This is no fly-by-night research, led by ideologically-driven researchers. These are serious academic researchers, conducting rigorous studies. Their findings paint a far different picture than reform critics, some of whom serve on the Denver school board, want you to see.

The reality here in Denver is that the reformers over the decades have been varied in their outlooks, and have spanned all parts of the educational system. They have been teachers (sometimes even teacher union leaders), principals, central office administrators, and a series of three superintendents.

The conversation we urgently need to have is one focused on quality rather than governance type. Do all of our students have access to the high-quality public school options they deserve?

Individuals and groups on both sides of the Denver education ideological divide need to join forces to deliver a clear message to all board members, including those not up for reelection. It’s a simple message: This is unacceptable. You are embarrassing us. You are poorly serving our children. Get to work on what matters.

Mario Giardiello: As the principal, I needed to help the community transition from advocating for their school to stay open to being a leader that supported the many decisions families and staff had to make for themselves.

Most of what I see looking back over the past year, on numerous issues, is a lot of time wasted and a road littered with the detritus of dysfunction.

Some board members are backpedaling as fast as possible from the understandably unpopular recommendation to close schools. But if their concern is so great, they could and should have intervened sooner.

School closing is a classic problem of termination. Many of the possible benefits, such as reducing the district’s budget deficit, benefit everyone just a little bit and often in the long term. The harms, on the other hand, are felt intensely by a few and appear immediately. There is rarely a constituency to close a school, but always one to oppose it.