Archives for category: Utah

We know that teacher evaluation is not a science. Either it relies on principal judgment or peer judgment or both, which are subjective; or it relies on test scores, which are “objective,” but notoriously invalid and unreliable because they reflect which students are in the classroom, not teacher quality. Nothing could be more outrageous or demoralizing than tying teacher pay to teacher evaluations, which is what the Utah Board of Education is now considering.

Please write and let them know why this will be very harmful to teachers and students.

One of our readers (Threatened Out West) sent this notice:

The Utah State School Board is planning on voting on Friday to make teacher compensation based on teacher evaluations. This will be a DISASTER.

This is the quote from a newsletter that I saw from one of the members of the board: Proposed Rule Change Would Base District Compensation Primarily on Evaluations

The Utah State Board of Education gave preliminary approval to amendments to R277-531 Public Educator Evaluation Requirements (PEER) and to R277-533 District Educator Evaluation Systems that would require Utah school districts to base educator compensation systems primarily on the district’s educator evaluation system beginning in the 2018-19 school year. The changes also eliminate any provision in Board Rule that is not also required in state statute. The Board worked with the Utah School Superintendents Association to give districts enough leeway to make the rule’s implementation more feasible. Final approval will likely come during the Board’s November 4 meeting

Utah school board members MUST be contacted! Particularly in you’re in Utah, do it NOW. But we could use teachers in other states to also email and let the board know what a terrible idea this is. Thank you.

http://schoolboard.utah.gov/board-member-bios

In a bold move to address the state’s teacher shortage (caused by low salaries), the state board of education removed all requirements for new teachers other than a college degree and passing a test in subject matter.

Will Utah soon allow barefoot doctors too, you know, the doctors without training or experience?

“Times have changed” — not everyone wants to return to school for a teaching degree, said Superintendent Sydnee Dickson.

An existing path gives permits to school district employees after one to three years of practice teaching and college classes. The new license, heavily criticized since being approved by the state board in June, is available immediately to applicants with bachelor’s degrees who pass a subject test.

The elected panel over Utah’s school districts and charter schools voted unanimously in favor of the measure at its monthly meeting Friday, but will consider tweaks to the policy that several Utah teachers and their unions have decried as an insult to their profession.

Vice chairman Dave Thomas said the move was made in part to address a teacher shortage and has largely been misunderstood.

“I don’t view this as an attack on traditional teachers,” Thomas said.

Utah Education Association President Heidi Matthews urged the board to reconsider, saying the state’s affluent districts could benefit, but low-income students would lose out. The rule could overburden schools without enough time or money to hire more mentor teachers to train the novice instructors, she said.

“It’s a human-rights issue.”

Board member Joel Wright said schools aren’t on the hook to grant the new licenses if they don’t want to. Under the new policy, administrators are allowed to tailor requirements for a license.

“This is a critical step,” Wright said, in giving individual districts control.

The board rejected a proposal from board member Brittney Cummins, of West Valley City, who sought to require that teachers-in-training be hired at a district or charter before receiving a license.

Mercedes Schneider points out that veteran teachers are expected to mentor the newbies for three years, but this may drive the veterans out of the classroom by giving them additional responsibilities without pay.

Utah is on a downward trajectory.

Day by day, we are making inroads into public opinion. Newspapers in Ohio have been speaking out against the frequent violations of public trust by greedy charter operators. Now the Salt Lake Tribune steps up with a bold denunciation of charter school profiteers. It’s about time.

Inviting the private sector to run schools was a colossal error. For the first time in American history, we have schools claiming to be “public”that operate for public. We have charter schools launched by entrepreneurs, not educators. It is wrong. Many members of the public believe that charters are privately funded, not realizing that it is their tax dollars that are paying off investors.

Here is concrete evidence that the tide is turning. It is an editorial in the Salt Lake Coty Tribune called simply “Charter School Profiteers.”

The editorial board says:

“A handful of private companies have banked more than $68 million from Utah taxpayers over the past three years. The money is delivered through no-bid contracts by people who don’t work for government, but the companies are often connected to political officials.

“An extensive examination of charter school spending by Salt Lake Tribune reporter Benjamin Wood shows several companies that exist only to contract with charter schools. While public schools have always contracted for some services, many charters go so far as to contract for their principals and teachers, providing undisclosed profits to the companies while shielding financial information from the public.

“Under state law, the schools must be operated as non-profits, presumably to avoid people profiteering on public education. Charters that contract with for-profit companies for their largest expenses effectively circumvent that requirement. There is no way for Utahns to know how many of their education dollars are ending up as someone’s salary or profits.

“In the meantime, charters are slowly losing one of their most persuasive arguments: that they can educate students for less money than traditional public schools.

“According to a report from the Utah Foundation released last month, Utah charters collect about 10 percent less per student than regular public schools, but they have cost advantages, too. They have fewer non-English speakers and economically-disadvantaged students. Add in the public schools’ requirements to provide busing, to build inefficient rural schools and to provide such things as gang-prevention services, and the cost difference virtually disappears. Looking at test scores, charters track pretty closely to public schools on average.

“In other words, there is no evidence the free-market capitalism allowed in Utah’s charter school system is providing better results for students.

“But it clearly is producing winners. One company that received more than $4 million last year is headed by the sister of the president of the state charter school board. Another company ($1 million from charters last year) is operated by a state legislator, and two others ($4.7 million and $4.5 million last year) are run by relatives of legislators. (Surprise! All three voted in favor of increasing charter school funding by $20 million last session.)

“One of those relatives promised, “We keep it pretty separate.”

“How many charters operate this way? Hard to say, but it’s not all of them. This isn’t an argument for ending charter schools, but it is a system that begs for reform. Otherwise, the worst is yet to come.

“Long before charters, there were non-profit entities providing K-12 education in Utah. They hired their own principals and teachers, and they still do. That is because there are no efficiencies in creating that second entity, but there can be profits.

“And with profits come profit pressures. Some of today’s charters look less like non-profit schools and more like for-profit proprietary colleges. They market on television and employ sales staffs. As charters become more common, competition for charter students increases. Expect to see these for-profit non-profits apply more sales pressure to prospective parents.”

http://www.sltrib.com/opinion/3923608-155/editorial-charter-school-profiteers

I have written before about the controversial program called “Pay for Success.” This is also known as “social impact bonds.” Recently, two officials at the US Department of Education and the White House wrote an opinion piece in the Salt Lake Tribune applauding the use of “pay for success” to expand pre-kindergarten programs.

 

What is “pay for success” and what are “social impact bonds?” As blogger Fred Klonsky explains:

 

Pay for Success is a social impact bond (SIB) that pays Wall Street investors like Goldman Sachs a bounty for every child that does not receive special education support.

 

Pay for Success is nothing less than a push-out program that then pays the bond investor a bonus for every child that is pushed out of special ed services.

 

Special education advocate Beverley Holden Johns sent me this comment on the administration’s endorsement of “pay for success”:

 
In my opinion this is a new low for USDOE. Uncritically mentioning that
only one student in the PFS group was identified for special education,
justifying these absurd results by stating it will be a bumpy road, completely
failing to stress that only very high quality pre-school produces results –
failing to point to the very substantial questions about the quality of PFS in Utah,
not stating that Goldman Sachs has ALREADY BEEN PAID over $260,000 as its
first payment, and by saying USDOE is excited by Pay for Success in ESSA is irresponsible.

 
Bev Johns

 

 

Clever equity investors! Goldman Sachs is profiting by investing in Social Impact Bonds, which pay off by helping pre-schoolers avoid placement in special education. The pilot program is in Utah. Goldman Sachs makes money for every child who is not referred to special education services.

But critics are skeptical:

“Nine early-education experts reviewed the program for The New York Times and identified irregularities in how the program’s success was measured. These seemed to significantly overstate the effect of the investment.

“Goldman said its investment helped almost 99 percent of the Utah children it was tracking to avoid special education.

“Researchers say well-funded preschool programs can reduce the proportion of students needing special education by 50 percent at most, usually nearer 10 or 20 percent.

“The success rate in the Utah program was based on what researchers say was a faulty assumption — that many of the school children would have needed special education without the preschool.

“This overstatement means that Goldman and its philanthropic partner, the J.B. & M.K. Pritzker Family Foundation, received more in payments than they should have. The bank was paid for each at-risk child who ended up not needing special education after leaving the preschool program.

“The Utah school district’s methodology, which led to large numbers of children being identified as at risk, was adopted by Goldman when it negotiated its investment.

“As long as 50 percent of the children in the program avoid special education, Goldman will earn back its money and 5 percent interest — more than Utah would have paid if it had borrowed the money through the bond market.”

Kim Irvine, English teacher in Ogden, Utah, knows the new state superintendent quite well. Brad Smith, a lawyer with no education experience, was superintendent in Ogden, where he implemented a series of failed “reform” policies. So, it being Utah, he was elevated to state superintendent.

Kim Smith here describes the havoc and disruption he imposed on Ogden. Watch out, Utah parents and teachers! Know what to expect and push back hard. As hard as you can.

This is the canary in the coalmine…

Few people in this state realize that many Utah teachers are holding their collective breath waiting for the state superintendant to unveil his educational plan. There are concerns because his previously unsuccessful reforms as a district superintendent are often pointed to as an exemplar. Not many people across the state know what these reforms could look like, but the teachers, parents, and students from Ogden, do.

Based on that perspective, there are a few points that should be considered, especially for the parents whose students will be educated under this new plan. Recently, an article addressed ten signs of a failing district. [i] Please refer back to the article because the descriptions of these ten sign are both illuminating and powerful. Here are the ten signs:

  1. The large majority of teachers have fewer than 5 years experience.
  2. Teachers are overwhelmed with requests for data.
  3. Teachers receive no support from administrators on discipline issues.
  4. Professional development is limited to indoctrination and data.
  5. The message is tightly controlled, eliminating constructive criticism.
  6. School Board members serve as rubber stamps.
  7. The community is not involved in its schools.
  8. The district is top heavy with administrators.
  9. An overemphasis has been placed on technology.
  10. Not enough emphasis is being place on civics and citizenship.

Watch how closely this mirrors the events that happened in Ogden as Mr. Smith implemented his reforms.

Librarians

One of the first actions as newly appointed superintendent that really caught the ire of the community was to fire all of the librarians in the district including many reading specialists, citing potential increases in the cost of benefits under the Affordable Care Act. [ii] Smith also went on to explain that Ogden School District is the only remaining district on the Wasatch Front to employ licensed teachers as media specialists in their libraries. [iii]This turned out to be false, but deaf to the public outcry by parents, teachers, and students, the librarians did, indeed, lose their jobs. Many had been in the district for decades. After all was said and done, a handful of librarians remained. [iv]

Scripted Teaching

The next concern arose because of mandated training and implementation of scripted curriculum. Although many requests were made to the district about the expense of this program, the district would never release exact numbers. It has been reported the cost of this scripted program is upwards of $800,000 a year for the English instruction alone. This is horrifying to anyone, but especially someone who understands that these supplies are “consumables”. They are basically a bunch of worksheets bound together that the students write in and are thrown away each year and replaced. This is a very expensive and not a very effective way to teach as many research studies show. “One program cannot meet the needs of all children. Teachers need to be trained and empowered to make decisions about how best to teach their students.”[v]

Teacher Attrition

Many teachers began to leave Ogden District for several reasons including heavy-handed discipline, scripted programs, and a huge increase in data gathering and analysis paperwork. Other teachers were simply non-renewed. The local paper reported, “District teacher turnover 57% from 2006 to 2013.” Actual numbers appear that the trend is not only not slowing, but also increasing. According to the district’s records just about the same number of teachers left again the next year which would bring the cumulative to 72% turn over in teachers. Smith said. “Reforms were implemented, and they are choosing to go elsewhere to work.”[vi]

Teacher, Jennifer Claesgens, whose resume includes a Ph.D. in science and mathematics education, experience teaching high school, and four years as an assistant professor at Northern Arizona University’s Center for Science Teaching and Learning, responded to having her teaching contract not renewed by speaking out. According to the Standard Examiner, “She wonders if the real reason she was let go was that she questioned some school policies. ‘I didn’t understand why we didn’t have finals at a high school, if we want students to be prepared for college. I didn’t understand why kids were allowed to play sports if they weren’t even in school that day, or were flunking classes…I questioned those things because I really feel that you need to have expectations of students.”’[vii]

Confiscation of Teachers’ salaries

Another large reason that teachers are fleeing the Ogden District are the ways, under the reforms, teacher discipline is handled. Currently, when a teacher is placed on what the district calls, “Tier Two Remediation,” they lose the state money. This represents several thousand dollars that is “confiscated” by the district. This practice has become rather commonplace in the Ogden School District, yet I haven’t heard of this happening to other teachers across the state. A concern here is that this seems to be a conflict of interest. The district is fiscally motivated to place teachers on discipline. Personally, I know several teachers who have had this happen to them. It is a stressful, demeaning, and hurtful punishment that pushes the boundaries of appropriateness, especially when Utah teachers struggle with low wages and shrinking benefits as it is.

Mr. Smith’s Superintendent Bonuses and OSD Board’s “Rubber Stamp of Approval for Renewed Contract

In the midst of all of this, the Ogden School District Board unanimously renewed Brad Smith’s contract for another two years. What surprised the community was to hear of Mr. Smith’s incentive pay and bonus plan, which seemed highly inappropriate due to the financial woes claimed by the district. The Standard Examiner covered the story, “…but his potential performance pay goes up. Before, Smith was assessed three times a year and got a $10,000 bonus each time he met the criteria. Now, Smith will be assessed four times yearly, and get $9,000 each time he meets criteria…” Board President Shane Story.[viii]

Even though many were present at this board meeting in protest of the many controversial policies, The Ogden School Board voted unanimously to renew Superintendent Brad Smith’s contract for two more years.[ix] This was particularly disturbing considering there was no formal offering of the job to other job applicants despite the public outcry. Here is a video of some of these concerns voiced at that meeting: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GscEIJ5lgdk

 

Data Shenanigans

But most importantly, it is vital to examine the data proffered by Mr. Smith as proof that his non-traditional methods actually work. Initially, the data showed that there were increases in student scoring at a few schools at the elementary levels, but those successes were short lived. There was minimal, consistent improvement at the secondary level. In 2014, as the state testing data came in, it became apparent that the reforms left a lot to be desired. The Deseret News reported shocking figures of proficiency rates in both the junior highs and high schools in Ogden District. Some of the most dismal were the math scores:

Ogden High= 4% proficient in math

Ben Lomond High= 5.9% proficient in math

Mound Fort Jr= 6.9% proficient in math

Highland Jr= 12.0% proficient in math

Mount Ogden Jr= 26.3% proficient in math

In 2014, two years after Mr. Smith started his sweeping reforms, the Deseret News reported the following:

“…Ogden, where English language arts scores fell by almost 77 percent — about 30 percent beyond the average drop experienced by Utah’s elementary schools. In the last four years, Dee and other Ogden schools have been hailed as having turned the tide in academic performance, fighting their way out of the bottom ranks through administrative overhauls and data-driven teaching initiatives. Between 2010 and 2013, Dee had gone from being among the worst-performing schools in the state to more than doubling its proficiency scores in language arts.”[x]

The paper even created a graph to illustrate how quickly the scores fell after being used as proof that Mr. Smith’s reform efforts were a smashing success. [xi]

Something else that is troubling about these numbers is that the math simply doesn’t add up to reflect authentic student growth and success. For instance, the graduation rates reported from Ogden District that same year were 71%. [xii]

Doesn’t that graduation figure become suspect when one considers that almost 90 percent of secondary students in Ogden District were not proficient in math? This means that almost 90% of the junior high and high school students in the district were not at grade level.

More and more testing…and now kindergarteners?

Lastly, many experienced educators are alarmed to hear the superintendent recommend standardized testing for our kindergarteners even though this flies in the face of a large body of educational research. [xiii] The Association for Childhood Education International (ACEI) has found that, “standardized testing in the early years causes stress, does not provide useful information, leads to harmful tracking and labeling of children, causes teaching to the test, and fails to set conditions for cooperative learning and problem-solving.” [xiv]

 

The Business Model in Education

So now that we await the new educational plan that the state superintendent plans to roll out in August, it is important to keep in mind that the business model does not work in education. Diane Ravitch, a national expert on education, historian of education and Research Professor of Education at New York University, and a former Assistant Secretary of Education under George W. Bush, describes Mr. Smith as follows: “Clearly, Ogden has decided to utilize a business plan. The superintendent has no education background. Class size doesn’t matter. Librarians don’t matter. The voices of concerned parents are ignored. As long as those test scores go up, the school board will declare success. After all, trained seals can perform no matter how many are in the pool.”[xv]

Concerns about Smith’s Reforms from the Community and Media

Alliance for a Better Utah describes Mr. Smith, “Between his credentials and behavior, educators in the state have plenty with which to be alarmed. Utah’s legislators historically have butted heads with educators, so a superintendent playing for the other team could have toxic consequences. The situation ought to be watched closely as Utah’s children will ultimately pay the price.”[xvi]

Recently, Paul Rolley, of the Salt Lake Tribune, pointed out some startling concerns in an article dated May 15th 2015 where he pointed out that Smith is a creation of the right wing:

“But Stephenson (Utah Senator) now has the education leader he always wanted. Smith, who immediately confronted the teachers union when he became superintendent of the Ogden School District and infamously slashed programs and people, seems to share Stephenson’s distrust of public school teachers and malevolence toward administrators bound philosophically to traditional education policies.”

Rolly went on further to express some concern over actions of state school board members as Smith’s reforms are adopted and the naysayers are eliminated:

“The few board members who met on their own and championed Smith have driven out other top professionals of the State Office of Education through their micro-managing and constant meddling, according to past and present education employees who have observed the recent carnage.”[xvii]

Conclusion

We, the Utah State Democratic Education Caucus is made up of parents, community leaders, students, teachers, administrators, and community members who are extremely concerned about the superintendent’s new 5 year educational plan especially since no one seems to be looking closely to the devastation he left behind in Ogden. Please, please heed our pleas. Be careful of glossy promises and slick brochures. Demand research backed programs that are authentic and peer reviewed, not just propaganda from vendors. We are your constituency and we are worried. At the beginning of this document we explained that this is the canary in the coalmine. The metaphoric canary is the remains of the Ogden School District. If you would like to speak to teachers, parents, or counselors who have seen this tragedy, we can arrange it. Please contact me and we will put you together.

Sincerely,

Kim Irvine

Chair: Utah Democratic Education Caucus

[i] http://www.huffingtonpost.com/randy-turner/ten-signs-your-child-is-i_b_7698514.html

[ii] http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/news/56222830-78/district-ogden-employees-positions.html.csp

[iii] Coverage from the local paper regarding firing the librarians and reading specialists: http://www.standard.net/Local/2013/04/27/Ogden-School-District-notifies-librarians-of-job-terminations.html

~A few of the many letters to the editor from outraged parents fighting to keep the librarians

  1. http://www.standard.net/Opinion/2013/04/30/Ogden-district-s-agendas-lack-info-on-firing-librarians.html
  2. http://www.standard.net/Opinion/2013/04/30/librarians-teach-students-to-evaluate-web-sources.html
  3. http://www.standard.net/Opinion/2013/04/29/Passionate-librarians-integral-part-of-education.html

[iv] https://dianeravitch.net/2013/10/05/ogden-utah-decides-to-let-non-educators-try-their-hand/

[v] Elaine Garan’s In Defense of Our Children: When Politics, Profit and Education Collide is a little book packed with insight and research.

http://www.tcrecord.org/library/abstract.asp?contentid=11835

[vi] Great information from local paper including stats and graphs on teacher attrition http://www.standard.net/Local/2013/11/02/Ogden-School-District-teacher-departures-at-7-year-high

[vii] Poignant story and video from the perspective of a talented, non-renewed teacher as Ogden fires 17 teachers http://www.standard.net/Education/2014/05/12/10-Non-renewed-teachers

[viii] Great video interviews and coverage of Mr. Smith’s bonuses and other compelling issues: http://www.standard.net/Lifestyle/2013/09/20/Ogden-School-Board-renews-superintendent-s-contract-for-two-years.html

[ix] Regardless of the public outcry, OSD Board unanimously renews Smith contract for two years. http://e.standard.net/stories/2013/09/19/ogden-school-board-renews-superintendents-contract-two-years

[x] After reporting sweeping successes, the Deseret News points out several flaws http://www.deseretnews.com/article/865614569/What-Ogden-reveals-about-the-SAGE-test-teaching-and-how-students-learn.html

[xi] Deseret News graphic illustrating problems with previously successes in Ogden School District http://img.deseretnews.com/images/article/graphicSidebar/1433848/1433848.jpg

[xii] Graduation data: http://www.schools.utah.gov/data/Superintendents-Annual-Report/2014/GraduationReport.aspx

[xiii] Please go to 1:46:38 to hear Mr. Smith’s ideas on standardized testing for Utah kindergarteners. http://utahlegislature.granicus.com/MediaPlayer.php?view_id=2&clip_id=19036&meta_id=559117

[xiv] http://www.education.com/magazine/article/testing-kindergarten-realities-dangers/

[xv] National Education blog describes Smith: https://dianeravitch.net/2013/10/05/ogden-utah-decides-to-let-non-educators-try-their-hand/

[xvi] Alliance for a Better Utah describes Smith: http://betterutah.org/2015/03/27/superintendent-smith-not-quite-ready-for-primetime/

[xvii] Rolly article in Trib: http://www.sltrib.com/opinion/2513070-155/rolly-schools-superintendent-is-a-careful

Here is a teacher worthy of joining the blog’s honor roll. She is willing to risk her career to do what is right for her students, her colleagues, and her profession. Let’s hope that speaking out protects her from vindictive retaliation.

From Kim Irvine, English teacher, Utah

To Whom It May Concern: The decision to write this has been a difficult one. I am the breadwinner for my family. I have an adult handicapped daughter who needs her seizure medication to survive. Without my insurance, her pills would cost over $750 a month, which I cannot afford. I put all of this in jeopardy by voicing my concerns. Many teachers feel the same as I, but are too afraid to speak. You must understand that teachers who speak out are labeled, targeted, and either forced to retire or resign. This may come as a surprise, but I have watched this happen to colleagues over and over. I know that I will now be a target, but the risk is something I have accepted because I must speak out for the sake of my students and my profession.

My philosophy of education and learning is simple. I believe that all students can learn. I believe that student learning is incumbent upon me, the teacher. I believe that authentic learning can only occur in an informed, stimulating, and safe environment, and I believe that the creation of that environment is my responsibility. I believe that the future of the quality of life for each of my students is directly related to whether or not they learn what I have to teach them. In short, I believe that my job is the most important job in the world because we desperately need the future innovations and ingenuity my students are capable of.

This is why I love my job, and all of my eighth graders. I like the way the adolescent mind approaches life. They are positive, creative, brilliant, and fearless, and I often end up on the other end of the teaching as their horizons expand and carry me with them. Every day is different and challenging, poignant and heartbreaking, but thoroughly exhilarating. I spend my days looking at life through the lens of an eighth grader, always looking for stimulating ways to teach. I’m fortunate because anything beautiful, noteworthy, or of good report, fits neatly into the English curriculum.

I have been teaching for 16 years and have always felt a special thrill when a former student contacts me saying they want to be a teacher just like me. But, lately, I hesitate because I am not sure what to say. Teaching is not the same profession it was, and many of my dear colleagues are leaving. It is not surprising to see that many of the states, that are paying attention to this exodus, are predicting a looming teacher shortage like we have never seen before. For example, in Indiana, the data show an alarming decrease in teaching licenses issued from nearly 7,500 six years ago to a measly 934 for 2013-14 school year.1 These figures are the canary in the coalmine and the culminating disaster in education will have rippling effects for a long time to come.

So why are we facing such a decline? Ask any veteran teacher and you will hear the same story. We can’t keep this up. The thirst for data is killing my profession and becoming the supreme focus above all else. Currently, we sacrifice over 30 teaching days a year currently with all of the mandated testing, and the fact that the data is used to discredit teachers is insulting. I will tell you right now that if I am unable to articulate where a student’s skill level was when they started my class, what specific skills we (the student and I) have targeted for the year, their current progress, and where we expect to be by the end of the year, I should be fired. That is my job. I am the professional. I have spent years perfecting and honing my craft of teaching. I collect my own data and drive my instruction based on that data. The data I get from the testing is nice, but frankly redundant and expensive and time consuming. I can teach reading to over 30 students at a time with reading levels ranging from 3rd to 11th grade in the same room at the same time and not only keep them all on task, but I can make it an exhilarating, successful experience for all involved. That’s what a professional teacher can do. That is the “art” part in the art of teaching.

Thank you for taking the time to read this. There is much at stake. Utah has many dedicated, passionate teachers who are working nothing less than miracles for our students. But, we are weary, and gun shy, and frustrated as we watch our class sizes increase, our pay and benefits decrease, and the mandated data-driven paperwork increase exponentially, while our state superintendent constantly reminds us that we are whiney, ineffective, and not worth our salaries. No wonder our numbers are dwindling. In sum, it is obvious why this next generation of college graduates is not choosing education. Why would they?

My father was a seminary teacher for over 36 years, and taught all over the world for the LDS Church Education System. He taught me an important precept, “Faith without works is dead.” The current state superintendent, Mr. Smith, recently explained that the thing our Utah students need most is faith, not necessarily more funding. 2 I disagree. I believe we need work; a lot of work, but we need to be careful to look closely because everything is not always as presented. Instead of spending ridiculous amounts of money on risky, unproven products created by vendors, we need to address the real issues that determine success or failure of our students. We need support for our students living in poverty and support for students struggling with language barriers. We need to insist on best practices for not only from Utah teachers, but our Utah legislature and Utah public servants as well. We need transparency and candor. We need authentic exploration into policy based on sound educational research, not propaganda produced by greedy vendors with intentions of using school funding and taxpayers’ dollars to line their pockets and increase their profit margins.

Education is not a business. Business is motivated by profit. Doing what is best for our students should be our motivation. We cannot serve two masters.

Sincerely, Kim Irvine

Utah State Democratic Education Caucus Chair

1 http://www.ibj.com/articles/53976-indiana-facing-chronic-teacher-shortage r

2 http://www.sltrib.com/news/2563101-155/state-superintendent-asks-for-faith- in Page 2 of 2