IBJNews

In election shocker, voters bounce schools chief Bennett

 IBJ Staff
December 28, 2012
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
Year In Review
More
Stories
City successfully stages Super Bowl, shoots for another Indiana adopts right to work WellPoint investors force Braly ouster Judge lays into Durham, sentences him to 50 years ISO reaches new contract, launches fundraising spree Developers unleash blitz of apartment projects Hoosier voters tap Pence to continue Daniels' legacy Daniels wins presidency—at Purdue City projects move ahead, following clash over TIF Indy airport sends CEO Clark packing In election shocker, voters bounce schools chief Bennett Bernard bounced as IndyCar Series CEO Digital marketer ExactTarget splashed onto NYSE


Newsmakers
2012
                              NEWSMAKER: School librarian Ritz won with grass-roots campaign 2012
                              NEWSMAKER: Crime stance returns Hogsett to political spotlight 2012 NEWSMAKER:
                              Council Dem Mahern plays role of antagonist 2012 NEWSMAKER: CEO keeps Simon stock surging 2012 NEWSMAKER:
                              Miles adds to diverse business, sports career Other 2012 news
                              of note

After becoming a celebrity in national education reform for spearheading sweeping changes in Indiana’s schools, Tony Bennett was bounced out of office by strong opposition from teachers, parents and their friends.

But with Republicans in firmer control than ever of the rest of state government, it is likely Bennett’s reforms will live on even after he is replaced by Democrat Glenda Ritz.

Bennett landed on his feet. He was appointed commissioner of education in Florida little more than a month after his election loss. His new gig will pay him as much as $275,000 a year—nearly $200,000 more than what Bennett has been making as Indiana’s superintendent of public instruction.

education-reform-15col.jpg Tony Bennett’s aggressive overhaul of Indiana’s K-12 education system generated national attention. But pushback from teachers and parents cost him his job.(IBJ file photo)

And he squeezed in one more reform before walking out the door. On Dec. 5, the State Board of Education—which Bennett chairs—passed a new system of teacher licensing that will allow more on-the-job pedagogical training versus formal training at schools of education.

The proposal was denounced by most teachers, including Ritz, a veteran librarian and reading instructor at Crooked Creek Elementary School in Indianapolis.

Ritz wants to de-emphasize the system’s reliance on standardized testing by redoing the A-F grading system for schools that Bennett built. She has also spoken against private school vouchers and the expansion of charter schools—both causes that Bennett championed.

But Ritz will have little formal ability to roll back Bennett’s reforms. They were approved by either the Republican-dominated Legislature or by the State Board of Education. Its members are appointed by the governor, and incoming Gov. Mike Pence, a Republican, has indicated little difference in education policy from his predecessor, Republican Mitch Daniels.

That dynamic has private schools that accept vouchers and privately run charter schools cautiously optimistic that Indiana will remain friendly to them.

“We’re just keeping our eyes on it and are optimistic that a lot of the work Mr. Bennett and others have done doesn’t get undone,” said Kristoffer Haines, vice president of national development for Rocketship Education, a California-based charter school network that plans to open eight charter schools in the Indianapolis area beginning in 2015.

What Ritz can do—if she wants—is to make it more difficult administratively for charter schools and private schools.•

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. How can any company that has the cash and other assets be allowed to simply foreclose and not pay the debt? Simon, pay the debt and sell the property yourself. Don't just stiff the bank with the loan and require them to find a buyer.

  2. If you only knew....

  3. The proposal is structured in such a way that a private company (who has competitors in the marketplace) has struck a deal to get "financing" through utility ratepayers via IPL. Competitors to BlueIndy are at disadvantage now. The story isn't "how green can we be" but how creative "financing" through captive ratepayers benefits a company whose proposal should sink or float in the competitive marketplace without customer funding. If it was a great idea there would be financing available. IBJ needs to be doing a story on the utility ratemaking piece of this (which is pretty complicated) but instead it suggests that folks are whining about paying for being green.

  4. The facts contained in your post make your position so much more credible than those based on sheer emotion. Thanks for enlightening us.

  5. Please consider a couple of economic realities: First, retail is more consolidated now than it was when malls like this were built. There used to be many department stores. Now, in essence, there is one--Macy's. Right off, you've eliminated the need for multiple anchor stores in malls. And in-line retailers have consolidated or folded or have stopped building new stores because so much of their business is now online. The Limited, for example, Next, malls are closing all over the country, even some of the former gems are now derelict.Times change. And finally, as the income level of any particular area declines, so do the retail offerings. Sad, but true.

ADVERTISEMENT