We will all be faced with a deciding vote on the first steps of education reform in November and it is important that everyone understand what is proposed and what is at stake. Idahoans will vote on three referenda aimed at repealing what may be one of the most sweeping education reforms in the country.

First, understand the problem. A report released a few months ago by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce’s Institute for a Competitive Workforce ranked Idaho as one of the four worst states in terms of the percentage of students who enroll and complete a four-year degree. Jeanne Allen, president of the D.C.-based Center for Education Reform, lays out the case like this:

“In states like this, the assumption is all is well. The reality is they’ve simply been going through the motions for years, and the result is a kind of Third World education status.”

Here is a summary of what education reform under “Students Come First” does:

* Aims to change our culture by getting control over costs and elevating achievement. Thus the so-called Luna laws now restrict collective bargaining to salary and benefits, phases out tenure and force teacher contract negotiations out in the open. They also eliminate a practice that across America operates largely to protect bad teachers and keep good ones out of the classroom: the last hired, first fired system of seniority.

* The other two prongs of Students Come First deal mostly with quality. New merit pay provisions mean that teachers can earn up to $8,000 a year extra for serving in hard to fill positions or helping their schools boost student achievement. The technology part has to do with ensuring that students and teachers in any part of Idaho have access to the best instruction available.

The teachers’ union is fighting all of this but rather than trying to answer the provisions of quality in the classroom they are focusing on the fact that Idaho will provide secondary students with a laptop computer and offer a variety of online classes. Listen to what Juan Williams (a popular Democratic pundit) has to say in a recent Wall Street Journal editorial about technology in the classroom.

Mr. Williams describes Mooresville, North Carolina this way: “The district ranked 100 out of 115 school districts in North Carolina on per pupil spending. But in the last 10 years, its test scores have pushed it from a middling rank among North Carolina’s school districts to a tie for second place. Three years ago, 73 percent of Mooresville’s students tested as proficient in math, reading and science. Today 89 percent are proficient in those subjects.

“The big change in Mooresville is that their textbooks, notes, learning materials and assignments are computerized, allowing teachers and parents to track their progress in real time. If a student is struggling, their computer-learning program can be adjusted to meet their needs and get them up to speed. And the best students no longer wait on slow students to catch up. Top students are constantly pushed to their limits by new curricular material on their laptops.”

Superintendent Mark Edwards says, “Our teachers are better informed, our parents are better informed, and our students are understanding what they’re doing and why they’re doing it.” He notes, by the way, that digital learning hasn’t increased the costs.

A recent article co-authored by Arne Duncan, President Obama’s Secretary of Education, and Reed Hastings, CEO of Netflix, targeted this issue in a very clear challenge. They stated in part, “In the past two decades technology has revolutionized the way Americans communicate, get news, socialize and conduct business. But technology has yet to transform our classrooms. At its full potential, technology could personalize and accelerate instruction for students at all educational levels. And it could provide equitable access to a world class education for millions of students stuck attending substandard schools in cities, remote rural regions, and tribal reservations. Other countries are far ahead of us in creating 21st century classrooms.”

The unions are not giving up. They are trying to scare parents and voters with warnings about wasted money on technology, larger class size, school safety, whatever they think will work on the emotions. We’ve seen this script before. As with other public sector unions, the Idaho Education Association offers no real alternative. At a time when Idaho’s education budgets are being cut for lack of revenues, the union answer is always the same: more money for more of the same.

Mr. Luna and the Legislature have answered. Idaho cannot afford more of the same. In November vote YES on the three propositions. Let’s turn failure in our schools into more local control and success.

Bob Shillingstad is a Hayden resident who taught for 13 years in public schools.

The Republican-led North Carolina Senate gave its final approval Monday evening to a public school overhaul bill after a Democratic amendment was defeated that would have deleted the measure’s proposed end to teacher tenure and weakened merit pay requirements.

The Senate passed the legislation on a party-line vote of 31-17, with GOP leaders calling the measure necessary to improve test scores, graduation rates and reading proficiency among children in early grades. But Democrats said the changes would demoralize teachers already discouraged by job losses, no pay raises since 2008 and other GOP-backed changes last year.

The Democrats’ amendment was defeated by the same margin as the full bill. Senate leader Phil Berger, a primary sponsor of the bill, called the Democratic ideas well-intentioned but “really represent a defense of the status quo.”

“What this bill tries to do is take us away from the status quo,” the Rockingham Republican said later in the debate.

The bill would scrap the current tenure system for veteran teachers that Republicans argue makes it difficult to fire teachers when administrators determine they are ineffective and gives them contracts of one to four school years. All teachers would get one-year contracts during this next school year. Tenure supporters argue that teachers need protections from political or other unfair firings.

The bill also would require school districts to create their own bonus or merit-pay programs to reward the most effective teachers. A program also would provide reading-intensive instruction in early grades. Most third-graders who didn’t show reading proficiency on tests by the end of third grade would be held back.

The bill now heads to the House. Republicans there have said they like the bill’s concepts but that there may not be enough time this session to pass it.

The Democratic amendment would have deleted the proposed teacher tenure change, made district merit-pay plans optional and would have given schools the ability to promote a student who doesn’t demonstrate reading proficiency.

Senate Minority Leader Martin Nesbitt, D-Buncombe, said teachers are doing a good job reducing dropout rates and helping students perform better on standardized tests. Nesbitt said teachers are having more pressure placed on them without commensurate extra help in the classroom.

The bill is “taking another slap at teachers, and we don’t need to be doing that,” Nesbitt said.

Sen. Bob Rucho, R-Mecklenburg, scoffed at Nesbitt’s characterization, saying Republicans are supportive of teachers who work hard to help their students.

The bill – which would cost the state about $44 million next year, rising to more than $80 million in the 2016-17 fiscal year – also would:

- change the state’s current system of grading school districts based on standardized test scores to a traditional grading method using a 0 to 100 scale and grades from A’s to F’s.

- provide teachers a $250 tax deduction for out-of-pocket classroom supplies they buy.

- set aside nearly 2,300 additional slots for North Carolina’s prekindergarten program.