On a recent road trip to Helena we had the opportunity to visit our Montana State Capital building. The legislature was in session so everybody was there, including the Governor.
One of the more notable features at the Montana State Capital building is the Tribal Flag Plaza: If your state doesn’t fly the flags of it’s First Nations People at it’s Capital, then it should.
Our son was born in Great Falls in 2006 and this was his first opportunity to actually go into the Montana State Capital building for a look around.
Governor Greg Gianforte is the second Montana Governor our son has met so far (he met our previous Governor Steve Bullock in the fall of last year), and he plans to meet more as time goes on.
I hadn’t actually been inside of the Capital building since Marc Racicot was Governor, so it was hard for me to remember where exactly everything was.
It was great that the legislature was in session, because our son was able to experience our state legislators going about their business on the House and Senate floors.
I think that more young people should visit their State Capital buildings and experience, first hand, how things are actually done, by real people, dealing with real issues.
Too many times we see our legislators on TV coupled with short sound bites, and rare is it that folks will take the time to go see those same legislators in real time on the House or the Senate floor doing the things they were elected to do.
Our son is only 16 years old and doesn’t get all off into the political flavor of the day, but even still, he has an interest in how things might get done. He sat and watched an afternoon session in the House with great enthusiasm — he listened to all of the questions and answers, he also made note of the decorum, and was somewhat impressed at the amount of respect each side gave to the other.
It wasn’t at all about what he might have learned on the television. These people actually talked to each other — provided each other with actual answers to the questions being asked. Some bills failed while other bills passed.
When we got up to the visitors gallery in the House chamber, the sergeant at arms graciously unlocked the doors and let us in early before the session started. There are always going to be rules and protocol for how things are done in any State Capital building, but here we are … in Montana. We treat each other with kindness, trust, and dignity. We often times find ourselves doing things we don’t have to do just because.
The Capital building security and the members of our Montana Highway Patrol were stellar as always.
Our State Capital building is a priceless work of art. The building was constructed between 1896 and 1902 with wing-annexes added between 1909 and 1912.
The building, constructed of Montana sandstone and granite, is in Greek neoclassical architectural style, and is listed on the National Register of Historic Places. The exterior of the dome is covered with copper. Atop the dome is a feminine statue affectionately dubbed Montana.
The most notable feature inside the center of the Montana State Capitol building is the massive rotunda, with four circular paintings surrounding it. These paintings, painted for the Capitol opening in 1902 by the firm of F. Pedretti’s Sons.
The most significant piece of art in the Capitol is by Montana’s famous Western artist Charles M. Russell. The 1912 painting, titled Lewis and Clark Meeting the Flathead Indians at Ross’ Hole, is 25 feet long and twelve feet high. It depicts the explorers Lewis and Clark meeting Montana’s Bitterroot Salish people upon their return across the Bitterroot Mountains from the Pacific Ocean. It is now displayed above the Speaker’s chair in the House of Representatives’ chamber.
Of particular note:
The bronze equestrian statue in front of the Capital building is that of Thomas Francis Meagher.
The statue was cast in 1905 by the American Bronze Foundry, Chicago, Illinois.
A native of Ireland, Meagher (1823-1867) was an Irish revolutionary, a Brigadier General in the U. S. Army during the Civil War, and was appointed Secretary of the Territory of Montana in 1865.
Soon after arriving in Montana, he was designated Acting Governor.
Thomas Francis Meagher is considered to be one of Montana’s founding fathers.
The Tribal Flag Plaza:
The eight tribal nation flags fly next to the U.S. and Montana flags on the north lawn between the grand staircase and the statue of Thomas Francis Meagher.
Montana’s tribes include the Blackfeet Nation, Chippewa Cree Tribe, Crow Nation, Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes, Fort Belknap Assiniboine and Gros Ventre Tribes, Fort Peck Assiniboine and Sioux Tribes, Little Shell Chippewa Tribe and the Northern Cheyenne Tribe.
At a May 2019 signing for HB 524, then Governor Steve Bullock said the monument will be a symbol of respect and understanding, and a recognition that the Capitol belongs to everybody.
Watch the flag raising ceremony from the Montana Public Affairs Network here: https://youtu.be/y3EbWeCa9y0
School Choice? Let’s try teacher choice
Originally published by: Antonette Bowman — February 21, 2023
The House Education and Workforce Committee convened a hearing last week entitled “American Education in Crisis.” The perennial left–right debate between promoting parents’ rights and protecting public schools was on full display.
Committee Chair Virginia Foxx, a Republican from North Carolina, used her opening statement to argue for extending “education freedom” and to defend parents’ prerogative to take their children and the public funding that goes with them to private, charter, or home schools. Representative Suzanne Bonamici, a Democrat from Oregon, countered by expressing her “strong opposition” to plans that would “funnel taxpayer dollars to unaccountable private schools and for-profit charter schools,” saying that such an approach would “undermine the effectiveness of public education.”
With both sides launching familiar salvos in a policy debate that never seems to go anywhere, what’s needed are reforms to improve American education that could actually garner bipartisan support. A policy of teacher choice could do just that by addressing some of the legitimate concerns of parents while preventing a damaging exodus of students and financial resources from many of America’s public schools. Indeed, letting parents and guardians of public school students choose from available teachers could empower parents and restore the parent-teacher-school relationship, facilitate more effective teaching, improve student learning, and elevate the status of the teaching profession.
To implement a policy of teacher choice, K-12 public schools could provide parents and guardians with teacher profiles and offer the opportunity to pick from available teachers at the beginning of each semester. These profiles could feature a balance of qualitative and quantitative information – including the teacher’s educational background and performance, student and parent testimonials, a description of teaching philosophy, and brief video footage of teachers speaking directly to parents and working in the classroom.
Allowing parents to choose who teaches their children would build greater trust with teachers. Parents would feel more empowered, and teachers would feel honored by the choice and more motivated to perform well. Parents and teachers could then work together to tailor more creative and effective curricula for students.
Teacher-choice policies would also boost student learning by facilitating better instruction. According to RAND, teachers matter more to student achievement than any other aspect of schooling. Permitting parents to find a pedagogical match for their children will enhance learning, as kids are more likely to excel when they have good personal relationships with their teachers and feel welcome in the classroom.
This model would reward top teachers and shine a spotlight on under-performing teachers, who could then choose to emulate the high performers or find a new line of work. As less competent teachers depart, morale and mutual respect will improve among remaining teachers. This, in turn, will elevate the image and status of the school and the teaching profession generally.
Critics of a teacher-choice policy might argue that some parents will make bad decisions. Some may rely on rumors about teachers or select teachers thought to be easy graders. Negligent parents may even fail to pick a teacher for their child at all. These challenges can be managed by administrators and school districts and must be weighed against the benefits of an approach that empowers parents.
Critics may also argue that a teacher-choice policy would create an increased administrative burden. Adopting this approach would no doubt require an investment of staff time and energy. But schools already expend substantial time to achieve a relatively equal student distribution among classes by achievement level, behavioral and medical considerations, language ability, gender, physical maturity, special needs, and even personality conflicts with faculty.
Besides, a teacher-choice policy would generate its own distribution – perhaps a more effective one in some schools. Different parents will want different types of teachers. When necessary, counselors and administrators can work with parents to even out the student distribution, based on mutual consent. Public schools can ease some of the burden by creating online registration systems for selection of courses and teachers, as most colleges and universities do.
Over the long term, under-performing teachers who are not a good fit for the school and community will struggle to attract students and will need to move on.
And that’s exactly the point.
The Left is correct that if we abandon public schools and allow them to deteriorate, we shouldn’t be surprised if our democracy declines, too. But the Right has a point in emphasizing the prerogatives of parents when it comes to their children’s education. Who can blame parents for being frustrated when their child is taught in a public school by an obviously subpar teacher?
Establishing a policy of teacher choice can begin to bridge the partisan divide by simultaneously empowering parents, preserving public schools, and perhaps even catalyzing a renaissance in American education. This is an approach we should all be able to support.
sourced: This article was originally published by RealClearEducation and made available via RealClearWire