This stakeholder support issue gets more interesting by the day (see previous posts on CA, OH, CT, KY, MA).
I've come across a letter that Indiana's state superintendent, Tony Bennett, sent to the state's teachers union late last week. If you are following RTT, you must read it--it's remarkable.
In short, Bennett tells the president of the Indiana State Teachers Association that the union needs to agree to five important reforms or the state will not win in round two. If the ISTA doesn't sign on, Bennett says the state will not apply.
The good news is that Bennett is sticking to his guns. The state is proud of its application (which I thought was quite good in places) and refuses to water down any of its provisions. Rather than backing down, Indiana is putting the onus on the union to get on board.
The bad news is that Bennett is giving entirely too much power to the union. Although it would be great if Indiana got all of its stakeholders to agree to the plan, it can win without them. Bennett should not allow reform opponents to decide whether the state applies.
Yes, IN lost points because of stakeholder opposition, and yes the peer reviewers wanted to see more buy-in, but the state lost far more points because of substantive issues. It lost nearly 15 points in the data systems section. It lost 53 points in the teachers section. It lost 10 points in the failing schools section.
IN needs to address these issues first.
Its message should be, "We're going to apply in round two, and our application is going to be bold. Stakeholders, we want you on board. Let's discuss how to craft provisions in a way that preserves reform while addressing your concerns. We want to do reform with you, not to you.??But have no doubt, we are pushing forward."
--Andy Smarick