You are viewing the EdNews Blog archives.
These archives contain blog posts from before June 7, 2011
Click here to view the new Voices section of EdNews

Archive for the ‘Parental & community involvement’ Category

Parents: Damned if we do, damned if we don’t

Friday, December 10th, 2010

Several recent posts on EdNews have been very confusing from my perspective as a parent.

Should I proactively track my child’s progress as she goes through school to provide the support at home to back up what the teachers ask in school? Or is my diligence and insistence that my kid gets all of those missing assignments turned in to raise her grades annoying to the teacher?

Should I be like a Shanghai mom and insist that music, sports, and extracurriculars give way to more rigorous academics so that my kid could do her patriotic duty to help secure America’s rightful place on top of the leaning tower of PISA?

But wait, wouldn’t that make me one of the mindless middle-class parents relentlessly putting pressure on my child for a Race to Nowhere?

What’s a mom to do? What is constructive parenting? What is mindless pressurizing?

Popularity: 5% [?]

The 2010 election and ed reform

Thursday, November 4th, 2010

One of the ongoing lessons of the shifting electorate is that party affiliation is less and less likely to predict specific election outcomes.  It’s simply no longer possible to count votes based purely on one’s declared party.  2010 clearly demonstrated this trend with victories for three officials — none of whom previously held statewide office — in related positions: a governor from one party, combined with a treasurer and secretary of state from the other. So, ignoring the limited lens of party affiliation (if we might), how was Colorado’s 2010 election for education reform?

Last fall saw a bitter contest — most of it within the Democratic party — on SB 191.  At the time, and exacerbated after the failure of R2T dollars to follow, there was the fear that 191 would be a ed reform waterloo, and many of the Democratic legislators who defied party stalwarts and traditional supporters to vote in favor of the bill were warned that they would suffer a lack of Democratic support, enthusiasm, and dollars in upcoming elections.

So how did they do?  Of the nine democrats (and 21 total legislators) who voted for 191 and were up for election, just one lost his seat — in a race where education was not a factor.

Also consider the local efforts of Stand for Children, a national nonprofit group founded by Jonah Edelman, son of activist Marian Wright Edelman. Stand is an non-partisan advocacy group for kids in a public school sector where most of the decisions are made both by and for adults (disclosure: I recently joined Stand’s local advisory board). For this election cycle, Stand both contributed money and developed an endorsement strategy that reached across party lines to find candidates whom its members believed were true education champions for children.

For Stand, party affiliation means little — it is the impact on the educational prospects and outcomes for kids that matters. Stand screened a number of candidates, with final endorsements contingent on a super-majorty vote of its members (a far more collaborative method to determine support than most organizations).  Stand eventually supported 18 candidates for Colorado’s legislature (a mix of 12 Democrats, 5 Republicans, and 1 Unaffiliated). On the dawn after Tuesday’s election eve, fully 15 of the 18 candidates will be in the legislature for the next session.

Stand’s singleminded focus on outcomes for kids rather than the interests of adults makes for shifting alliances: Stand and the Colorado Education Association (CEA) agreed on 8 candidates, 7 of whom won. However there were also four candidates that Stand supported and CEA opposed, three of whom won.

Election reformers had reasons to celebrate further up the ticket as well, with the narrow election of former DPS Superintendent Bennet, whose organization produced a remarkable GOTV effort that seems to have picked up where his personal shoe leather campaign for Manual left off.  In fact, if there is a unknown variable in Colorado’s post-election education reform algorithm, it is probably future Governor Hickenlooper, whose education policy statements have been bland and inconsequential — a reflection of a campaign where a viable strategy was not to draw too much attention to himself while his opponents cut each other into smaller and smaller pieces.

Where — and to what extent — Hickenlooper decides to pursue a specific education agenda is still a very open question.

Education has been mentioned as a potential wedge issue to separate Democrats.  But this survival of Colorado’s pro-reform Democrats in what may be the toughest partisan election in their careers makes that claim hollow.  Instead, it seems like education — mentioned specifically by President Obama as one of the areas where he hopes to find common ground with the new Congress — can serve as a meeting place for sanity, somewhere in between the conservative Scylla’s who wish to abolish the Department of Education and the liberal Charybdis’s who fight any change to the failing status quo.

Perhaps the group who emerged with the least amount of bruises, and the most hope, from the torrid Colorado campaign season are those who are still too young to vote.

Popularity: 9% [?]

Are Kaplan, Merida afraid of dialogue?

Friday, October 15th, 2010

Janel Highfill lives in Northwest Denver. She is a parent of two students at Brown Elementary and a member of Stand for Children.

I was filled with nervous excitement Wednesday night as I pulled up to Edison Elementary, where I was part of a small group of parents leading a community discussion about Northwest Denver schools. We first had the vision for this last February after joining Stand for Children, an education advocacy organization that has been supporting our efforts to gather parents, community members, and teachers to share concerns and priorities for our schools.

As I stepped out of the car, I thought of North High School, just a five minute drive from Edison, with a remediation rate of 75 percent. That means that out of the 189 students who graduated in 2009, only 47 left with the skills needed to dive into college-level work. I also thought about the impact of recent budget cuts on schools like Brown Elementary, which has been successfully transformed and is now on the road to success.  Northwest parents and community members like me are frustrated by these issues, but this meeting wasn’t about complaining, it was about finding solutions.

Given our excitement at the thought of coming together to discuss these pressing needs, I was surprised by what I saw in front of Edison: DPS Board members Andrea Merida and Jeannie Kaplan standing in front of building trying to silence the dialogue.

Yes, you read that right. Two elected board members were passing out fliers with inaccurate, anti-Stand for Children propaganda. With DPS’s recent focus on Northwest Denver and the forthcoming Northwest Community Committee, which will create a feeder pattern plan for schools in our quadrant, you’d think that Kaplan and Merida would welcome and encourage parents and teachers to roll up their sleeves and brainstorm solutions. But instead, their goal seemed to be to discourage us from having a conversation.

Several of us invited Kaplan and Merida inside to our meeting, which, despite their efforts, was a great success. Perhaps if they had come in to hear our ideas, Kaplan and Merida would have gleaned valuable insight into what matters to parents and teachers. Perhaps they could have used our input to lead the district to provide the quality education that all kids deserve. Clearly, these aren’t their top priorities.

DPS is facing a number of struggles, including an intense debate around the Far Northeast turnaround plan. I’m surprised that Kaplan’s and Merida’s top priority last night was to stand outside Edison Elementary and attempt to stop parents from coming together. Is this really how our elected school board officials should be spending their time?

Most of us who are committed to education issues, no matter which “side” we fall on, agree on the values of parent and community engagement and focusing on children’s need first. Those of us who met last night passionately embrace those principles.  Those who stood outside, clearly don’t.

Popularity: 6% [?]

Making parent engagement meaningful

Monday, October 4th, 2010

Over the last month, several events had me thinking about parent engagement in our schools.

First was Back to School Night for my youngest child.  He was starting high school in Denver and I was looking forward to meeting his teachers and getting a feel for the school.  I was surprised as I pulled up to the school to find that I was nervous and a little anxious.  This was after all a relatively easy exercise. Those feelings, however, stayed with me through eight classroom visits.

I also realized that a shockingly low number of parents attended that night.  In most of my son’s classes there were no more than three sets of parents.  In honors and X classes, there were more, but fewer than half of the kids in these classes had parents present.  The school had made a huge effort to get parents to attend.  It was in their newsletters.  I received two robo-calls to remind me of the event.  There were e-mail messages and the teachers repeatedly reminded the students to ask their parents to attend.

On Labor Day, I was reminded of a phone call I made five Labor Days ago to then Superintendent Michael Bennet.  He was in the process of writing the Denver Plan and I wanted to be sure that the plan would include meaningful parent engagement.  He assured me that it would.  My first four years on the board taught me to be skeptical about a commitment to parent engagement.  We had made small gains in policy and some parent training, but we were light years from where we needed to be.

Next, I attended a PTA meeting.  There was great information to be gleaned that night.  The principal did a terrific job talking about the progress the school had made and what the priorities for this year would be.  While everyone was excited about the number of parents who had come to the meeting, there were still fewer than 40 parents in attendance.

As I reflected on these events, questions continued to linger in my mind. Why did Back to School Night intimidate me?  Why did so few parents attend?  Are we engaging parents in the most productive ways to leverage their support and help?  Do we really believe that engaging parents can change the outcome for students and if we do believe that, how do we help parents understand how to effectively help their children?

I know that parent engagement is not as cool as other reform and turnaround strategies that we are so engrossed in these days.  I get that parents are often hard to reach for a number of reasons – some valid and some not so valid.  Yet, the research on parent engagement is so striking that it seems amazing that we are not trying to do more to engage parents.

In 2002, the Southwest Educational Development Laboratory summarized much of the research conducted on parent engagement and found that, “Taken as a whole, these studies found a positive and convincing relationship between family involvement and benefits for students, including improved academic achievement. This relationship holds across families of all economic, racial/ethnic, and educational backgrounds and for students at all ages.”

The Michigan Department of Education sites research that shows that, “Family participation in education was twice as predictive of students’ academic success as family socioeconomic status. Some of the more intensive programs had effects that were 10 times greater than other factors.”  The Harvard Family Research Project web site has hundreds of studies and reports on the positive effect of parent engagement.

With my questions in hand, I decided to visit Patsy Roybal.  Patsy manages the Office of Parent Engagement for Denver Public Schools.  Patsy and I had a long history of working to improve parent engagement in the district.  She is a dynamic and avid crusader for parents in our schools.

After two hours, Patsy had convinced me that DPS has really made progress from where it had been five years ago.  Her body of work in DPS is amazing.

Last year, Patsy’s office worked with DPS’s 20 lowest-performing schools to ensure that their Collaborative School Committees had parents working with the school team. The goal was to provide input on the school improvement plan, including how to engage parents for the purpose of increasing student achievement. The parents were taught how to look at budgets, time, and staffing to improve achievement.

The parent liaisons are working to find parents to fill spots on CSC’s across the city.

Tom Boasberg created the Superintendent’s Parent Forum.  Two parents from every school in the city meet with Tom once a month with the parents setting the agenda for the meetings.  Parents can choose between a 9:15 a.m. or a 6:15 p.m. meeting.  So far, the number one concern of these parents is effective communication.  The goal is to establish ongoing, constructive dialogue directly with the superintendent in areas of interest and concern to parents and to get these parents to go back and discuss issues with the parents in their schools.

A Parent Communication Toolkit has been created by the district in an effort to improve communication with parents.

The district continues to seek out creative and innovative ways to connect with families.  Alex Sanchez, director of the DPS Multicultural Outreach Office, hosts a live Spanish radio talk show four days a week to engage parents, and Patsy Roybal is often a guest on the show.

This year both offices are piloting a program called Maestro en Casa or Teacher at Home that has a goal of teaching English to 5,000 Spanish-speaking parents via the radio – all paid for by private sponsors.  The Multicultural Outreach Office also publishes quarterly newsletters for Spanish, Vietnamese, Arabic and French speaking parents.

On Saturday, October 9th, DPS will sponsor a Parent Leadership Institute.  Parents from across the city will meet for workshops, resource information, and inspiration.  Parents and community members from across the city are invited to this free event to engage parents.  At this same meeting, the superintendent will be meeting with his Parent Forum to discuss school turnaround.

On November 6th, DPS will host a Collaborative School Committee Summit in an effort to strengthen the role of parents on CSC.

Last year, schools were encouraged to apply for Title I grants from the parent engagement office to implement best practices in parent engagement.  Twenty-two schools were awarded grants up to $8,000.

Finally, by spring recommendations will be made to the superintendent on how to measure the quality and quantity of parent engagement programs on the School Performance Framework.

This is incredible work by both Patsy and the district. Yet, there is still much to be done.  What struck me most about what Patsy said was that we really have to recondition all of the stakeholders to look at parent engagement in terms of how it will affect student achievement.

We need to reanalyze what we are doing with parents to see if it is really meeting the intended goal.  Are we using our time wisely?  Are we helping parents understand how they can best help their students?

The time has come for school districts to change the way they interact with parents.  If there is to be a revolution in education in the country, parents must play a central role.  We must teach parents how to advocate for their children and make good choices for them.  Instead of blaming them for the problems in education, we need to teach them how to effectively drive the outcomes they want for their children.

Congratulations to EdNews for Starting EdNews Parent.  Let the revolution begin!

Popularity: 11% [?]

A sterling example of community-driven reform

Thursday, September 2nd, 2010

Editor’s note: Jeanne Kaplan is a member of the Denver school board.

Since I was first elected to the Denver Public Schools Board of Education in November 2005, improving our middle school programs has been a top priority.

As noted in Jeremy P. Meyer’s Denver Post story of Thursday, August 19, 2010, some of our middle schools are making academic and enrollment gains of which we can be proud.

However, Mr. Meyer’s story about Hill Middle School does not tell the whole story, so I would like to elaborate on its success.

In 2003, Denver taxpayers voted for a mill levy specifically to revitalize neighborhood schools in areas where schools were underperforming, under enrolled and not meeting neighborhood needs.

Hill Middle School was one of the first recipients of this money, and as we can see, it has used this money and its plan to become a resounding success.

Hill’s enrollment has grown from just over 52% capacity in 2006 (A+ Denver statistics) to close to full capacity with a waiting list in 2010. Its test scores have soared since 2004.

The Hill community worked very hard to determine and define what the preferences of its community were. It worked together in a very collaborative fashion with teachers, parents, administrators, and neighbors.

It determined that people wanted an arts and technology focused program with honors classes for all students who could qualify. It did not want to have a magnet program, but rather wanted a school that accepted all interested students, and it wanted a school with a good selection of electives.

The committee also placed a high value on being able to walk or bike to the revitalized school. The parents involved in this process have worked tirelessly to develop a middle school program with high expectations and equal opportunities for all.

Hill Middle School is an example of a very successful community-driven reform. It is highly unlikely that the academic gains and the attendance gains would have been as pronounced without the revitalization efforts, funded by the Denver taxpayers and implemented by a local school committee responding to the wishes of its community.

Is revitalization of neighborhood schools the only route DPS should be taking? Of course not. But then, neither should community-driven reforms be overlooked as viable solutions for struggling schools.

Congratulations to all of the Hill community for taking charge of its successful turnaround strategy.

Popularity: 4% [?]

From the editor: Parents propose marriage

Tuesday, March 9th, 2010

Let’s say a group of parents at a neighborhood school banded together and proposed to a high-performing charter school that the two schools combine efforts to create a PreK-12 school that would help send all kids from the struggling neighborhood to college.

What’s not to like, right? Parental involvement at its best. Community engagement. A tacit recognition that ideological food fights over charter versus traditional public schools are meaningless; all that matters is how to serve kids well.

Who might object, and on what grounds?

Stay tuned for some possible answers.

Last Friday, Denver’s Cole Arts and Science Academy (CASA) parents, along with Principal Julie Murgel, held a news conference to announce they had asked the Denver School of Science and Technology to open its third campus at Cole in the fall of 20l1. See video). The idea, hatched by a group of parents, had been presented to DSST leadership some weeks earlier, and DSST had responded with interest.

Every member of DSST’s first two graduating classes has been accepted into a four-year college. Forty-five percent of the school’s students qualify for federally subsidized lunches. Measured by the Denver Public Schools School Performance Framework, DSST is the top-rated high school in Denver, by a wide margin.

Much remains to be negotiated. CASA is currently PreK-8th grade, and DSST offers grades 6-12. Presumably, DSST would take over the middle grades, but that isn’t set in stone.

Attendance boundaries would be another delicate negotiating point. How might a new, high-performing high school in the area affect Manual High School? Manual is still rebuilding, under strong leadership, after being closed down for a year in the wake of an ill-fated dalliance with the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.

One of DSST’s cornerstones is a socio-economically mixed student body. How would the school achieve integration in a neighborhood that, while gentrifying, remains predominantly low-income? That will be an issue requiring careful, sensitive handling.

These are real challenges, but they are surmountable with open, inclusive planning, transparency and good intent. In this regard, the potential partnership is off to a good start.

But signs have already appeared that, on the Denver school board at least, there will be opposition to this plan. Probably not enough to sink it, but enough to cause some anxious moments.

I asked board member Andrea Merida, who regards charter schools with a skeptical eye, for her initial reaction to the idea. It wasn’t warm and fuzzy.

“We need to step back and take a look at the range of needs for the entire near-northeast sector before we can jump into such an arrangement,” she said in an e-mail. She then listed some specific concerns:

  • It is unclear, she said, how or whether the new school would address the needs of English language learners and special education students in the area. “I want to make sure we avoid any kind of a situation that might tend to benefit more affluent kids or segregate kids that need ELL or special education support.”
  • Parents may not have reached out to “non-English dominant families” and didn’t appear to have plans to do so, Merida said. However, one of the speakers at the Friday press conference spoke only Spanish, and another, a parent named Miguel Oaxaca, clearly wasn’t a native English speaker. So someone has done some outreach into that group of parents.
  • The principal sent information about this “unauthorized initiative” home in Thursday folders, thereby using “district resources…without having first cleared it with her instructional supervisor.” Sounds like a bureaucratic objection to me – not substantive.

Merida concluded by saying that she looked forward to receiving the proposal. “I hope that it will have recommendations for addressing these issues.”

From what I’m hearing, there’s also some skepticism among dissenters on the board that this idea came from parents. It must have been driven by DSST, or Superintendent Tom Boasberg, this line of thinking goes.

DSST CEO Bill Kurtz told me last week that near-northeast Denver “wasn’t even on our radar screen” until Cole parents approached DSST leaders. (The charter network is in the early stages of an ambitious expansion plan. Four new DSST campuses will open in Denver in the next four years, the first of those this fall in Green Valley Ranch.)

And Boasberg spokesman Mike Vaughn had this to say about the origin of the idea:

“The leadership and parent teams at Cole and DSST have proposed a partnership.  We look forward to discussing the proposal with the entire community and with the Board of Education as part of our process for identifying locations for new schools.”

Board members might want to be careful about opposing this idea. If the new partners answer the pending questions, as I’m confident they will, it is hard to see how this isn’t good for kids in northeast Denver.

At that point, you’d have to wonder whose interests those in opposition would be promoting.

Popularity: 6% [?]

Tough choices remain for Jeffco

Friday, January 15th, 2010

As a taxpaying citizen of Jefferson County, I recognize that the school board has faced some very tough decisions lately. Ending up only closing down one school in the drastically under-capacity district, as the board did last night, is admittedly a token move that won’t solve the core budget problems.

But given the loud public statement made by students and other members of the community to leave alone Wheat Ridge Middle School and others, how can I say I would have acted differently? (It certainly would have swayed my vote more than a letter from the Congressman urging the board to save a school he attended more than 40 years ago. Sound policy is forged from better things.)

As Nancy Mitchell’s story captures well, the debate in Jeffco isn’t done. It merely has moved forward to a new phase. At least one board member (disclosure: whom I personally supported in the recent election) gets it:

“To every person in this district – wake up,” board member Laura Boggs told the ultimately happy crowd on Thursday. “We have too many seats for the number of children that we currently have and that we project to have … we need to fix the capacity problem in our district.”

And while board chair Dave Thomas raised alternative solutions to balancing the budget that might include furlough days, salary freezes, and/or layoffs, the local union leadership is left in its own difficult (and unrealistic) position:

[JCEA president Kerrie] Dallman, who addressed board members early in the evening Thursday, urged them to “provide us the leadership this district deserves in a time of crisis” by putting a tax increase on the November ballot.

The district “is trying to run a champagne program on a beer budget,” she told the board.

If by “beer budget” you mean a $1 billion budget supporting 14,000 employees to serve 84,000 students, then so be it. But now that Jeffco Public Schools has taken the very laudable step of pushing the envelope on financial transparency as a way to rebuild community trust, my fellow citizens and I will have to decide whether our families can more easily afford to pay more each month in property taxes or whether the district can find a way to be leaner in accomplishing its mission.

Right now, I’m leaning against the tax hike idea. Sorry, school board, but I see more very tough choices coming down the pike.

Popularity: 3% [?]

Save Lake IB Blog, anonymity and consistency

Friday, December 11th, 2009

Earlier this week I wrote a blog post asking readers to weigh in on whether I should allow anonymous comments on this blog. I banned pseudonyms for bloggers more than a year ago, but have allowed people to comment anonymously, though few have chosen to do so.

My question was prompted in part by an unfortunate incident last weekend when an anonymous commenter turned out to be one of my regular bloggers, who, unbeknownst to me, decided to take on a harsher persona and a pseudonym to make some points he felt he couldn’t make under his real name. Sunday, with an assist from me, Janine Vanderburg discovered the commenter’s identity. To Alexander Ooms’ credit, he immediately owned up, and explained his actions.

Janine discusses this incident in a new post on her Save Lake IB Blog. While she has the outlines of the story right, there are inaccuracies I would like to correct. First of all, she takes a swipe at me for my “grandmotherly admonition to ‘be nice’”  while allowing comments like some of “Horse With No Name’s” harsher missives. Perhaps she missed the play on KIPP’s slogan, “Work Hard. Be Nice.” But no matter. While Janine hints at hypocrisy, she has the chronology backwards. It was those same harsh, anonymous comments and my uneasiness about my decision to run them that prompted me to start thinking about banning anonymous comments, and to ask people to ‘be nice.’

Second, Janine refers to HWNN’s last comment, about her blog, as particularly virulent. Actually, it wasn’t. It was an aggressive critique of the role Janine’s Save Lake IB Blog has played in the Lake issue. There was one clause in one sentence that Janine objected to, and which I removed at her request. I thought the rest of the comment was a valid critique of the blog, well within the bounds of acceptable discourse. I removed the rest of the comment, and all of HWWN’s comments, after his identity was revealed, and after talking to him about it. Subsequently, he reposted his final comment, minus the offending clause, under his own name. Janine again asked me to remove it, which I told her I would not do.

One question that has troubled me from the start is that the Save Lake IB Blog has itself been penned anonymously. Only in the last day has Janine begun signing her posts, at the bottom, with a lowercase jv. Until then, only those in the know had any idea who was writing the posts. Perhaps other people wrote some of them, but Janine was the main person behind the blog. And it’s impossible to tell if others contributed, since all were unsigned. Some of the Save Lake posts were pretty harsh, certainly as harsh as anything written under the moniker Horse With No Name.

It’s also interesting to note that at least one post on the blog has been removed. That’s the one that featured photos of purported classrooms in the Lake Middle School basement. The photos of tiny, windowless spaces raised questions about the wisdom of DPS filling the building by moving a second school in there.

Then, at the Nov. 30 school board meeting, Superintendent Tom Boasberg discredited that blog post and its photos by presenting a brief slideshow of photos of the actual “basement” classrooms. Big windows, plenty of light. Ample room. He admonished the person or people who posted the photos for irresponsibly spreading false information. Shortly thereafter, the post came down, with nary an explanation, refutation or apology.

What I’m saying, I guess, is that people who live in glass houses, etc., etc.

Janine and I have worked together closely on issues over the years. I respect her as a tireless and passionate advocate and watchdog. She and I disagree on some aspects of the Lake issue, as well as tactics employed by both sides in the debate. I would hope that when the dust settles from the current flap, we will find ourselves once again agreeing more often than not.

Popularity: 5% [?]

In the community, time to work on healing

Monday, December 7th, 2009

I got into a heated discussion with some close friends of mine over the weekend. We were at a party for my wife’s birthday, when the Lake Middle School/school board meeting came up.

The discussion ended poorly and I felt bad that we had ended the discussion curtly and abruptly. We’ve communicated since then and all is well. My friends and I share common beliefs and values, we just happened to disagree. Friends can do this—they can hug and move on, knowing that they still share and value their friendship.

What about communities who have been fractured by disagreements? They can’t shake hands and move on unless they make a concerted effort to do so. The school board just ended its“counseling” therapy session. It’s important for them to work together; after all they are the ones who make the decisions—but what about the community? The school board is divided because the community is divided.

We have some work to do–some hard conversations to take place. I’d like to see someone who is well respected by the entire community come in and facilitate a series of conversations in the community about the direction of our schools and how that process can be better structured.

I’ve also learned a thing or two about the power of blogging. What I have recently learned is that while blogging can put ideas out there, blogging cannot take the place of good, honest, face-to-face dialogue. Let’s remember the power and limits of blogging as “conversation.”

Popularity: 3% [?]

Reframing the DPS mess

Thursday, December 3rd, 2009

I too grew up in Chicago during the Richard J. Daley Administration. I saw many a political maneuver used by those who were fighting the Boss’s Machine.

They were fighting because they were marginalized and disenfranchised from city politics. They used these ploys as a way to bring attention to their plight.

I am not comparing the machine politics of Chicago to the Denver school board. I am trying to reframe the issue with the recent school board hearing and Lake Middle School voting, from one that focuses on the intended results from the political maneuver to what I see as the more important issue: a lack of community voice in the reform movement in Denver.

Let’s use the recent events not as a moment to cry foul, but to look at the reason why people felt that they had to prematurely remove Michelle Moss from her seat. The issue is access to the process.

DPS knows it has work to do in bringing the community into the various conversations about reform. But what concerns me is that there is no formalized effort to monitor or set benchmarks to ensure that the community is involved.

DPS has established the Office of Community Engagement. Good step in the right direction. That Moss was unceremoniously removed from her seat should not cloud the real failure here. It truly was a failure to constructively engage the community.

Popularity: 3% [?]

Colorado Health Foundation Walton Family Foundation Daniels fund Pitton Foundations Donnell-Kay Foundation