks.” They support public programing in order to influence education journalism. The media perpetuates the myth that there is a STEM shortage in the workforce and they go along with the misconception even though the data proves otherwise. The technocrats pour millions of dollars into technology-based public charter schools and drive their rigid curriculum. When the Zuckerbergs donated $100 million to the Newark School District, it made headline news. The newspapers did not mention that these donations actually required matching funds, which were impossible for the impoverished school district to meet. The $20 million that was donated went mostly to education software and made a few people very wealthy. Also, it's quite possible the Zuckerbergs received a tax credit (The New Market Tax Credit) so it wasn't exactly altruistic. If you look closer at the charter schools that are receiving all the funding, you will see a common scene, which is called the “Rocketship model.” Young children are corralled into computer rooms for 2-3 hours per day. Here they work on reading comprehension and math practice problems at their own level, "differentiated learning.” Ha! Their teachers come from Teach For America with two years experience. A typical technology lab may have 130 children with three non-certified teachers’ assistants. This allows for a school to hire fewer teachers who get cycles of children over the course of day. Imagine grading all those papers? This model can save a school $500,000 per year. Why do T4A teachers take these jobs? They are promised lucrative positions in administration later. Rocketship administrators are not certified, not properly educated, not qualified. The mostly low-income children at reform charters do not have Music, Art, or a foreign language. For hours a day, they don’t engage with another human being. They don’t read for pleasure. They don’t debate or discuss a topic. They don’t invent or create. It is inhumane. It's Common Core.
@noellegreen: You had me up until your last sentence: It's common core."
I'm not a huge fan of common core- although it does seem to be, as you say, yet another marketing opportunity for new testing and curricula. But we can't blame CC for all modern education ills. Most of these have been accumulating for years, since education started becoming a for-profit industry.
Some of the provisions of CC are OK, though – the emphasis on mental math, for example. I have an uncle who is, literally, a rocket scientist. He practices mental math every day – when he gets up to the checkout counter at the grocery store, for example, he knows wihin a dollar or two what the total will be. Obviously, not a new concept, but one we got away from over the years.
Collaborative work is also not a bad, nor a new concept, and useful as long as it isn't overdone. What remedial college professors lament is that they are getting a new generation of kids who are very good at working in groups and thinking and discussing literature deeply, but who absolutely suck at writing an in-depth, long analysis of the same literature by themselves.
What has been missing in education since it has become a for-profit industry is balance – instead of swinging like a brainless pendulum every three years from fad to fad, I really would like to see education be TRULY data driven. If we were data-driven, and honest, we would embrace:
The technology requirements are part of Common Core. Technology should be taught as a separate discipline like reading and math. Blended learning is a very shallow approach to education. Expect to see student to teacher ratios of 60:1 as a result. This is the Walmartization of public school education.
The Common Core standards are another concern. In Colorado, the math standards remain the same with Common Core added to them to make them more robust and more in depth. Teachers are incetivized to teach to the Common Core–aligned standardized tests because 50% of their pay is tied to the results. These are some of the strictest laws in the country.
The Colorado standards are so complex and so burdensome that the Common Core-aligned textbooks do not meet the minimum standards on their own. There is not enough time in a school year to meet all the standards. There isn't any incentive for teachers to teach anything more than the minimum standards because their pay is based on it and there isn't enough time to meet anything more than the minimum. Again these standards are a MINIMUM. Common Core is great for closing the achievement gap. Those children with natural mathematical ability will be held back by the slow pace.
Also, Common Core is more theoretical rather than computational. Those schools that are only complying with Common Core and not the State standards (such as charters who are run by parents with no epxertise) are not giving their students the necessary rote practice that is required to master basic mathematics.
Anyway, this whole movement to overhaul education quickly and in the mostly costly way possible is such an obvious scam to make money in the new ed tech field at the taxpayers expense.
Great points Mamajama55!
NoelleGreen, I agree with many of your points (there is little time to teach more than the basic minimum if using Common Core, that quick corporate fixes to education are a scam — I would even say dangerous) but when you say the "blended approach' doesn't work, I beg to differ. There is a lot of research about thematic lessons — integrating facts and skills into a more cohesive, relevant, interesting whole, that helps people learn faster.
I think the real underlying issue is this: ed "reform" is to some extent a sexism issue — male dominated corporations undermining the expertise of professionals in a field that is predominantly female — trying to overthrow it to make a profit off of our children. The only power parents and teachers have against corporate vultures who would ransack our schools the way they've ransacked everything else (I just came from Detroit yesterday — don't get me started about their charter schools) is to support teacher's unions. Parents who spend time in the schools and know the truth about the current state of education must stand with the teachers. I see no other way.
One of the things I find most interesting is the precursor to Common Core was Core Knowledge, which was firmly supported by the GOP in the early days of No Child Left Behind. Lately, there are just as many GOP parents against Common Core as progressive parents, and as many Dem parents for ed "reform" as conservative ones — I find that fascinating.
The first question I have for all of them is this, "How many hours did you spend volunteering in a public school in the last 10-15 years?" Those who have spent a lot of time volunteering see that teachers have their student's best interests at heart and really are the experts in education. We should be listening to them more, rather than undermining their authority and expertise.
Nancy, thank you for adding the feminist perspective on why it is alright to attach teachers and their unions.
Nancy I agree with all your points, even that blended learning has some value when used by a motivated teacher. Also, I love teachers and donated over 100 hours per year to my children's public charter school.
Also, I have been reading the Detroit Free Press series on charter school corruption. The same corruption is happening here in Colorado. I know of three charter schools where self dealing and conflicts are everyday business. It should be a crime. Colorado desperately needs charter school oversight.
E.D. Hirsch offers the Core Knowledge Sequence to guide schools and districts. It's not the same as a common standard. It still allows for individual teachers to get creative and focus on student specific needs. Common Core is a specific inflexible standard and it does change curricula, despite what Bill Gates says.
Finally, I am very distressed to learn that David Sirota was fired from Pando. He was digging a little too deep into all the education crap I listed above. He is one of the only investigative reporters on big money education reform. Most people, including parents, don't care.
Hi Saying,
I'm sorry I am not on Pols very much anymore (I'm also sarcasm-impaired and admittedly a little too pollyana for some, I guess), so I don't know your writing style. I am strongly pro-teacher's unions and always have been. Do you mean why it's "not alright" to attack teachers and their unions?
SAILIS:
How the heck did you get "it is alright to attach(sic – s/b attack?) teachers and their unions" out of Nancy's comment, quoted below:
Are you offended by feminists? Does Nancy's observation that ed reform often consists of
is somehow a "Go Ed Reform!" slogan?
So are you happy or unhappy that Val Flores, Taggert's opponent, who was supported by the teacher's unions, but not by the Democratic party, won the school board race?
I think some of our trolls may have adopted new identities, to avoid the taunts and jeers in the wake of Scotty's loss.
Real men of principle, they
Don't worry, Elliot will still be here as himself. His ego could never endure being anonymous.
Hi, Mama. There was no attempt at sarcasm. I believe that part of the attack on teachers and why it has been so effective is because the profession is dominated by females.
As I hope you can guess, I am delighted that Dr. Flores was able to pull off the election despite the influx of national corporate cash.
Real trolls don't research, if research is defined as more than "find a website which agrees with ___ talking point."
So…I don't think that Saying is a troll. His/her research on Taggert is good, anyway.
He (probably) doesn't care for feminists, much, though, or Nancy's contention that the education system is inherently sexist, consisting as it does of a corruption-prone bureaucracy, mostly male, and well-paid in comparison to the predominantly female work force.
Someone mentioned Detroit charters. For insight into how incidious the privatization movement is in Michigan see below.
From Diane Ravitch:
The Lansing (Michigan) State Journal explains why the charter law lacks teeth.
The law permits conflict of interest, nepotism, self-dealing and other scams.
Why? Charters are a $1 billion industry annually. Charter chains and founders hire lobbyists and give generously to politicians. The charter lobby has given $1.3 million since 2003. It plans to spend $1 million for pro-charter candidates in this fall’s elections.
And that is why the charter law in Michigan is weak and permits scams and frauds with public money intended for public schools.
http://www.lansingstatejournal.com/article/20140625/NEWS02/306250008/Pro-charter-lobby-shows-its-clout-Legislature?nclick_check=1
Breaking News from Chicago. The CPS announced 550 teacher layoffs due to under enrollment in public schools.
http://my.chicagotribune.com/#section/544/article/p2p-80646392/