Education reform: Are you kidding me?

Do we have an educator crisis in Idaho or do we have an issue with how education is funded and governed? Everyone is an expert in educational issues because everyone has had one - good or bad!

In 2006 I had the privilege and honor to run as a Republican candidate for the office of the Superintendent of Public Instruction. My platform was simple. I believed then and I believe now, the highest educational office in our state should be held by an educator.

How naive I was. When I announced my candidacy the polarization began immediately. Many of my educator colleagues, including the IEA, were disappointed in my choice of parties and were reluctant to publicly support my campaign. My fellow Republicans were very mistrusting of an educator who was a Republican and told me in no uncertain terms that I was a Democrat running as a Republican! However, I was the only Republican candidate who had significant educational and administrative experience.

My point: My campaign was DOA because of a party affiliation not because of my lack of educational experience! (my opinion). ARE YOU KIDDING ME?

Maybe Idaho should consider a change in the requirements of the Superintendent of Public Instruction? An independent candidate with a degree in education (not online) and an allegiance to the state he/she serves not the party. If I had to do it over, Steve Casey (E for educator) would be much less polarizing than Steve Casey (R) or (D)!

I believe the citizens of our country and our state are tired of partisan politics. What is so disappointing with Superintendent Luna's "Students Come First" legislation is that it was developed with little or no input from those that have to implement the results! The proposed legislation unveiled in November caught the education community by surprise. Brilliant plan! The only recourse left to educators is to question the proposal and offer reasons why it won't work. This is viewed by many non-educators as self serving and not in the best interests of students but teachers. ARE YOU KIDDING ME?

As disappointed as I am with Superintendent Luna's plan, I am equally disappointed in both the IEA (Idaho Education Association) and the IASA (Idaho Association of School Administrators). We knew after last year's session that the reality of more cuts was a possibility. The figure being thrown around at that time was $60 million. Today, the figure fluctuates weekly. My point is this: what are and where are the "proposals" for solutions from the IEA and/or the IASA? It has been made very clear that the largest single budget item in our state, education, cannot be held harmless when considering cuts - nor should it. Knowing the possibility of more cuts coming in 2011 should have resulted in the formation of a "non partisan" committee of educators, legislators, and business leaders to search for common ground on how we, as citizens of the state of Idaho, could mitigate the devastation these cuts will have on education in Idaho. Hello, Wisconsin! ARE YOU KIDDING ME!

Let's agree that Superintendent Luna's proposals have come from left field (it appears that only those in the inner circle were privy to these plans). Here are some proposals, then, from right field:

1. Fund special education ONLY to the level reimbursed by the federal government. As it is now, districts pay for non-reimbursed services from their general fund budget.

2. Terminate busing. Those who believe education is important will find a way to get to school

3. Eliminate charter schools. Funding of these secondary schools is at a smaller ratio, 14 to 1, than traditional secondary schools, 18 to 1; current budget dollars would be spent on fewer schools; oh, what happened to the at class load issue?

4. Students who miss 10 days or more and do not pass their ISAT proficiency test must make up the time in summer school working on their skills; their ISAT test scores will not be counted in school population - you can't teach them if they are not there!; also, summer school will be funded by charging the parents/students a stipend to attend.

5. Create magnet schools called IBAMAS (Idaho Behavioral and Motivational Adjustment School) where students who are disruptive, have excessive absences, and/or are failing academically will be sent until positive improvement can be measured and quantified.

6. Eliminate kindergarten. Pre-first grade preparedness is the responsibility of the parent. If the student is old enough to attend first grade, but is not at skill level, they are placed in first grade "educational training" programs and their RIT score will be measured AFTER they have reached the first graded level, no matter how many years it takes them to do so. AM I KIDDING?

What appears to be common sense education reform for some is ridiculous for others. However, Superintendent Luna is right on one account, "Students DO AND MUST Come First"! That is exactly why the Legislature needs to carefully consider their vote on these legislative proposals. They are too wide-sweeping, they came too fast and they will be too harmful to our children. Our legislators must weigh in not as a "D" or an "R" but as an "I"- individual. Then, with a cooperative attitude, all public education stakeholders in Idaho can and must work together to bring positive, systemic changes before it is too late! I AM NOT KIDDING!

Steve Casey is a Hayden resident.