Early in his first tenure as Governor, Iowa schools were number one in the ... The local school districts and parents sh
Return to Local Control and Parental Choices Comments on the Education Reform Bills (HF HF 2380 and SF 2284) 2012 Legislative Session The FAMiLY LEADER applauds Governor Branstad for focusing on Iowa’s education system. Early in his first tenure as Governor, Iowa schools were number one in the country. With our decline in education, Iowa’s numbers have regrettably slipped to middle of the pack. We agree with Governor Branstad that these numbers are not acceptable, and are thankful he has taken the initiative to reform Iowa’s education system. However, The FAMiLY LEADER believes the Governor’s proposed Education Reform Bill does not further the restoration of local control to schools and communities, nor does it offer parents enough opportunities to choose which form of education is best for their child. Politicians and bureaucrats at the Capitol are not the best ones qualified to dictate mandates and regulations on local school districts. Citizens hire capable superintendents and elect qualified school board members who are accountable to the citizens of the community. The bill includes too much state involvement, too much regulation, and limited choices for parents. As a result, the vital roles of both communities and parents in education are being minimized. Even though we join the Governor in calling for education reform, we, along with the following organizations, are registered “against” his proposed bill for either the House or Senate version. Professional Educators of Iowa Iowa Association of Christian Schools Iowa Faith & Freedom Coalition Iowa State Education Association AFL-CIO AFSCME The FAMiLY LEADER opposes the increased funding needed to implement the current Education Reform Bill.
Past history shows that increased funding results in greater bureaucratic control, at the expense of the classroom, resulting in diminished student achievement.
The FAMiLY LEADER opposes the Core Curriculum and any form of its expansion.
It gives too much power to the Department of Education by controlling teachers and the curriculum used in the local classrooms. It takes control away from the local school districts, parents, teachers, administrators, and school board members who know what’s best for students in their communities. It is detrimental to students because it imposes a requirement to teach sexual education to students as young as first grade. It endangers private, faith-based schools by requiring that they teach concepts that may be against their faith. Private and faith-based schools need an alternative accreditation option to free them from public school mandates. Common education courses are steered towards more social engineering and less education. Governor Branstad campaigned on ending the Core Curriculum in the 2010 election and now wants to expand it.
The FAMiLY LEADER opposes the job posting requirement for non-public schools.
It is not the state’s business who private schools are hiring for teachers. We view this bureaucratic encroachment as the state taking more power away from private schools. The requirement should be changed from mandatory to optional, for those private schools who would elect to take advantage of this method of teacher recruitment.
The FAMiLY LEADER opposes the charter school language found in the bill.
We support charter schools, but without Chapter 20 bargaining. o We believe Chapter 20 does not allow for differentiation between charter schools and public schools. o Charter schools must be a place where experimentation of new forms of thought should be allowed. Strong unionization does not always promote that line of thinking. o Many aspects of collective bargaining are not fair and give employees no say in their contract negotiations unless they pay union dues. The bill does not extend beyond charter schools to education choices for home and private schools. o Home and private school support mechanisms could include “per pupil” money following the student, tax credits, and voucher systems.
The FAMiLY LEADER opposes the centralization of education at the state and national levels.
The bill gives more power to the state and less to the parents, teachers, school board members, and administrators. o The requirement to move professional development to the state level is detrimental to school districts, as each district knows what’s best for its teachers. o The mandate to require teachers to have a 3.0 GPA is too restrictive. Each school district should decide its own hiring parameters. o The FAMiLY LEADER supports the Governor’s idea for merit pay for teachers but it should not be mandated by the state. Letting local school districts decide how they want to pay teachers empowers each district to look at different pay systems, innovate with new systems, and create a climate of competition.
The FAMiLY LEADER agrees with the Governor and supports online learning.
The online learning component is in the Senate bill only. The local school districts and parents should decide if online learning is best for their districts (i.e. online learning is especially beneficial to rural districts). We agree that a certified teacher needs to be at the point of origin of online learning, but home, private, and public schools should have flexibility in monitoring at the point of delivery.
Education reform should focus on ways to maximize student achievement, thus The FAMiLY LEADER recommends the following solutions:
Simplify funding to local school districts Set high expectations and measurements Let teachers teach Let local school districts lead Give parents options to choose a different route than government education Ensure a climate of Research & Design to foster a learning laboratory and shared best practices. Maximize the best use of current technology (online learning).
