Go to the mobile version of this Web site.

Login | Contact Us | Site Map | Paid archives | Electronic edition | Subscription Questions | Extras

Home › News › Education

Bruce Randolph decision on hold

Teachers union wants more info on autonomy bid

By Nancy Mitchell, Rocky Mountain News (Contact)

Published January 9, 2008 at 12:30 a.m.

Text size  

More Education

More stories »

Map my news

A Denver school asking to be free of district and union rules will have to wait another two weeks before it gets a final answer.

The governing board of the Denver Classroom Teachers Association voted Tuesday to delay a decision on the autonomy bid from Bruce Randolph School in north Denver until Jan 22.

"It's not a no; it's not a yes," said DCTA President Kim Ursetta. "It's, 'We don't have sufficient information to make a responsible decision at this time.' "

Randolph Principal Kristin Waters and most of her staff sought the historic break from district and union regulations because they said the red tape was slowing their efforts to improve student achievement.

They cited as examples the restrictions on who and when they could hire as staff and on decisions about how their school dollars could be spent.

But while Denver Public Schools board members last month unanimously endorsed the Randolph proposal, union leaders have been slower to warm to the plan.

Ursetta repeatedly has said her board wants more specific information, such as exactly which union contract provisions the school wants waived.

"We're still having conversations with Bruce Randolph staff . . . in trying to get clarification as to what exactly they're asking for," she said. "We feel it's in everyone's best interests to continue these conversations before making this decision."

Of the union board's 22 members, 19 voted in favor of a motion calling on Randolph staff "to identify which provisions in the contract, if any, impede student achievement."

After that, "a proposal may be submitted to DCTA and DPS that would achieve the goals of the school without unnecessary waivers of existing contract provisions," the motion states.

If Randolph staff decide to revise their autonomy proposal, it's likely the Denver school board would have to vote again on the tweaked version. Both the school board and the union board must approve significant contract waivers.

School board Vice President Michelle Moss, for one, is willing to take up the matter again.

"I'm certainly willing to work with DCTA and Bruce Randolph to come up with a proposal that best meets the needs of our kids," Moss said. "If that means we re-evaluate it and we revote, I'm absolutely willing to do that."

DPS Superintendent Michael Bennet said he is "obviously happy to talk to the DCTA leadership about any concerns or thoughts they have about it."

"In the end," he said, "I'm very optimistic that we can reach a conclusion that allows the teachers at Bruce Randolph to continue the excellent work that they're doing."

Waters said she and her teachers are "hopeful that this will move forward quickly . . . because we're on a pretty tight timeline."

mitchelln@RockyMountainNews.com or 303-954-5245

Comments

  • January 9, 2008

    10:07 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    jacka writes:

    F the union, let the teachers who are union members opt out of work there if they have a problem.

  • January 10, 2008

    12:33 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    observer2 writes:

    In watching all that has happened with this schools desire to have more say over selection of teachers, retention of teachers and suitability of teachers, it seems that there are three points to be explored.
    First, The DPS board itself in looking for a principal to run a school develops a committee to see which candidates are best suited for the job, and to fit the principal to the team of teachers at a school. Qualifications of the candidates are reviewed as well as team values. If this is the practice at that level, why is it not reasonable to have the same practice at the school level when hiring and firing teachers?
    Second, Other models in the business world practice the same selection process in order to create and build better products. Finding a team think model that works well together removes barriers to group think and selective creativity. And other agencies annually evaluate their employees for performance and hire according to skills. Why wouldn't a similar practice be called for when the product is the education of our students? Why would we believe that sending a teacher whose specialty is earth science over to a school who needs a chemistry teacher ok as standard proceedure. We wouldn't want our students to be taught less than what the class is supposed to teach, yet the union is protecting jobs rather than expertise.
    THird, The principal at bruce Randolph seems to have brought the school's scores and acheivement up a notch. In other settings, she would be asked to come up with the next step-- she would have earned the respect to follow up on her success and earned some trust as well. The other schools staffs are being asked "what is your next step to bring up scores" --why is this principal being kept from taking this success to the next level?
    It begins to look as though the school union is afraid of being found to be an archaic entity. Are they simply interested in protecting teachers who don't or can't perform and can't accomodate change? A business that is stagnant folds upon itself. Cronyism has long been frowned upon in other arenas. Why is the union still promoting this? Why, as parents and neighbors of these schools, do we think this is acceptable for our children and students?