Review teams from the Colorado Department of Education were in Ignacio earlier this month to examine practices in the elementary school and the district as a whole. That's because of the district's history of poor scores on state-mandated student achievement tests.
CDE review team members Troy Lange and Alan Dillon met with district administrators and the current school board on March 7.
Lange said a separate team was at the elementary school, and that review was independent of the district review. The two teams don't work with each other. "The district is on Priority Improvement in the fifth year. The elementary school is Turnaround Status in the fifth year."
The review panels were created by the State Legislature in 2009, Dillon said. "There was a push after the first year, three years ago, to actually visit the schools and meet face to face. That's why we're here. Our goal is to gather evidence and take that back to share with the powers that be. ... The result of this will be a report. Interviews and classroom visits are to gather information. Our role is not to evaluate staff."
The report will go to the state Board of Education, Lange said, adding, "we don't know what the state board will do."
They asked school board members to respond to a series of questions about district goals, visions, and implementing change in the district. They also listed potential outcomes of the review process.
Those sound dire, but in his January 2015 visit, CDE representative Peter Sherman told the board that the state board doesn't have the power to enforce recommendations for districts that run past the five-year deadline, which will be June 30 this year for Ignacio. He said, "I'd hope the state board would work with you on what seems like the right solution. ... What happens after June 30, 2016? Life goes on."
Options listed by Lange and Dillon were:
. Consolidation with a neighboring district.
. District reorganization, which could include turning over management to a private or public entity.
. Converting to charter schools.
. Putting the district on "innovation status."
. Closure of one or more schools.
Board members didn't like any of those prospects, except possibly the innovation status.
"I think we are always restructuring and reorganizng," Board President Bobby Schurman said. "Every year we are trying something." He noted the center-based classroom for the most serious special needs students that's now done in Ignacio instead of bussing those kids to Durango. He cited the above average percentage of special needs students in the district and Ignacio's multi-cultural population.
"As a whole, I think this district does a good job," Schurman said. "I know there are people at the state who don't see it that way."
Board member Yvonne Conley-Chapman didn't like the idea of bringing in outside management.
Kelly McCaw asked, "Who pays for that? Will the state give us $200,000 a year to do that?"
Luke Kirk added, "Charter schools don't make any sense for a small district." It would "take one set of problems and morph into a different set of problems."
Chapman said, "I don't see it flying here. It would make it more challenging. The cream of the crop would go to the charter school, and the district would be left with the rest."
As for closing a school, Chapman said, "I don't see how that would benefit anybody. Look at the investment here (from the $50 million bond issue). As a taxpayer, I'd be up in arms. Kids are coming here. I see momentum. Hopefully (better) test scores will come."
McCaw cited the distance to other local schools if an Ignacio school was closed. "That would be a huge impact for families."
Doug Little commented, "It would swamp Bayfield and Durango. It's not feasible."
Chapman said, "I don't see any of the other districts being stellar. Every district has its problems." During the earlier question session, she said, "There's a bit of frustration on my part... Where does the failure start? We see it at a pretty early grade level." She objected that the state-mandated PARCC test results don't come back to the district soon enough to do any good. Results from last spring weren't available until near the end of 2015. They weren't good.
"We're being asked to hold people accountable when there aren't the resources from the state to do that," Chapman said.
Lange said innovation status "allows us to waive certain statutory requirements, bureaucratic obstacles to meeting some of the goals."
Chapman cited teacher credentials, waiving those so local Spanish speakers could teach Spanish without credentials, or waiving the expensive requirement for one-on-one aides for some special needs students. "That's very handicapping financially. Thinking outside the box. That's something I'd be interested in exploring. The first time I heard about innovation status was last week"
Kirk asked, "What's the practical effect? Loosening strings, or adding other strings?"
Both, Dillon said.
Kirk asked for feedback on the team visit, but Dillon said they aren't allowed to do that. "There's a purpose behind what we're doing. We are hearing what you are saying. All the information is turned in to CDE."
Lange said, "We have to take a stab at the five options" in their draft report. It probably won't be done before June.
Chapman objected, "In order to make changes, we'll need it before the next school year. As we are looking at hiring decisions, that would be valuable information."
Dillon responded, "You'll have the report before the school year starts. The elementary will be on a similar timeline."
Little commented, "If you consider this district ineffective, think again. We have administrators, teachers, that are graduates of this system. They are quality staff."
Kirk asked, "Have you ever found a district where none of the five solutions was a possible fit?"
Lange said, "It's a challenge because they aren't really clear what they mean," such as changing management. "Do they take over, or work with district leaders? It's hard to really define that. We do the best we can. The state board is the decision-maker."
Dillon added, "This is a law (the Education Accountability Act of 2009) from the legislature. People come down too hard on the CDE. We're six years into it now. We aren't settled by any stretch of the imagination."
Education department representative Peter Sherman visited the district in January of 2015, but only two of five school board members then are still on the board: Board President Schurman and board member Luke Kirk.
Schurman's predecessor Toby Roderick protested back then to CDE rep Peter Sherman, "We are headed into year five, and by statute year five is the end of the road even though we've done everything we were asked to do, and we're still not seeing the turnaround in the one snapshot everybody cares about." That was before the state switched to the PARCC test last March. This year's test is in April.
